Cant really comment as didnt watch it but dosent this happen with most reality shows? arent they there to plug themselves as a "brand", brand PA, brand PRICEY, ETC or to sell themselves and keep us interested in their lives?
not so sure what there is to get so het up about but eh think theyre ALL guilty of it maybe if everyone complains we wont have any more ANDRE/PRICE/KATONA/shows.. but then what would people make threads about?
If people are that offended they can always do what i did..and not watch ? =no viewers=no new series just an idea.
Well we saw with the recent Kerry Katona 'reality' programme the difference between one made by an agent and one not.
Who watching Andre's or Price's programmes would be aware the shows are made by their agents or own production companies?
What creedence would people give to a 'reality' show about Nick Griffin made and edited by the BNP...it would be regarded as a farce as are these programmes.
Well we saw with the recent Kerry Katona 'reality' programme the difference between one made by an agent and one not.
Who watching Andre's or Price's programmes would be aware the shows are made by their agents or own production companies?
What creedence would people give to a 'reality' show about Nick Griffin made and edited by the BNP...it would be regarded as a farce as are these programmes.
Youre aware? Im aware? what makes you think others arent? its assuming people arent smart enough to figure it out..
Well we saw with the recent Kerry Katona 'reality' programme the difference between one made by an agent and one not.
Who watching Andre's or Price's programmes would be aware the shows are made by their agents or own production companies?
What creedence would people give to a 'reality' show about Nick Griffin made and edited by the BNP...it would be regarded as a farce as are these programmes.
......anybody who cared to read the credits at the end I guess
I didn't see the programme and have no intention to watch it either simply because I cannot stand PA.
My view is that every single thing that the clown does/says has been decided by his management company. He is so stupid that if he was told to jump in front of a bus, he would probably do it.
Any 'Father of the Year' who will sell his own children to the highest bidder is beneath contempt so it doesn't surprise me in the slightest that he can be bought to sell coffee/diets/holidays/perfumes etc etc.
In spite of my contempt for the moron though, I'm not certain that OFCOM would be interested in his tactics......much as I'd love him to permanently disappear.
Even more millions watched programmes which consisted of phone scams....it took years for those in authority to take it seriously.
Any idea what the rules are in america for product placement, i remember reading about a scam in the 50s where every programme was basically filled with product placement and they had too get it under control back then....
I wonder if they will start putting stickers over names on cereal boxes in corrie etc ? lol
I didn't see the programme and have no intention to watch it either simply because I cannot stand PA.
My view is that every single thing that the clown does/says has been decided by his management company. He is so stupid that if he was told to jump in front of a bus, he would probably do it.
Any 'Father of the Year' who will sell his own children to the highest bidder is beneath contempt so it doesn't surprise me in the slightest that he can be bought to sell coffee/diets/holidays/perfumes etc etc.
In spite of my contempt for the moron though, I'm not certain that OFCOM would be interested in his tactics......much as I'd love him to permanently disappear.
Just a quick question, this "selling of children" thing im assuming youre including ALL reality stars that feature their kids in their shows and OK/HELLO magazine deals on an "AT HOME WITH" basis or "so and so introduces us to their new baby"?
No, they are pointing out that a viewing audience doesn't always notice when they are being ripped off and taken for muppets.
So you are basically suggesting that people who tune in to watch the Next Chapter are "ripped off and taken for muppets". I rather take exception to that. I tune in because I enjoy watching it and am in no way being ripped off as you suggest.
Just a quick question, this "selling of children" thing im assuming youre including ALL reality stars that feature their kids in their shows and OK/HELLO magazine deals on an "AT HOME WITH" basis or "so and so introduces us to their new baby"?
From my pov, the introducing the new baby thing is neither here nor there.
But any celeb/zeleb that exploits their family in order to maintain their own profile would be on MY list...all of them can protect their children quite easily, but they choose not too. I would even include Madge and her Madgeliting of Lola - the kid is on just in her teens, let her be a kid!
Just a quick question, this "selling of children" thing im assuming youre including ALL reality stars that feature their kids in their shows and OK/HELLO magazine deals on an "AT HOME WITH" basis or "so and so introduces us to their new baby"?
Of course I am but the thread is about the numbskull that is PA.:yawn:
No, they are pointing out that a viewing audience doesn't always notice when they are being ripped off and taken for muppets.
So you are basically suggesting that people who tune in to watch the Next Chapter are "being ripped off and taken for muppets". I rather take exception to that. I tune in because I enjoy watching it and am in no way being ripped off as you suggest.
So you are basically suggesting that people who tune in to watch the Next Chapter are "ripped off and taken for muppets". I rather take exception to that. I tune in because I enjoy watching it and am in no way being ripped off as you suggest.
No, that is not what I am saying. What I am saying is is the phone scams were not picked up on because people didn't realise what was going in.
Youre aware? Im aware? what makes you think others arent? its assuming people arent smart enough to figure it out..
The more people that know the better....according to most broadcasters many viewers don't even know what channel they are watching...hence the channel bugs top of screen.
These programmes take the trust built up over years and abuse it...as Nevellie Hendricks would say 'it ain't friggin' art'.
So you are basically suggesting that people who tune in to watch the Next Chapter are "being ripped off and taken for muppets". I rather take exception to that. I tune in because I enjoy watching it and am in no way being ripped off as you suggest.
As you can see, by the message I've quoted below, artlesschaos said no such thing and felt no need to personalise it at all.:yawn:
Maybe sticking to the topic would make for a less aggressive discussion in the light of the strict moderation which has been previously announced.
No, that is not what I am saying. What I am saying is is the phone scams were not picked up on because people didn't realise what was going in.
Some people did.
This is the same.
ETA - so good you said it twice, huh?:D
I think people watch the show for light entertainment or because they like Pete. No-one is being ripped-off. By now, they are well aware of how this type of show works.
If ITV ever dump him, it looks like he's gearing up for a handy career on JML TV, or even taking over from the likes of Shane Ritchie for the Daz Doorstep Challenge!
I think people watch the show for light entertainment or because they like Pete. No-one is being ripped-off. By now, they are well aware of how this type of show works.
But some of those will be the same people that saw the front cover about the lovely reunion and have no idea that it didn't happen.
Not everyone is s cynical and jaded as we are - don't forget that soap stars are often berated in the streets by people who don't realised they are not the character they play.
IF Pa is going to use his show as one long ad, perhaps he should have a disclaimer on it, just so there is no misunderstanding.:)
I think people watch the show for light entertainment or because they like Pete. No-one is being ripped-off. By now, they are well aware of how this type of show works.
I cannot agree with that at all.
You think no-one is being ripped off whereas I think that many viewers will swallow it all down and are, in effect, being ripped off.
Comments
Well we saw with the recent Kerry Katona 'reality' programme the difference between one made by an agent and one not.
Who watching Andre's or Price's programmes would be aware the shows are made by their agents or own production companies?
What creedence would people give to a 'reality' show about Nick Griffin made and edited by the BNP...it would be regarded as a farce as are these programmes.
That just means that 1.1 million people had him on their tv, you don't know how they felt about it.
I meant ANYONE who WAS offended could not watch.
simples
Even more millions watched programmes which consisted of phone scams....it took years for those in authority to take it seriously.
Youre aware? Im aware? what makes you think others arent? its assuming people arent smart enough to figure it out..
......anybody who cared to read the credits at the end I guess
My view is that every single thing that the clown does/says has been decided by his management company. He is so stupid that if he was told to jump in front of a bus, he would probably do it.
Any 'Father of the Year' who will sell his own children to the highest bidder is beneath contempt so it doesn't surprise me in the slightest that he can be bought to sell coffee/diets/holidays/perfumes etc etc.
In spite of my contempt for the moron though, I'm not certain that OFCOM would be interested in his tactics......much as I'd love him to permanently disappear.
Any idea what the rules are in america for product placement, i remember reading about a scam in the 50s where every programme was basically filled with product placement and they had too get it under control back then....
I wonder if they will start putting stickers over names on cereal boxes in corrie etc ? lol
....ah right, so you are comparing The Next Chapter to a phone scam ?
No, they are pointing out that a viewing audience doesn't always notice when they are being ripped off and taken for muppets.
Just a quick question, this "selling of children" thing im assuming youre including ALL reality stars that feature their kids in their shows and OK/HELLO magazine deals on an "AT HOME WITH" basis or "so and so introduces us to their new baby"?
I think maybe most realise but his die hard fans wont care
Of course - they were all probably doing other things with ITV2 on in the background ..............as you do
So you are basically suggesting that people who tune in to watch the Next Chapter are "ripped off and taken for muppets". I rather take exception to that. I tune in because I enjoy watching it and am in no way being ripped off as you suggest.
From my pov, the introducing the new baby thing is neither here nor there.
But any celeb/zeleb that exploits their family in order to maintain their own profile would be on MY list...all of them can protect their children quite easily, but they choose not too. I would even include Madge and her Madgeliting of Lola - the kid is on just in her teens, let her be a kid!
Of course I am but the thread is about the numbskull that is PA.:yawn:
So you are basically suggesting that people who tune in to watch the Next Chapter are "being ripped off and taken for muppets". I rather take exception to that. I tune in because I enjoy watching it and am in no way being ripped off as you suggest.
No, that is not what I am saying. What I am saying is is the phone scams were not picked up on because people didn't realise what was going in.
Some people did.
This is the same.
ETA - so good you said it twice, huh?:D
The more people that know the better....according to most broadcasters many viewers don't even know what channel they are watching...hence the channel bugs top of screen.
These programmes take the trust built up over years and abuse it...as Nevellie Hendricks would say 'it ain't friggin' art'.
As you can see, by the message I've quoted below, artlesschaos said no such thing and felt no need to personalise it at all.:yawn:
Maybe sticking to the topic would make for a less aggressive discussion in the light of the strict moderation which has been previously announced.
I hear exactly what you are saying and agree with you.:)
I think people watch the show for light entertainment or because they like Pete. No-one is being ripped-off. By now, they are well aware of how this type of show works.
Peter Andre - Snakeoil Salesman!
But some of those will be the same people that saw the front cover about the lovely reunion and have no idea that it didn't happen.
Not everyone is s cynical and jaded as we are - don't forget that soap stars are often berated in the streets by people who don't realised they are not the character they play.
IF Pa is going to use his show as one long ad, perhaps he should have a disclaimer on it, just so there is no misunderstanding.:)
I cannot agree with that at all.
You think no-one is being ripped off whereas I think that many viewers will swallow it all down and are, in effect, being ripped off.