Kitten, Trojan Horses, Disobedience, Mass Media Power.

apart from the many people who are blatantly prejudiced against aggressive lesbian role models, one of the most common criticisms of kitten is that if she doesn't like rules then why participate in big brother in the first place.

one possible answer is that it is perhaps a trojan horse approach. she has gained entry into a mass media live broadcast show watched by millions every day. more pointedly she is inside a 24 hour surveillance experience whose thematic title originates from orwell's dystopian cautionary tale.

http://www.online-literature.com/orwell/1984

in the past people such as george bernard shaw, oscar wilde and john lydon, among others, have pointed out to us that disobedience is a magnificent and vital human virtue.

in britain today more than four million surveillance cameras monitor our every move, making Britain the most-watched nation in the world.
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/thi...p?story=480364

in today's world, corporations have greater power and influence in the world than even countries or people do.
http://www.thecorporation.tv/about/

private police forces are among the biggest growth industries.
http://mediafilter.org/caq/CAQ54p.police.html
http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=PMC

new laws enable governments to imprison people indefinitely without trial.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/...209766,00.html

with the aid of our taxes ordinairy citizens are being killed and tortured in our names.
http://www.counterpunch.org/stanton05152004.html

and noticeably nobody is rioting in response to any of it.

it is arguable that we are currently living through the most conformist of times in at least the last 50 years.

the roots of today's successful levels of conformity are rooted in the highly influential power agendas seeded by people such as edward bernays, the nephew of freud and the "father" of PR.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays

Bernays famously stated "Public relations embraces the "engineering of consent" based on Jefferson's principle that in a truly democratic society, everything depends upon the consent of the public." and "The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society."

fundamentally he believed that people couldn't be trusted to think and do the "right" thing collectively or by themselves. more importantly bernays' notion of what was best for the masses was not focused on encouraging autonomy, compassion or equality, but instead was directed at encouraging us to be consumers rather than citizens, and to acquiesce to the will our corporate-military masters.

whilst today the web allows us, for the first time ever, to communicate in something that approximates true democracy, the corporate mass media (tv, movies, advertising, newspapers, music) continues to hold immense power and influence over our day to day existence and opinions. this power is in the hands of a very small number of people who do not have humanity's best interests at heart.

http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/talks/91...a-control.html

the majority of voices and viewpoints speaking to us through the mainstream media tend to collude in propagating a narrow range of behaviour and beliefs. despite there being millions of people employed in the media, a restricted message is maintained effectively through self censorship (what we believe we shouldn't say) aswell as through peer group coercion (i won't be liked if i say that) and managerial blackmail (you'll lose your job if you don't toe the line).

it is too rare within the mainstream that we ever hear or witness people who are confidentally disobedient.

it is an immense struggle for alternative and humanitarian opinions to be represented and have influence within the mainstream media. we can consciously seek out alternative opinions, but they aren't presented to us on tap in the same way in which influential corporate agendas are, over and over again.

therefore one of the best ways for people with alternative points of view to be heard is to exploit any media opportunities made available. and one of the best windows for such media subversion is via popular live tv.

more specifically within the context of the show, big brother says "who wins, you decide", but we don't have any say in making the big brother rules. and why should big brother be the only one to have the right to change the rules at anytime? and by whose criteria are the rules created or changed? not ours, nor the housemates. so why shouldn't big brother be disobeyed? why shouldn't housemates rock the boat and push at the safe boundaries? whats wrong with sometimes disobeying big brother purely for a laugh or just to see what happens?

we tend to forget that in life, wether or not we're in a game show or even if we're in the army, adults do not ever have to automatically do what another person tells them, and all rules and laws need to be thought about, openly discussed and constantly reviewed, rather than automatically obeyed.

plus purely in the context of plain entertainment, we know what happens when housemates do what they are told, we don't know what happens when they don't. disobedience can create interesting unpredictable dynamics. in many ways kitten is an evolved version of last year's federico who occaisionally highlighted the manner in which the majority of housemates blindly obey and rush to show their gratitude to big brother.

lastly the potential of bb5 constantly reminds me of the bbc's reality tv recreation of the stanford prison experiment,
http://education.guardian.co.uk/high...714927,00.html
where for a time at least the disobedient "prisoners" unpredictably negotiated a democratic open co-op with their "guards".

further interesting links regarding obedience and surveillance.....

surveillance camera theatre
http://www.notbored.org/the-scp.html

the original stanford prison experiment
http://www.prisonexp.org/

the Milgram experiment on Obedience to Authority
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

plus "KITTEN COULD KILL BIG BROTHER"
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews...name_page.html

Is this a forum or a A-level exam?

wow! are you looking for a quick reply?

If only Kitten or Lydon were as eloquent as you biomorph.

Top post

Everyone knows that the Trojan Horse is a myth, and would have been practically impossible to have pulled off! (You would have needed very big hands )

Hence your argument is flawed as was Homer.

So this may be classed as a Homer Sexual statement!

Sorry, this is Big Brother, Ranting is next door.

The footnotes are not only for academics - one or two actually explain a lot about this BB. The point about this BB is that the HM are going to be asked to punish each other (whips on trailers were not there for nothing). That was the point of the first "nomination" and only Stuart, Daniel and Shell noticed what they were being asked to do was odd and new. The whole point is if you accept the logic that some people deserve bad things to happen to them you wil begin to ratchet up the punishment on request. The Milgram experiment tells you what happens if you do this.

In a TV series staffed by psychologists, and probably more dependant on them this year given the theme, you can't tell me that this is all coincidental.

I suspect howver it was planned before the Iraqi prison pictures and C4 are treading on very thin ice,

Beats me why anyone thinks BB contestants owe BB loyalty or obedience.

BB exploits the contestants just as much as it provides them a possible opportunity to find fame and fortune. BB exploits them 'to the max' while they are in the house and afterwards - for years afterwards, e.g. Kate Lawler and Jade still promote BB each and every time they appear on tv and in magazines - so why shouldn't the housemates enjoy themselves and exploit the BB experience in just about any way they feel inclined to while they are in the house?

Iraqi prison pictures?

What's that got to do with C4?

Are you sure you don't have some obsessions that you want to include in every conversation?

I don't think it's a question of loyalty to BB but loyalty to their fellow HMs.

What punishments (read the article in the Mirror above) do you think EVIL BB will include? Kitten has lost her clothes and toiletries and family pictures, BB3 were left showering outside, locked up behind bars, with only a few clothes and living on minimal food . If BB5 is going to be EVIL it will have to be worse than BB3 - unless it just means being left out of the reward room like in BB4. The tabloids are going to point out this is in bad taste given Iraq. Its obviously not the same but the comparison will be made and C4 will be accused of poor taste.

If you read the link to the experiment above where people cheerfully electrocuted other people the point is that once they accept that some people deserve punishment and they are entitled to give it, people then go on to inflict more and more punishment. The guards in Iraq just took the logic to the extreme and no one said "I won't do that because they don't deserve that and I shouldn't o it". Expect the psychologists to start pointing this out after the HM have punished each other a few times.

Thank you for Biomorph04 for the interesting Trojan horse episode. Well if true to the story, this should produce interesting viewing, reality in the round indeed.

Thank you Biomorph04 for the interesting Trojan horse episode. Well, if true to the story, this should produce interesting viewing, reality in the round indeed.

I think you could well loose that argument, and if you do, it undermines the thrust of your post,

Some of the largest UK street demonstrations have taken place in the last few years, a wide range of laws, from speeding to drug taking are routinely flouted, there are more television channels and a wider range of people appearing on them then ever before, fringe parties such as UKIP and the Greens win seats at elections, middle class men can no longer be relied on to buy their underpants at Marks and Spencer.

Nostalgaa ain't what it used to be.

I think you could well loose that argument, and if you do, it undermines the thrust of your post,

Some of the largest UK street demonstrations have taken place in the last few years, a wide range of laws, from speeding to drug taking are routinely flouted, there are more television channels and a wider range of people appearing on them then ever before, fringe parties such as UKIP and the Greens win seats at elections, middle class men can no longer be relied on to buy their underpants at Marks and Spencer.

Nostalga ain't what it used to be.

This is Big Brother game show not some kind of torture prison.

I think you are getting carried away.

Interesting thread and original premise.

While I agree with most of what Biomorph originally said, it is then pretty sad that the representative for non-conformism is Kitten, who is not especially articulate or able to explain her (valid) views in a more persuasive manner. I've always wanted to see someone challenge BB, but Kitten doesn't quite cut it for me as the best candidate for the job - but then again, that was clearly BB's intention - to place someone in the house with stridently anti-establishment views and then harness their vitriolic energy for their own benefit, ultimately 'affirming' BB's hegemony.

Games are all about rules and challenging those rules, and BB has got away for too long in dominating its contestants, but they are easy, manipulable fodder because they are so desperate for the money and fame BB can offer. Contestants don't seem to recognise their own value to BB, and at least, for all of her presentational faults, Kitten has offered a sufficiently subversive alternative to question BB's rules and behavior.

This raises interesting issues. For my part I have believed for a while now that the intelligence services have taken a keen interest in BB, and it is not unreasonable to suppose that there have been discussions between Endemol and those elements of the security services responsible for torture and interrogation, in developing this year's "nasty" theme. I suspect also that more general classfied mind control techniques were being used during the transmission of BB4, the way the general public at large accepting as the winner a charisma-free, Bible-bashing Orcadian virgin being surely the proof of that. This technology has come a long way since its original exposure to the public thanks to the efforts of Dr Armen Victorian a decade ago

Im all for the HMs challenging BB if something is wrong or patently unfair but Kittens disobediance just for the sake of it is tiresome in the extreme.
Maybe I only feel this way as I have 2 toddlers of my own so get to see this kind of behaviour regularly - they are not called the terrible twos for nothing.

I'm with gadfly on this. If this is a way to bring subversion into the mass media could they not have chosen somebody more articulate than you know, like, I dunno, basically, like whatever... Kitten?

You ask 'why should big brother be the only one to have the right to change the rules at anytime?'
Because it's their house, they're the ones who devise and implement the show - so it's completely up to them. Maybe if you had your own TV show you could have some kind of commune where the HMs decide everything, but that's not really the point of Big Brother, what with the Orwellian reference and everything.

Kitten is an attention seeking selfish idiot - albeit an entertaining one. It has nothing to do with her being a lesbian, and everything to do with her being a muppet. I seem to remember Anna being hugely popular and nearly winning BB, or was she not a proper lesbian because she didn't bang on about it ad nauseum?

I hope they kick out the most popular HM, so that the other remaining ones turn on Kitten. It'd make great telly to see her hoist by her own petard.

Thankyou biomorph for your excellent & well researched thread opening.

I really don't see what the opening post has to do with Kitten at all.

I bet everyone here knows a "Kitten". University radical who is against everything. Who does not tolerate dissent from their opinions (if you do dare to contradict you are a racist / fascist / homophobe delete where applicable).

If Kitten had been an activist she would have come with a plan.

If she had been an anarchist then she would not have entered - or certainly would not have said sorry for gaining three strikes.

Let's face it - she's getting booted (or rewarded - wonder how that will go down if she's off to the secret room ) for trying to move a fridge full of booze and painting on walls. Way to go radical chic.

biomorph04, your polymorphic commentary was food for thought.

Well give me a thought out and well prepared post like Bio's any day.
I much prefer this sort of post to the usual 'rantings'.
there is more than an element of truth in the post, and the issues raised are worth talking about in the context of BB. imo

BB, what political system does it emulate?.

I'd say a dictatorship, You have to obey the rules, any breaking of them can result in an innocent party getting punished as a warning, you are not allowed to challenge any BB rules, you have to do as they say, when they say it. your life is controlled 24 hours a day by BB.
Ok BB dont execute Hm's (well not yet anyway), but eviciton is a metaphor for execution. When a hm leaves, particulary a liked one, the hm's reactions are akin to bereavment.
(eg Kate Lawlers reaction when Alison was evicted).
we even use metophorical terms for execution...(eg 'Who is next for the chop'.)
BB is a window on a world that a large number of the worlds population have to live under every day of their lives.

Its true, that on one level it is 'only a game show', but as a metaphor of a totalitarian dictarship, its makes interesting viewing and the public reaction towards the hm's is also fascinating. imo