There's an interview with John de Mol in Broadcast about his new major reality show Utopia: http://www.broadcastnow.co.uk/in-dep...ontentID=40611

It is worth saying that in the Netherlands where it is currently airing, it has lost 10pct of its viewers each and every week for the last three weeks. It is not quite the hit the article is making it sound like. FOX has already acquired the rights to it in the USA and there is interest from UK broadcasters, but I dont see this becoming a big ratings hit.


No I never mean to cause harm nor do I ever get personal.

I imagine Stan and Doris must be amongst them.

Do you think Samuel stole their remote so they couldn't turn over from BBC One?

Some fairly weak singers on The Voice tonight. And I don't understand why all of the them watch to see if the other turns, then completely miss theiur chance and then say as Kylie did last week 'I was just about to push it'. Well why didn't you. Its all well and good being an entertaiunment format, but they all act as if its a game.

One thing I can definetely say is that you have never been personal towards anyone. You just sometimes get a little excited! I'll just post you the Marshmallows, you can do what you want with them.

Samuel and trying to inflate things to be bigger than they are... sounds familiar.

Producers on the Voice all around the world have advised coaches to press the button as late as possible to increase the dramatic effect and entertainment value. Coaches pressing the button as late as possible heightens the jeopardy of each performance and increases the tension. Coaches have been advised by producers to leave it as late as possible unless there's an absolute standout singer for which they can press the button asap. By leaving the pressing of buttons as late as possible, the coaches actually have to improvise in terms of making up excuses and faux expressions and movement to make it look like theyre contemplating pressing the button or not. It's all in the name of entertainment. Some of these coaches know from 5 seconds into a performance they want to press the button, but they will do so towards the end of the performances, to increase dramatic tension.

Unfortunately, as in all talent contests on TV, the emphasis has to be about what makes good telly rather than the contestants. In reality it is a "game". I agree with you though, Kylie's twins were awful as were Ricky's. But I am pleased that hippie duo didn't go through, they really were terrible.

But after a while it doesn't increase tension, just irritates. The 1st series worked in that respect, but now they just need to get on with it. They potentially loose a good singer for being slow.

In other words it's stage managed - just like all shows of it's ilk.

I have to say I only watched the opening few minutes of the first ever episode of The Voice UK as I felt it was slow and the panel lacked a spark to increase interest. However I tried the show again with the new panel and the improvement is clear to see though I haven't watched tonight's episode yet.

Despite its low figures the Splash thread has a remarkably high comment tally and views of 1,149 comments and 58,056views. Usually when a programme drops to 3.5m the thread is visited very little, but it seems to buck the trend.

I think overall it is probably the right decision to leave the pushing off buttons as late as possible, in general. It can irritate sometimes but I think it works better than having the coaches pressing the button early on.

Rising Star is another show which will have 'faux tension'. What I mean by that is that during a performance, the viewers at home will vote on their apps 'yes' or 'no' whether they want a contestant through or not. The majority of people will vote within the first 30seconds and the required 70% pass score is normally surpassed within those first 30seconds, in reality. However on-screen, the producers will stagger the upward movement of the %-value to drag it out as much as possible to increase the dramatic tension, if that makes sense. So a contestant may have got 70% approval within 30seconds but on television, it may take 2-3mins for the bar to reach 70pct to make it look more interesting for viewers at home. It's production tricks which all good reality shows use and they work well.

Do we know how Splash! skews? I presume the younger audience has been eaten into by The Voice.

It's a shame the show has taken an understandable dip due to the increased opposition as I think it's a better series than last year.

Or indeed like every show on television. Ever.

The key for The Voice is less about not being staged managed but feeling less overtly stage managed which by and large I think it manages. Most of the time.

However I'm getting increasingly close to throwing in the towel on The Voice UK to be honest. I really like the format and really enjoy the US version of the show but the UK version has never really managed to find its groove. This year is an improvement (although I think the improvement has been vastly overstated) but it still lacks any kind of pace or excitement. In part its because while the coaching panel is now infinitely more likeable they're still mind numbingly dull with no real sense of urgency or competition between them. In fact a complete lack of urgency basically sums The Voice UK up.

January Overnight Average for the Top Three:

Coronation Street: 8.35m
down 810k y-o-y

EastEnders: 7.33m
down 940k y-o-y

Emmerdale: 6.93m
down 300k y-o-y

Actually that's not entirely how Rising Star works.

The magic ingredient of the Rising Star format is that you need the support of the judges to get through to the next stage. As much as they talk about the audience deciding every step of the way I'm pretty sure that in the early episodes its mathematically impossible for a contest to progress without at least one or two of the judges voting for them so that's how the voting gets staggered.

Totally agree with you, its just lacks excitement. I watch in now and just want to skip it. There is now urgancy to watch it. Unlike the XF the panel interaction is easier because the judges sit right next to each other and therefore can argue/laugh etc. together easier than sitting apart in big chairs. The arguments make more intersting viewing - as Big Brother has shown recently. Everyone getting along sometimes is tedious, its needs arguments to make it intersting.

Not surprised to see Emmerdale's decline being the lowest of the three. It's be basically well received at the moment and it's shares have held up in the overnights whereas Coronation Street's and EastEnders have seen dips.

I think all EastEnders can do it stick with it; it's like turning a supertanker - changes will not happen overnight. And that's why ITV have to be very careful with Coronation Street; considering it's had a widely talked about storyline dominating the show a 810k decline is not very good at all.

Thanks for this. I hope the sudden drop for Corrie from its rise last year is a wake up call to ITV and replace Stuart Blackburn very soon.

On Rising Star, a contestant can get up to 100 'points'. Up to 72 points are from the public vote, 28 points from the judges [7 points per judge]. Overall a contestant needs 70 points out of 100 to get through. Therefore it is possible for a contestant to get through purely based on the public vote if they get a 97% approval from the public app-vote, even if they get 0 points from the judges. It is unlikely, I know, that a contestant would get 97% approval from the public app-vote but it is mathematically possible. You can pretty much guarantee anyway that 1 judge out of 4 will give their vote to a contestant so an 87.5% approval from the app-vote combined with the points from one judge would be enough to get 70points out of 100 overall for a contestant to go through. The voters at home will still have the majority of power in deciding a contestants' fate and therefore the producers can predictably delay the on-screen upward ticking graphic as long as possible to increase the dramatic tension.

I respect your views, but as you are overtly biased towards US shows anyway, no matter what the Voice UK did, you would still find it dull. I think this year's Voice is far more entertaining and much more invigorating to watch than last year and as such is perfect entertainment. Comparing it to a version from a different country is not always a good thing because different countries make shows for different audiences. If you compare The Apprentice to the American version they are totally different.

Arguments on XF are as staged as the judges hesitation on The Voice. I actually think arguing is unnecessary, the Craig revel Horwood induced arguments on SCD get on my nerves. I like constructive criticism, not rudeness and big ego's.

Yeah. Emmerdale also hadn't got Waterloo Road to contend with this year and the added support of BOAF on Thursdays.

EastEnders decline is 750k minus the 2 Wednesdays and the Emmerdale clash. Not as bad as it looks at first glance.


No probs. The Big Three's ratings have been pretty uninspiring so far this year. I think the best is yet to come. I also think we're stuck with Blackburn for the forseeable, he has the year mapped out so I guess we just have to hope for the best.

I do go towards agreeing. The first 40 minutes or so seemed to accommodate about 3 or 4 people. The small talk of the coaches is just flat and once again the show does not flow as it should. There are good moments and for me it is interesting and watchable but Im sure it could be edited better. I cant believe they don't have a few more people to show in 80 or 90 minutes. Im keeping my towel at the moment though

So in fact, on a fair and equitable basis, EastEnders was actually down less than Corrie in January, year-on-year?

See now I thought differently - I thought it would have been a far better show tonight if they'd saved the last couple for next week. Every time it felt like there had been enough for one episode nope here comes another one.

Should be around the same rating it got last week if not slightly higher but I thought it'd increase last week so what do I know