“Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.”

And they do it so regularly.

You're telling me!

And I've got absolutely zero idea of who Hayley is.

H De Vil is biased heavily towards ITV. Andy23 is biased heavily towards ITV. Brekkie is slightly biased towards ITV as you are. GeorgeS is just a loveable ITV fan who's slightly bonkers!

Robbie and Samuel are heavily biased towards the BBC. I'm slightly biased towards the BBC. Samuel is just a loveable BBC fan who's slightly bonkers!

Well I have not watched CS for 20 years but I know who Hayley is - however the Becky character mentioned - no idea.

I maybe slightly biased - but I don't understand how someone can love just one channel and hate everything else.

I watch a variety of shows on many channels. I don't have a favourite channel, I just have favourite shows.

I think in honesty, we all have our slight biases one way or another. It can't be denied that those who have strong ITV biases can, on occasion, be just as bad.

Well that's most of the thread bias then!

I see no need for it, i'd rather lick my own Arse through my own throat!

It's a man isn't it? Or she is a man? Or she was a he? Or whatever the politcally correct term is.

Not a soap watcher but having seen pictures Coronation Street either has a potential world class Oscar winning make up department or the actress was a bloke

See that's where you've got me wrong. BBC1 [or any other bbc channel] isnt the only channel I watch frequently. Im not deluded, I like what I like. With that said however Im less likely to give Itv shows a chance compared to BBC1, BBC2, C4 or C5 due to having had bad viewing experiences with their shows in the past [dramas not ending satisfactorily, inappropriately timed adverts, cocks-up during live events, rigged programmes, heavily manipulated talent shows, lower quality news coverage etc]. And also I find lots of their shows are aimed more towards a female demographic, not to my tastes.

Ooo err. I hope you've washed it.

Samuel says what he says and other people react with fury towards him. I think it says more about them than Samuel to be honest. He just talks about programmes. Others insult him. Some people become very odd on this thread.

I find if Samuel says something I think is daft, I'll just tell him. Then I normally move on. Unless it's about Atlantis!

Got you all wrong? All you ever do is praise the BBC and abuse everything on ITV.

Out of interest - why do you not enjoy IAC?


Because what he says half of the time is quite frankly ridiculous.

I mean his blatant under prediction for The Voice - just so tomorrow he can say how amazed he is by it and will probably provide us with about 50 bullet points as to how good it did.

Many of us have wondered that about GeorgeS! You too eh?

Absolutely agreed 100%. Samuel's entirely entitled to his opinion. The way some posters react with their complete lack of a sense of humour derail this thread!

You are encouraging him.

Don't.

There have always been channel biases on this thread, it's inevitable, it's a ratings thread. The simple thing to do if you don't want to get annoyed by someone elses opinion is just to ignore the post and don't respond to it. It's when people respond to every comment, every single post that causes thread derailment. If we all focused on things we were interested in and not just responding for responding sake then no one would get angry!

Because you asked:

1. IAC is the same thing every year, with very little evolution or creativity in the format: on the first day half the celebs bungee jump out of a helicopter. They are then split into two camps, always the same names like Snake Rock. Then after a few days they are brought altogether, whilst carrying out the same sort of bushtucker trials every year - eating bugs, swimming underwater etc. I think the show creatively is quite poor and there has been little effort to switch it up and make it unpredictable.

2. I believe morally it is wrong for live insects and animals to be eaten on national tv. Also find it in bad taste that they show celebrities killing animals during highlights shows [a celeb the other year killed a rat]. I eat meat so Im not an animal rights activit or anything like that, but I just find it a bit sickening watching live animals eaten on tv.

3. Same location every year, same set. I think like point 1, it is a bit too predictable.

4. Very heavily edited. This show is very heavily edited in terms of highlights. In a 1hour Big brother highlights show, you get around 40minutes of actual house action. In a typical IAC program, an hour long episode had about 20-25mins of actual highlights. I think it makes the show a bit boring and producers have a very big influence on how the celebs appear. Also often Itv based celebrities are given a very pro-biased edit [Joey Essex, Mark Wright etc].

5. Calibre of celebrities: I just dont think the calibre of celebrities are on the same level as other shows like SCD or even CBB. For instance, the current CBB cast have more household names than the recent IAC lineup and also are more entertaining.

6. The show is very sanitised: when IAC began, they would have swearing and other adult themes as well as heavy topics of conversation. Nowadays swearing is always bleeped out and I think it is very much aimed towards kids. Mature conversations about heavily relevant topics arent ever shown [ things about politics for example]. I think it's quite a kiddy, family aimed show. That's fine but not for me.

George S can be just the same about ITV shows and insulting about BBC shows and I don't see him getting abuse. Andy 23 Only seems to comment on here after Samuel says something.

People around here are selective with their criticism and get wound up over nonsense.

Ridiculous!

06 - 12.233m - SOAH
07 - 12.230m - BGT

That'll be a pretty boring history lesson if only the number 1 show is what matters, especially if the fireworks are number 1 now frequently, which they might be in non football years, if current trends continue.

Imagine this thread 20 years from now, people trying to remember what the big shows were in 2013. You wouldn't learn much if the answer was 'New Year Fireworks, end of story, nothing else matters, move on'

Don't most history books list the top 10 at least, so people can get a feel for the year?

And she wasn't dying in no doubt emotional scenes either!

Samuel becomes less credible the more he posts.

To be fair, GeorgeS is hardly ever on here, Samuel is. Both are unbelievably biased towards one channel and will slate every programme on the unfavourable channel. That is where it goes over board.

I favour ITV, but watch all channels.

You won't be predicting a ridiculously high figure for these episodes then? And then declaring the actual rating poor when it fails to reach your predicted level then?

As she is such an insignificant character, I assume your prediction will be about 9m?