Well he has more to give than the twins who just sit there looking gormless at people and oblivious to everything thats happening, the worst housemates in history
Did they do something to you? Seriously,they're a bit strange but I wouldn't go that far.
Well he has more to give than the twins who just sit there looking gormless at people and oblivious to everything thats happening, the worst housemates in history
Did they do something to you? Seriously,they're a bit strange but I wouldn't go that far.
He's entitled to his opinion. I can't say the twins are the most interesting housemates either to be honest.
it was nice to see chanelle looking so happy and well on bblb/bbbm tonight. charley looked well rough in comparison and only showed herself to be far 'real'! i will miss chanelle in the house but think she did the right thing for her.
The producers really were desperate and pathetic in deceiving Chanelle into staying. It was obvious she'd made up her mind - and all they achieved was an extra 24 hours of footage and making themselves look - well, desperate and pathetic.
Thus proving my earlier point about a ratings panic.
StuartPlymouth posted:
I understand that the BB contestants have access to Psychologists all the time. It is a very stressful situation which I would not wish to endure.
And these psychologists are in the pay of Endemol, and therefore do whatever Endemol tells them to make good television. Might as well give the housemates access to resident chimps.
It's clear that anyone who auditions for Big Brother either needs something to make them feel good about themselves or they fantasise about fame which, in most cases, does not last. Whatever you think of these individuals, Channel 4 still has a duty of care towards them - if their viewer care was as lax for a phone competition, Ofcom would have hit them with a massive fine weeks ago!
The producers really were desperate and pathetic in deceiving Chanelle into staying. It was obvious she'd made up her mind - and all they achieved was an extra 24 hours of footage and making themselves look - well, desperate and pathetic.
Thus proving my earlier point about a ratings panic.
StuartPlymouth posted:
I understand that the BB contestants have access to Psychologists all the time. It is a very stressful situation which I would not wish to endure.
And these psychologists are in the pay of Endemol, and therefore do whatever Endemol tells them to make good television. Might as well give the housemates access to resident chimps.
Of course they are in the pay of Endemol. Everyone involved in the production is. It is a television programme. What exactly were you expecting?
I personally feel it was a bad judgement call to keep Chanelle in for the extra day, but it was clear that deep down she wanted to stay. Despite her protestations she was telling the other housemates she wanted to go "on Friday" - which was at odds with what she had told BB in the diary room. In any event, she is out and looks and sounds entirely happy.
Quote:
It's clear that anyone who auditions for Big Brother either needs something to make them feel good about themselves or they fantasise about fame which, in most cases, does not last. Whatever you think of these individuals, Channel 4 still has a duty of care towards them
Specious reasoning again, Simon.
I cannot see how you think that Carol or Tracy fall under your umbrella category.
Perhaps you should look at the house members with the same objectivity you demand from others.
[Of course they are in the pay of Endemol. Everyone involved in the production is. It is a television programme. What exactly were you expecting?
But what's the point of them being there if their professional judgement counts for zip in the end? The very least they should be able to do is their jobs properly. Forcing Chanelle to stay another day was cruel; though if she really wanted out that badly she could easily have said a certain word...
Quote:
Specious reasoning again, Simon.
I cannot see how you think that Carol or Tracy fall under your umbrella category.
Perhaps you should look at the house members with the same objectivity you demand from others.
Obviously not everyone who goes in for Big Brother does so for a personal boost - some may well have auditioned out of curiosity and if successful have taken the experience as they found. However, it is clear that producers are increasingly looking towards "freaks and geeks" (for want of a better expression) because their job is to provide TV that pulls in viewers - and sadly, extreme eccentrics will give them this at a stroke. The viewers who tune in will be laughing at these people, rather than with them.
Why, then, don't we just bring back bedlam or the stocks and be done with it?
[Of course they are in the pay of Endemol. Everyone involved in the production is. It is a television programme. What exactly were you expecting?
But what's the point of them being there if their professional judgement counts for zip in the end? The very least they should be able to do is their jobs properly. Forcing Chanelle to stay another day was cruel; though if she really wanted out that badly she could easily have said a certain word...
Woah there. I said they were being paid by the production company. From that you have concluded that their professional objectivity has been compromised. That is your suggestion, not mine. Have you heard of the Hippocratic Oath?
Quote:
Obviously not everyone who goes in for Big Brother does so for a personal boost - some may well have auditioned out of curiosity and if successful have taken the experience as they found. However, it is clear that producers are increasingly looking towards "freaks and geeks" (for want of a better expression) because their job is to provide TV that pulls in viewers - and sadly, extreme eccentrics will give them this at a stroke. The viewers who tune in will be laughing at these people, rather than with them.
Why, then, don't we just bring back bedlam or the stocks and be done with it?
What does that have to do with our discussion about Chanelle?
EDIT: Forgive me, I had forgotten about the wider points mentioned earlier.
I don't think there's a larger proportion of freaks and geeks. There are more wannanbes but that is because of the fame/notoriety (albeit shortlived) waiting for many ex housemates.
Woah there. I said they were being paid by the production company. From that you have concluded that their professional objectivity has been compromised. That is your suggestion, not mine. Have you heard of the Hippocratic Oath?
Brian Hutton, as a judge, will no doubt have taken a judicial equivalent of the Hippocratic Oath too. Yet that did not stop him working to very narrow terms of reference in the Hutton whitewash, sorry, inquiry, as determined by a government determined to get the result they wanted, ie. a report which discredited and damaged the BBC.
If it is possible to manipulate a judge like this, then surely it must be possible for TV producers to manipulate healthcare professionals into delivering results which fit their agenda but in a way that does not compromise anyone's career.
Halfway HMs had to choose four HMs to swap with them and therefore face eviction. They chose the three newbies in the house - David, Kara Louise and Shanessa, along with Tracey.