Options
Do people still believe bb is fixed
gentleguy
Posts: 16,358 Forum Member
✭✭
I still am not sure tbh, im in two minds for example james getting so many boos and but surviving every week or people like aaron bb12 and helen bb15 winning and getting boos, it goes on and on bb still really confuses me on alot of things.
0
Comments
However, i do think that editing plays a major part in steering the public to like or dislike a housemate, so in that context then yes, an element of fixing is taking place from the word go.
then switch to a late rival just to encourage frenzied voting
Do they edit housemates favourably and unfavourably to suit their agenda?
Absolutely!
Do they pigeonhole housemates and only show a certain aspect of that housemate?
e.g. if a housemate is cast as the "baddie", they will never show it if they are being nice,
or if a housemate is cast as "boring" or "miserable", they will never show it if they are having fun.
Most definitely!
Do they give key roles in tasks to certain housemates or give tasks to specific housemates to show them in a good/bad light?
Yup!
Do they engineer certain outcomes to make sure the "right" people are up for eviction?
Oh yeah!
Do they manipulate the housemates and engineer certain situations/storylines?
For sure
Do they manipulate the viewers into voting more to make as much money as possible?
Och aye!
Do they have a good idea who they want to be the winner right from the start, e.g. one of a possible 3 or 4?
I personally believe so.
Is there possible meddling with the voting system from betting cartels/gambling rings and maybe even with insider collusion?
Maybe....
Is there a way to cheat the voting system by using a dodgy iOS app?
Seems so....
Are the votes all officially independently verified?
Yes
Is there a way to know exactly who is placing the votes?
I don't know.
Simple things as "he/she gets booed every week, but is saved" means nothing when a Vote to Save or Vote to Win is in place.
Big characters in Big Brother, get booed nowadays, whether its warranted or not... if you do more, you have a bigger chance of being controversial and liked by some, disliked by others.
Whereas if you're a dull, bland, pointless housemate, you get by.
How many times over the year has "Why do we vote the big characters out early?" been asked? Its because if you put someone up who's possibly annoyed viewers, against a dullard like Ricci, or Sam Evans last year, they're too boring to let us viewers create opinions so will unfortunately go over them.
Vote to Save deals better with this, and usually rewards the deserving people unless theres meddling at hand.
Ive not been one to champion the "FIX" claims, but the Helen win absolutely stank, whether it was the fact she never faced the public vote, to the 3 serious warnings with no real punishment (some would've been thrown out, or at the very least lost the "final pass" but nothing), the 15 minor warnings, the fact she was massively behind Ashleigh right up until the final hour of voting, and somehow swang the vote by like 8000+ wasnt it? Strange.
As sangreal has said above too, the show is massively manipulated to suit their needs for "an hour's entertainment highlights".
Most notable is when they pick housemates to do tasks... gives them airtime, gets them in the public eye during the shows, to try and garner support... they've done it for years, whether it be giving Dee, a 'lesser name' in there amongst bigger "stars" the airtime and focus this year to build up some support early on... or it be one of the many 'immunity' twists or earpieces on launch night etc... Choosing Helen to be "Fake evicted" in the summer, in the final week was another?
Nominations are meddled with non stop, I can't be the only fan/viewer wishing it was just 2 nominations each week, the two housemates with the most votes are up for eviction... None of this 4 or 5 up when the top 2 have 5 votes each, and the other 3 have one each or something.
Money orientated too.
They could easily have opened the 'Vote to Win' lines on Monday night and let it roll all week, freezing them tonight to evict the two with the lowest amount of votes, before reopening them going into Friday.
Of course though, that would be losing out on money, so they put them all up, get all the fans of each housemate to 'vote to save' before then starting afresh with the 'vote to win' so they all have to vote again.
Its little things that become more and more noticeable with each passing series, I think 'fix' is strong in most cases (not Helen's win though sadly)... but heavily manipulated is there for all to see, its so obvious now, they dont even try to hide it.
Enjoy the final two shows, fully expect them to rip Gary and Audley apart on both the HL show and Bit on the Side whilst Luisa swaps allegiance to George (she's already started) after praising Gary all series... its happened for years, happens when they're running scared over who's gonna win, if its not someone they want, or can use and exploit on Channel 5, in the Daily Star etc.
good post
I think so too.
It may not be fixed, but it certainly is creatively edited to favour the producers' favourites. It is the old argument. Unless you have live feed 24/7 you don't really know what is going on.
I for one hope Gary or Audley wins and that Dee is first out on Friday.
This series of CBB has shown pack mentality in all its ugliness and the house has been mostly filled with 'non-celebrities'.
But in the sense that they'll have a bloody good go at getting who they like into a very strong position to win.
It doesn't have to be one person either, it could be two or three who BB think would fit the image of a good winner in their eyes.
Even back when we had live feed most who watched it were aware that we only saw some of what was going on depending on which camera feed they chose to show us. I remember crys of "why are watching these two when we can hear shouts of laughter coming from ******.
Mind they had to stream something so if there's only one room with any action going on they had to show it. Many will remember CAROLE
My thoughts exactly......:o
Now maybe BB originally tried to protect Gary, that is why we never actually witnessed what all the other HMs complained of, if that is the case, why are BB now throwing Gary to the wolves.
Let's say all the dullards got saved, Ricci, Lauren, Adele, who would really bother to vote in the final. BB to to ensure the more controversial HMs are there in the final. BB have paid loads of Wonga to get these HMs in there, they need to guarantee they get that money back, and some, to make the show viable.
Why did bb not remove Helen after her behaviour in weeks 3 and 4 .
Did they think it would reflect bad on them removing pass.
No other housemate got away with do much .
In that sense bb did manipulate the programme.
Excellent post.
BB is undoubtedly manipulated - I think most people can see that.
Beyond that it's fixable - not directly (as other posters have pointed out the ramifications of direct fixing makes this extremely unlikely).
I do believe betting syndicates are getting the pay out results they want on some evictions or wins - but even that is not a pure fix - because even though it pees me off I know they are piling up 'real' votes. So the announced results are numerically correct and verified - it's just how we got to those numbers that is the issue.
The programme makers haven't helped themselves with dodgy phone lines and having to deal with phoney vote to evict apps (which actually vote to save).
I don't vote - I'd want to be sure that my vote was going into a level playing field, not liable to being swamped by syndicate betting by people who probably don't even follow the programme much.
Simplest explanation for how big brother plays out is that each day they go through 48 hours of footage and pick either the 45 minutes they think the audience will find the most entertaining or the 45 minutes most relevant to what the house mates might have spent the day talking about.
Once a few episodes have aired and they have access to social media reaction and press coverage, this will suggest to them what the audience are enjoying most and they'll favour those elements in their editing. A runaway early favourite will doubtless get more airtime than others. You could argue that this is a 'fix' I suppose, but it's more audience dictated that Machiavellian and will (an often does) get turned around at a later date if viewer allegiances change.
Are there powerful figures behind the scenes having boardroom meetings, deciding who they want to win and ordering the production staff to make sure it happens? Are the live audience members instructed who to boo for and who to cheer? Do the people running the website, apps and phonelines recieiving mysterious brown envelopes ordering them to make sure certain housemates votes stop working? Unlikely, because like most conspiracy theories for it to work it would require complete and utter allegiance from everyone working there or turning up in the live audience. With not a single one of them ever, even anonymously, simply going on twitter and saying, "hey guess what?"
Nothing shadowy ever adds up for me, the risk far outweighs the gain. "Make sure it's entertaining and gets people talking" is probably the most likely rule being handed down, which can lead to selective editing in the same way absolutely every TV show does. But again this Ito me is simply about making the show work, not sinisterly brainwashing people.
Are there people involved in the show or in the independent vote counters who might use their knowledge of how the numbers are adding up to go and place large bets and win themselves some money? ....well that's very probable. But again that would have little to do with hood winking the public and trying to force a result.
Yes the voting system is key basically if you spend enough you can buy the desired result.
Someone on a forum created a multiple choice question and you could vote once and once only for the answer you want.
This would reduce revenue maybe but if viewers felt that there vote actually meant something I think more people would cast their vote.
What about the public vote to nominate and the housemates vote to evict, there would not be the same people up every week and even if there were alliances like Helens cool gang ,it would make no difference.
Give the public back the power and I think they will come back.
Oh yeah! Duh! I never even thought of that.
I agree with all this but would go even further and say Yes to the betting cartels etc.
I would love to know more about how many people know about how many votes have been placed and for whom.Who is privy to this information?
I think this should be made very transparent and the people who adjudicate should not have to tell anyone till the vote is closed.
BB know who is up and the results should be just as much as a surprise to them as the public.
Only fair way I think.
The system is so open to abuse,especially with the small amount of votes cast nowadays.