DA
I'm not sure why "he just reads the results out" is being used to imply that he, whether personally or as part of the production team, should take absolutely zero blame for anything that occurs afterwards.
A so-called "lie detector" doesn't detect lies, it detects stress. The results are then interpreted, subjectively, by the operator. They shouldn't be used as absolute arbiters of truth.
By "just reading the results out" he's promulgating a myth.
Do they ever give a disclaimer that lie detector results are subjective and have no guaranteed accuracy?
From my understanding of watching the show when it first aired in 2005 (believe it or not, I was five years old) up until now, Jeremy has no control over the lie detector tests.
He just reads the results out. Compare his appearances on his own to show to that of his appearances on Good Morning Britain.
People bashing him is just not okay
He just reads the results out. Compare his appearances on his own to show to that of his appearances on Good Morning Britain.
People bashing him is just not okay
I'm not sure why "he just reads the results out" is being used to imply that he, whether personally or as part of the production team, should take absolutely zero blame for anything that occurs afterwards.
A so-called "lie detector" doesn't detect lies, it detects stress. The results are then interpreted, subjectively, by the operator. They shouldn't be used as absolute arbiters of truth.
By "just reading the results out" he's promulgating a myth.
Do they ever give a disclaimer that lie detector results are subjective and have no guaranteed accuracy?
DM
I'm not sure why "he just reads the results out" is being used to imply that he, whether personally or as part of the production team, should take absolutely zero blame for anything that occurs afterwards.
A so-called "lie detector" doesn't detect lies, it detects stress. The results are then interpreted, subjectively, by the operator. They shouldn't be used as absolute arbiters of truth.
By "just reading the results out" he's promulgating a myth.
Do they ever give a disclaimer that lie detector results are subjective and have no guaranteed accuracy?
In regards to a disclaimer about the lie detector results, in recent times a graphic appears on screen that states that or a rolling lower third that explains it in depth.
From my understanding of watching the show when it first aired in 2005 (believe it or not, I was five years old) up until now, Jeremy has no control over the lie detector tests.
He just reads the results out. Compare his appearances on his own to show to that of his appearances on Good Morning Britain.
People bashing him is just not okay
He just reads the results out. Compare his appearances on his own to show to that of his appearances on Good Morning Britain.
People bashing him is just not okay
I'm not sure why "he just reads the results out" is being used to imply that he, whether personally or as part of the production team, should take absolutely zero blame for anything that occurs afterwards.
A so-called "lie detector" doesn't detect lies, it detects stress. The results are then interpreted, subjectively, by the operator. They shouldn't be used as absolute arbiters of truth.
By "just reading the results out" he's promulgating a myth.
Do they ever give a disclaimer that lie detector results are subjective and have no guaranteed accuracy?
In regards to a disclaimer about the lie detector results, in recent times a graphic appears on screen that states that or a rolling lower third that explains it in depth.
AA
This is a particularly naive view of Kyle himself and the show. Go and read what has been written by people who worked on the show, people who went undercover on the show and guests who have appeared on the show.
Kyle himself perpetuates a nasty, aggressive persona designed to humiliate vulnerable people. Kyle’s persona and demeanour heavily contributes to the program. For this reason, Kyle must be held somewhat responsible.
The intention to bait and humiliate vulnerable people is what makes the show different, and is partly why there has been such an outcry. Axing it certainly isn’t a mistake on ITV’s part in my view.
He just reads the results out.
Compare his appearances on his own to show to that of his appearances on Good Morning Britain.
People bashing him is just not okay, the people who appear on the show aren’t forced.
People bashing him is just not okay, the people who appear on the show aren’t forced.
This is a particularly naive view of Kyle himself and the show. Go and read what has been written by people who worked on the show, people who went undercover on the show and guests who have appeared on the show.
Kyle himself perpetuates a nasty, aggressive persona designed to humiliate vulnerable people. Kyle’s persona and demeanour heavily contributes to the program. For this reason, Kyle must be held somewhat responsible.
The intention to bait and humiliate vulnerable people is what makes the show different, and is partly why there has been such an outcry. Axing it certainly isn’t a mistake on ITV’s part in my view.
LL
London Lite
Founding member
I'm afraid I'm going to be cynical about this decision.
Kyle's audience is largely C2DE and isn't a show for the chattering classes in the London media bubble, so is an easier decision to sacrifice his show despite bringing in a sizable audience consistently for 14 years, but they're the 'wrong' audience.
Love Island on the other hand is a revenue earning show, which not only brings in C2DE, but also the London chattering classes who'll write up positive stories on the show during its run.
However if more participants die indirectly because they were on that show, ITV may have to look again, but for now it's safe.
Kyle's audience is largely C2DE and isn't a show for the chattering classes in the London media bubble, so is an easier decision to sacrifice his show despite bringing in a sizable audience consistently for 14 years, but they're the 'wrong' audience.
Love Island on the other hand is a revenue earning show, which not only brings in C2DE, but also the London chattering classes who'll write up positive stories on the show during its run.
However if more participants die indirectly because they were on that show, ITV may have to look again, but for now it's safe.
MC
TV needs to take a long look at itself overall- it influences how people act- I’m not saying don’t cover real life issues, and we know people shout and argue, but does it need to be aired on tv as dirty laundry? Not really.
I know a couple forumers here think ITV have made a massive error in axing the show... and are really spoken for it which glad to see shows always have a strong fan base when being axed- there’s lots of shows I didn’t want to see end, but most shows (even what some of us think are good) come to an end eventually... it’s a good point to refresh day time schedules- come up with new ideas at the same time.
I know a couple forumers here think ITV have made a massive error in axing the show... and are really spoken for it which glad to see shows always have a strong fan base when being axed- there’s lots of shows I didn’t want to see end, but most shows (even what some of us think are good) come to an end eventually... it’s a good point to refresh day time schedules- come up with new ideas at the same time.
JA
Considering the rubbish they put in the newspaper, it must be bad.
You should see some of the absolute rubbish The Telegraph commission for the website which would never be touched by the newspaper.
Considering the rubbish they put in the newspaper, it must be bad.
JC
There's a lot of whataboutism going on with Love Island. The show obviously needs to be more careful with casting and aftercare but, regardless of what people might think about it, Love Island is not the "theatre of cruelty" Jeremy Kyle is/was.
You should have kept the rest of this post in. I was interested in seeing if you would provoke fans of a certain show…
Ha, yeah I dragged Big Brother into the debate then deleted it. My point was post 2003 Big Brother was more like Jeremy Kyle than Love Island is and has dodged a bullet if this really is open season on reality tv! Just that Jade/Shilpa race bating series alone would kill the show instantly now.
ITV will be hoping to save Love Island - a scandal on this year's series could end the show if it looks like risking someone's mental health.
There's a lot of whataboutism going on with Love Island. The show obviously needs to be more careful with casting and aftercare but, regardless of what people might think about it, Love Island is not the "theatre of cruelty" Jeremy Kyle is/was.
You should have kept the rest of this post in. I was interested in seeing if you would provoke fans of a certain show…
Ha, yeah I dragged Big Brother into the debate then deleted it. My point was post 2003 Big Brother was more like Jeremy Kyle than Love Island is and has dodged a bullet if this really is open season on reality tv! Just that Jade/Shilpa race bating series alone would kill the show instantly now.
NL
This horrible business could be the kick up the arse that ITV needs. Any broadcaster needs to be responsible especially to those with emotional and psychological health issues. This will kick up a stink but I will admit I loathe these kinds of programmes and this may lead to them being ended.
TV needs to take a long look at itself overall- it influences how people act- I’m not saying don’t cover real life issues, and we know people shout and argue, but does it need to be aired on tv as dirty laundry? Not really.
I know a couple forumers here think ITV have made a massive error in axing the show... and are really spoken for it which glad to see shows always have a strong fan base when being axed- there’s lots of shows I didn’t want to see end, but most shows (even what some of us think are good) come to an end eventually... it’s a good point to refresh day time schedules- come up with new ideas at the same time.
I know a couple forumers here think ITV have made a massive error in axing the show... and are really spoken for it which glad to see shows always have a strong fan base when being axed- there’s lots of shows I didn’t want to see end, but most shows (even what some of us think are good) come to an end eventually... it’s a good point to refresh day time schedules- come up with new ideas at the same time.
This horrible business could be the kick up the arse that ITV needs. Any broadcaster needs to be responsible especially to those with emotional and psychological health issues. This will kick up a stink but I will admit I loathe these kinds of programmes and this may lead to them being ended.
NG
I think the situations are different - but they are comparable when it comes to a duty of care responsibility to contributors.
Jeremy Kyle can have a massive and life changing effect on someones personal relationships with loved-ones, amplified by the publicity.
Love Island can have different, but similarly life changing effects as a result of publicity too. A short-lived window of major increases in your earning abilities may put people in the positions of trying to live a lifestyle long term that is unsustainable, and only really a very short term thing. Add on the pressures of living this life on social media, and you have another potentially toxic situation that members of the public have been put in for the entertainment of others, and the profit of shareholders.
ITV in both cases have a duty of care requirement to ensure people are properly aware and prepared for their exposure and its effects.
Personally I've never understood any justification for Jeremy Kyle's style of show. It's just never seemed to me to be in the public interest, and feels like it reduces its subjects to 'dancing bears'.
noggin
Founding member
Not surprised at all by the announcement, although I didn’t think it would be quite so soon. This Morning shoehorned the statement in at the start of the show, presumably to avoid being criticised for not covering it.
Not sure how you’ve reached that conclusion, if I’m honest.
I don’t think the situation is comparable to Love Island at all. The two former contestants who sadly took their own lives did so a significant amount of time after appearing on the show. In both instances, Love Island was not the sole cause or an immediate contributor. Both contestants were already well known on Instagram before appearing on the show, and other issues (eg. financial and relationship based) player a major part. The Jeremy Kyle Show, on the other hand, has directly led to, or significantly contributed to, the death of a participant just a week after appearing on the show.
There’s no hypocrisy at hand here, the situations are just not comparable.
Big mistake by ITV.
Not sure how you’ve reached that conclusion, if I’m honest.
I don’t think the situation is comparable to Love Island at all. The two former contestants who sadly took their own lives did so a significant amount of time after appearing on the show. In both instances, Love Island was not the sole cause or an immediate contributor. Both contestants were already well known on Instagram before appearing on the show, and other issues (eg. financial and relationship based) player a major part. The Jeremy Kyle Show, on the other hand, has directly led to, or significantly contributed to, the death of a participant just a week after appearing on the show.
There’s no hypocrisy at hand here, the situations are just not comparable.
I think the situations are different - but they are comparable when it comes to a duty of care responsibility to contributors.
Jeremy Kyle can have a massive and life changing effect on someones personal relationships with loved-ones, amplified by the publicity.
Love Island can have different, but similarly life changing effects as a result of publicity too. A short-lived window of major increases in your earning abilities may put people in the positions of trying to live a lifestyle long term that is unsustainable, and only really a very short term thing. Add on the pressures of living this life on social media, and you have another potentially toxic situation that members of the public have been put in for the entertainment of others, and the profit of shareholders.
ITV in both cases have a duty of care requirement to ensure people are properly aware and prepared for their exposure and its effects.
Personally I've never understood any justification for Jeremy Kyle's style of show. It's just never seemed to me to be in the public interest, and feels like it reduces its subjects to 'dancing bears'.