1. In the introductory show they put her in the safe room with Louis and Sophie to do the observing.
Dislikers of the other two could equally use that as an example of bias to them. Next ...
2. After pill-gate they didn't show any of the stuff on the live feed. The housemates were woken in the early hours and seriously disrupted when she was called in for a formal warning and locked herself in the toilet afterwards. Louis had to rescue her so they could switch the lights off and all go back to bed.
They did show all this on the live feed. Next ...
3. The live feed footage of this episode was removed from youtube just before the show that evening.
and is freely available elsewhere as always. Next ...
4. During Sunday's show, when they showed housemates the diary room footage of the nominations they only showed one very brief clip of one of Mario's nomination explanations when all the others got a montage of all their nominations.
Dustin and Bruce's nominations were also shown. Next ...
5. They picked her again to go in the safe room away from the relative challenges of the recent tasks.
and the same as in (1) above applies. Next ...
6. The Keith Allen documentary on youtube has now been removed as it has been so talked about on here.
The same as in (3) above applies. Next ...
7. Lastly, I'm not sure but I feel they might have been limiting discussions of Lauren on BB Bots, though admittedly Judy James did finally do a brief analysis of Lauren last night.
So that's a personal feeling, not an evidence based decision - and you even provide evidence to the contrary. Next ...
After all the alleged failed applications by Lauren over the years I think they, (channel 5), may be protecting their decision to finally allow her to go in there.
and your proof is? (because you haven't provided it above in any of your points. Not one single one).
I don't have any proof. I said right from the start that this is just what I think, based on my suspicions from a few of the points I have listed. I have no more proof than you. In fact I am not sure why you have responded in such a condescending and aggressive manner.
The point about the live footage after pill gate. Very little of what appeared on the live feed was shown on the day's highlights show. Lots of people complained about this on here, in lots of other threads.
Yes it was available elsewhere on other sites but not as many people knew about these as they did Youtube, the site from whence it was removed. There were loads of people asking about this, again on here, in various different threads.
In this thread I have merely conveyed my own opinion. An opinion to which of course I am entitled.
I am seriously suspicious. I think they are in favour of Lauren.
1. In the introductory show they put her in the safe room with Louis and Sophie to do the observing.
2. After pill-gate they didn't show any of the stuff on the live feed. The housemates were woken in the early hours and seriously disrupted when she was called in for a formal warning and locked herself in the toilet afterwards. Louis had to rescue her so they could switch the lights off and all go back to bed.
3. The live feed footage of this episode was removed from youtube just before the show that evening.
4. During Sunday's show, when they showed housemates the diary room footage of the nominations they only showed one very brief clip of one of Mario's nomination explanations when all the others got a montage of all their nominations.
5. They picked her again to go in the safe room away from the relative challenges of the recent tasks.
6. The Keith Allen documentary on youtube has now been removed as it has been so talked about on here.
7. Lastly, I'm not sure but I feel they might have been limiting discussions of Lauren on BB Bots, though admittedly Judy James did finally do a brief analysis of Lauren last night.
After all the alleged failed applications by Lauren over the years I think they, (channel 5), may be protecting their decision to finally allow her to go in there.
Your thoughts?
Completely agree with you nosedive,in fact I've said the same on another thread about BB blatant favouritism towards Lauren and it puts me off watching every night
Edit- I better add that this is just IMO of course
Completely agree with you nosedive,in fact I've said the same on another thread about BB blatant favouritism towards Lauren and it puts me off watching every night
Edit- I better add that this is just IMO of course
Thank you Ella. Good disclaimer there btw! What was the name of that thread, perhaps I could have a read?
(I'll do a forum search in the mean time to see if I can find it). Thanks.
I don't have any proof. I said right from the start that this is just what I think, based on my suspicions from a few of the points I have listed.
The thread title 'Channel 5 bias' and your opening line 'I am seriously suspicious. I think they are in favour of Lauren.' followed by the list of reasons, is hardly setting out your stall as 'this is just what I think', but is laid out as a number of proofs for a strong opening statement - as 'facts'.
It is only when you got to point 7 that you mentioned ' Lastly, I'm not sure but I feel' - all the other points were laid out as blunt fact.
I see what you are saying now with 'the point about the live footage after pill gate. Very little of what appeared on the live feed was shown on the day's highlights show. Lots of people complained about this on here, in lots of other threads'.
And I agree with you. However, this is different to your original point, which was it wasn't shown on the LF. It was, in detail.
My response to your post was to demonstrate all the points were fallacies. I haven't conjectured, merely pointed out facts in response to an erroneous post and thread starter that had already been covered elsewhere previously. I picked out each point, and explained briefly why it was actually wrong, with reasons. This seemed to be a sensible way to deal with it.
I am not sure why you consider I have 'responded in a condescending and aggressive manner' by doing that.
If you found it aggressive or condescending, I apologise that you read that tone in it, it certainly wasn't intended.
I think the explanation is simpler and less political: they are trying to give her a soft time with as little pressure as possible, as they see her as vulnerable. So they removed her from the house before putting them under the pressure of being deprived of food. They did not allow the housemates to put her up for the fake eviction, though they could perfectly well have done that (and it was bad luck that louie rushed in in about 0.2 of a second to call out her name) so she was not exposed to hostile comment. Lauren will not be given any harsh tasks or allowed to listen to hostile comments from now on. That's my theory anyway.
If she's so vulnerable that she needs such careful treatment, why did they pick her as a housemate?
Hi: I thought your response merited a reply on a number of grounds.
The thread title 'Channel 5 bias' and your opening line 'I am seriously suspicious. I think they are in favour of Lauren.' followed by the list of reasons, is hardly setting out your stall as 'this is just what I think', but is laid out as a number of proofs for a strong opening statement - as 'facts'.
It is only when you got to point 7 that you mentioned ' Lastly, I'm not sure but I feel' - all the other points were laid out as blunt fact.
I see what you are saying now with 'the point about the live footage after pill gate. Very little of what appeared on the live feed was shown on the day's highlights show. Lots of people complained about this on here, in lots of other threads'.
And I agree with you. However, this is different to your original point, which was it wasn't shown on the LF. It was, in detail.
My response to your post was to demonstrate all the points were fallacies. I haven't conjectured, merely pointed out facts in response to an erroneous post and thread starter that had already been covered elsewhere previously. I picked out each point, and explained briefly why it was actually wrong, with reasons. This seemed to be a sensible way to deal with it.
I am not sure why you consider I have 'responded in a condescending and aggressive manner' by doing that.
If you found it aggressive or condescending, I apologise that you read that tone in it, it certainly wasn't intended.
Biscuit? Take two!
You have to agree though there is some very suspicious behaviour by Endemol/BB.
To the OP: It's not Channel 5 who are responsible for anything that happens on BB, they only carry it on their channel & schedule it
2. After pill-gate they didn't show any of the stuff on the live feed. The housemates were woken in the early hours and seriously disrupted when she was called in for a formal warning and locked herself in the toilet afterwards. Louis had to rescue her so they could switch the lights off and all go back to bed.
They did show all this on the live feed. Next ...
...
Did they show Lauren in the DR or getting a warning? (I don't think the live feed's ever shown what's happening in the DR.)
Did they show Lauren in the DR or getting a warning? (I don't think the live feed's ever shown what's happening in the DR.)
Never saw it but I do know as fact that in all BB series they have never shown a live diary room normal discussion or warning. They may have shown noms live but not normal conversations!
Did they show Lauren in the DR or getting a warning? (I don't think the live feed's ever shown what's happening in the DR.)
No they didn't show the Diary Room itself, just her going in and coming out, what was said afterwards about it, and the effect on the house before, during and after.
Agreed. And someone raised a valid point that I am not saying this is what they were implying but it sure got me thinking. We know about the influencing both by the way they edit shows...that dates back to channel 4 even...and more recently by the presenters since it's been on Five. Many would say it can't be fixed because the public vote & whilst you don't actually hear of phone lines jammed anymore or unavailable for certain hm's in theory it would be easy to fix by freezing phone lines like they do. I never understood why BB part 2 was not live on Wednesday & why they never kept the phone lines open, unless they are not allowed the crowd there after 11pm. IMO the phone lines should be frozen at the exact same time for every eviction and not when they feel like it.
Hi: I thought your response merited a reply on a number of grounds.
The thread title 'Channel 5 bias' and your opening line 'I am seriously suspicious. I think they are in favour of Lauren.' followed by the list of reasons, is hardly setting out your stall as 'this is just what I think', but is laid out as a number of proofs for a strong opening statement - as 'facts'.
It is only when you got to point 7 that you mentioned ' Lastly, I'm not sure but I feel' - all the other points were laid out as blunt fact.
I see what you are saying now with 'the point about the live footage after pill gate. Very little of what appeared on the live feed was shown on the day's highlights show. Lots of people complained about this on here, in lots of other threads'.
And I agree with you. However, this is different to your original point, which was it wasn't shown on the LF. It was, in detail.
My response to your post was to demonstrate all the points were fallacies. I haven't conjectured, merely pointed out facts in response to an erroneous post and thread starter that had already been covered elsewhere previously. I picked out each point, and explained briefly why it was actually wrong, with reasons. This seemed to be a sensible way to deal with it.
I am not sure why you consider I have 'responded in a condescending and aggressive manner' by doing that.
If you found it aggressive or condescending, I apologise that you read that tone in it, it certainly wasn't intended.
Biscuit? Take two!
Dave, thanks for responding and taking the time to explain.
I think that first sentence in my point about pill gate: 'After pill-gate they didn't show any of the stuff on the live feed,' can probably be read either way. Though given the context this didn't occur to me at the time of writing. I perhaps could have added the words 'on the highlights show' inbetween pill gate and they didn't.
Thanks too for the apology. I was more worried about the clarity when laying out my points, you can see I still caused one mix up, so laying them out as assertively and concisely as I could seemed the best way to maximise efficient reading.
any time.
Any one who can argue clearly and without the usual rage is a shining example to many shameful people here and deserves all the tea they can drink :D;)
You have to agree though there is some very suspicious behaviour by Endemol/BB.
To the OP: It's not Channel 5 who are responsible for anything that happens on BB, they only carry it on their channel & schedule it
Sorry I meant to respond to this when i logged on earlier.
I used Channel five in a metaphoric sense to convey my point. It may well be Endemol doing it but Channel 5 still represent them overall though. What about BB Bots, that's Channel 5 isn't it? Or is it still Endemol?
Sorry I meant to respond to this when i logged on earlier.
I used Channel five in a metaphoric sense to convey my point. It may well be Endemol doing it but Channel 5 still represent them overall though. What about BB Bots, that's Channel 5 isn't it? Or is it still Endemol?
Ironically I just started a post with the subject Endemol/BOTS employees as I have no clue
I am seriously suspicious. I think they are in favour of Lauren.
1. In the introductory show they put her in the safe room with Louis and Sophie to do the observing.
2. After pill-gate they didn't show any of the stuff on the live feed. The housemates were woken in the early hours and seriously disrupted when she was called in for a formal warning and locked herself in the toilet afterwards. Louis had to rescue her so they could switch the lights off and all go back to bed.
3. The live feed footage of this episode was removed from youtube just before the show that evening.
4. During Sunday's show, when they showed housemates the diary room footage of the nominations they only showed one very brief clip of one of Mario's nomination explanations when all the others got a montage of all their nominations.
5. They picked her again to go in the safe room away from the relative challenges of the recent tasks.
6. The Keith Allen documentary on youtube has now been removed as it has been so talked about on here.
7. Lastly, I'm not sure but I feel they might have been limiting discussions of Lauren on BB Bots, though admittedly Judy James did finally do a brief analysis of Lauren last night.
After all the alleged failed applications by Lauren over the years I think they, (channel 5), may be protecting their decision to finally allow her to go in there.
Your thoughts?
My thoughts are that you are quite right in that they are doing everything to protect the fame hungry family that is Harries, which includes Lauren. James Harries was a dreadful, pretentious little fake who, far from being a child prodigy, was just a child who regurgiatated all that was fed to him by his odious parents and then became a nasty, vicious b*tch on several BB after shows over the years. Sorry, no sympathy from me. He and his family should remove themselves forever from the public eye and try to nurture this person to save her sanity, but alas, the parents are to blame for creating the monster. Shame on them.
My thoughts are that you are quite right in that they are doing everything to protect the fame hungry family that is Harries, which includes Lauren. James Harries was a dreadful, pretentious little fake who, far from being a child prodigy, was just a child who regurgiatated all that was fed to him by his odious parents and then became a nasty, vicious b*tch on several BB after shows over the years. Sorry, no sympathy from me. He and his family should remove themselves forever from the public eye and try to nurture this person to save her sanity, but alas, the parents are to blame for creating the monster. Shame on them.
Thank you Hermione. Yes I think the silence is ominous. Normally when a needy housemate becomes apparent there is a lot more discussion generated by it both on and off the show. I would say this is another very suspicious sign. It reminds me of the last government and the subject of immigration when anybody daring to mention it was deemed racist.
Comments
So that's a personal feeling, not an evidence based decision - and you even provide evidence to the contrary. Next ...
and your proof is? (because you haven't provided it above in any of your points. Not one single one).
You have them. Thank you.
The point about the live footage after pill gate. Very little of what appeared on the live feed was shown on the day's highlights show. Lots of people complained about this on here, in lots of other threads.
Yes it was available elsewhere on other sites but not as many people knew about these as they did Youtube, the site from whence it was removed. There were loads of people asking about this, again on here, in various different threads.
In this thread I have merely conveyed my own opinion. An opinion to which of course I am entitled.
Completely agree with you nosedive,in fact I've said the same on another thread about BB blatant favouritism towards Lauren and it puts me off watching every night
Edit- I better add that this is just IMO of course
Thank you Ella. Good disclaimer there btw! What was the name of that thread, perhaps I could have a read?
(I'll do a forum search in the mean time to see if I can find it). Thanks.
Ella - It's ok I think I found it.
The thread title 'Channel 5 bias' and your opening line 'I am seriously suspicious. I think they are in favour of Lauren.' followed by the list of reasons, is hardly setting out your stall as 'this is just what I think', but is laid out as a number of proofs for a strong opening statement - as 'facts'.
It is only when you got to point 7 that you mentioned ' Lastly, I'm not sure but I feel' - all the other points were laid out as blunt fact.
I see what you are saying now with 'the point about the live footage after pill gate. Very little of what appeared on the live feed was shown on the day's highlights show. Lots of people complained about this on here, in lots of other threads'.
And I agree with you. However, this is different to your original point, which was it wasn't shown on the LF. It was, in detail.
My response to your post was to demonstrate all the points were fallacies. I haven't conjectured, merely pointed out facts in response to an erroneous post and thread starter that had already been covered elsewhere previously. I picked out each point, and explained briefly why it was actually wrong, with reasons. This seemed to be a sensible way to deal with it.
I am not sure why you consider I have 'responded in a condescending and aggressive manner' by doing that.
If you found it aggressive or condescending, I apologise that you read that tone in it, it certainly wasn't intended.
Biscuit? Take two!
If she's so vulnerable that she needs such careful treatment, why did they pick her as a housemate?
You have to agree though there is some very suspicious behaviour by Endemol/BB.
To the OP: It's not Channel 5 who are responsible for anything that happens on BB, they only carry it on their channel & schedule it
Did they show Lauren in the DR or getting a warning? (I don't think the live feed's ever shown what's happening in the DR.)
Never saw it but I do know as fact that in all BB series they have never shown a live diary room normal discussion or warning. They may have shown noms live but not normal conversations!
Agreed. And someone raised a valid point that I am not saying this is what they were implying but it sure got me thinking. We know about the influencing both by the way they edit shows...that dates back to channel 4 even...and more recently by the presenters since it's been on Five. Many would say it can't be fixed because the public vote & whilst you don't actually hear of phone lines jammed anymore or unavailable for certain hm's in theory it would be easy to fix by freezing phone lines like they do. I never understood why BB part 2 was not live on Wednesday & why they never kept the phone lines open, unless they are not allowed the crowd there after 11pm. IMO the phone lines should be frozen at the exact same time for every eviction and not when they feel like it.
Huh? Where's the Rylan fans?
He is the only person so far that twings my biasometer.
Natalie Cassidy did badly and they still gave her a job of sorts.
Dave, thanks for responding and taking the time to explain.
I think that first sentence in my point about pill gate: 'After pill-gate they didn't show any of the stuff on the live feed,' can probably be read either way. Though given the context this didn't occur to me at the time of writing. I perhaps could have added the words 'on the highlights show' inbetween pill gate and they didn't.
Thanks too for the apology. I was more worried about the clarity when laying out my points, you can see I still caused one mix up, so laying them out as assertively and concisely as I could seemed the best way to maximise efficient reading.
Thank you, I'll have some more tea too if I may?
Any one who can argue clearly and without the usual rage is a shining example to many shameful people here and deserves all the tea they can drink
Sorry I meant to respond to this when i logged on earlier.
I used Channel five in a metaphoric sense to convey my point. It may well be Endemol doing it but Channel 5 still represent them overall though. What about BB Bots, that's Channel 5 isn't it? Or is it still Endemol?
Ironically I just started a post with the subject Endemol/BOTS employees as I have no clue
Yup, just seen it atko. I find it just as annoying as you.
Thank you Hermione. Yes I think the silence is ominous. Normally when a needy housemate becomes apparent there is a lot more discussion generated by it both on and off the show. I would say this is another very suspicious sign. It reminds me of the last government and the subject of immigration when anybody daring to mention it was deemed racist.
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1888467