GS
Both girls have been saying they have worked for AMS since September in all of their interviews,
The same thing happened last year, didn't it?
Anyway, its worth noting that after calling this the "largest sham since 'Space Cadets'" the article goes on to tell viewers how they might apply for next year.
Gavin Scott
Founding member
stuartfanning posted:
Both girls have been saying they have worked for AMS since September in all of their interviews,
The same thing happened last year, didn't it?
Anyway, its worth noting that after calling this the "largest sham since 'Space Cadets'" the article goes on to tell viewers how they might apply for next year.
NE
Erm, the title is missing the words "Times article:" or at least "The Apprentice 2 UK Final 'a sham' says Times". A bit conclusively judgemental on your part to word it the way it is, isn't it?
This, as Gavin has said, is exactly what happened last year, and there were no cries of foul back then, were there? Suddenly, this year, the media world has become so savvy about the Apprentice, and you have interviews here, there and everywhere, coupled with inane accusations by writers (and fans) who probably didn't even watch the series last year and many of whom will be just trying to cash in on the reality TV-cum-newspaper article vicous circle that always arises with such shows. Chances are next year we'll probably end up with the Mirror or the Scum stating that they are the "OFFICIAL paper for The Apprentice hot goss".
I mean, what were people expecting? Were they expecting each episode to have been filmed and shown the same week? In such a situation you would have got annoying tits all over the streets coming up and disrupting the filming to be in shot or to get autographs or to tell Michelle that she was fit, etc.
If the programme was filmed any other way then the result would have leaked out one way or another. It practically did this year with papers reporting about Ruth's home moving.
Title of thread posted:
The Apprentice 2 UK Final a sham
Erm, the title is missing the words "Times article:" or at least "The Apprentice 2 UK Final 'a sham' says Times". A bit conclusively judgemental on your part to word it the way it is, isn't it?
This, as Gavin has said, is exactly what happened last year, and there were no cries of foul back then, were there? Suddenly, this year, the media world has become so savvy about the Apprentice, and you have interviews here, there and everywhere, coupled with inane accusations by writers (and fans) who probably didn't even watch the series last year and many of whom will be just trying to cash in on the reality TV-cum-newspaper article vicous circle that always arises with such shows. Chances are next year we'll probably end up with the Mirror or the Scum stating that they are the "OFFICIAL paper for The Apprentice hot goss".
I mean, what were people expecting? Were they expecting each episode to have been filmed and shown the same week? In such a situation you would have got annoying tits all over the streets coming up and disrupting the filming to be in shot or to get autographs or to tell Michelle that she was fit, etc.
If the programme was filmed any other way then the result would have leaked out one way or another. It practically did this year with papers reporting about Ruth's home moving.
ST
In The Apprentice with Donald Trump they don't need to tape two version of the person being hired, as Alan Sugar had to do with both finalists. Trump makes his decision on who he's gomg to hire live during the finale show. So the way they did it here could leave the show open to 'sham' accusations.
NE
And? SAS made his decision (at or around lunchtime on Tuesday, apparently) at the very last moment before the final filming and editing runs, so it was just a matter of picking the recorded ending which corresponded with the outcome. The fact that the American Apprentice had the finale "live" doesn't make the UK version of being pre-recorded anymore likely of being a sham. All it does is makes Ruth, Michelle, Tim and Saira good on-the-side actors.
stuartfanning posted:
In The Apprentice with Donald Trump they don't need to tape two version of the person being hired, as Alan Sugar had to do with both finalists. Trump makes his decision on who he's gomg to hire live during the finale show. So the way they did it here could leave the show open to 'sham' accusations.
And? SAS made his decision (at or around lunchtime on Tuesday, apparently) at the very last moment before the final filming and editing runs, so it was just a matter of picking the recorded ending which corresponded with the outcome. The fact that the American Apprentice had the finale "live" doesn't make the UK version of being pre-recorded anymore likely of being a sham. All it does is makes Ruth, Michelle, Tim and Saira good on-the-side actors.
:-(
They said that everything was filmed - including the final episodes back in October, and the "Your Hired" episode was recorded Tuesday, therefore Tuesday was when Sir Alan decided which one he had hired.
IS
This is exactly what happened last series. Also it was never said that the result would be based purely on the result of the final challenge - Alan Sugar made it clear (as he did with the cruise ship and advertising tasks) that the result was subjective and decided by him.