Iain Lee is head and shoulders above the other presenters for me. His humour I think often goes over people's heads.
He is the only one who seems to largely echo my sentiment every time and for me he should be the main guy on all the shows.

..and no this isn't because he's (or someone who has his name) posted in this thread .

Well said last night Iain, you said something that needed to be said, and Carol did try to be balanced in her comments. It was a disgusting show, and that therapists slating of Jim and calling him manipulative etc. was disgusting.

IF Linda did self harm, it could have explained what we saw on BBOTS last night, with them crawling all over Linda,buttering her up, as they clearly failed in their duty of care for a HM. Even worse if that Annie Lennox wannabee is responsible for the pysche evaluation of people going into the house.

That doesn't negate their appalling treatment of Jim,

God no, totally agree. I meant more as a damage limitation excercise in case Linda felt she had some case for them to answer if she decided to take it further.

I am sorry but that blonde woman does not look like Annie Lennox, she looks like Hayley Cropper without her wig

I have never seen a worse biased programme than last nights.

Usually Emma and Rylan bend over backwards to be fair and equal to all housemates but last night was excruciating a hatchet job of the highest degree.

It will fail because it will backfire on them, they should be sacked.

I turned it off as it was disgusting, I wouldn't let those harpies near my cockatiel, let alone a human being

Not sure if serious?

You're more than welcome to disagree! I don't like him, I think his ego is enormous, in that he's more interested in himself and his own views than he is in the HMs or even panellists. I love Rylan, but when they're together on that Saturday show they behave like a couple of naughty schoolboys with the attention span of a gnat.

Whether he was prompted in his earpiece or not, I'm glad that he spoke up for Jim after a barrage of dross from 2 women who ought to know better.

I feel you may have me confused with a Jim hater Have a look at some of my posts in the last week

I agree he would be the best replacement for lead presenter out of anyone associated with the show. I trust he can actually do impartiality and balance - the basic skill-set - and is cleverer and funnier than the others combined. Did I mention he was sexy? Even though he's got a bit porky. Suits him, he's no spring chicken anymore x

I dont understand Linda saying you have to be yourself in the house that you couldnt act for more than a couple of days , yet she now says Jim is acting ...it is all an act..... she does my head in

BIB :
Firstly : One of the reasons I and many posters like Iain him is BECAUSE he doesn't turn eveything back to talking about himself, something which Rylan is very very guilty of. He's no nonsense straight in with the questions to the panel that we all want to know, so you're wrong there.

Secondly : Iain has posted - HE WAS NOT TOLD TO SAY ANYTHING about Jim - it was his opinion.

It was a hurried little comment toward the end. He didn’t have the balls to elaborate or even counter argue any of the poison spouted by the panel.
His rushed little comment was the shows legal obligation so as not to appear biased.

I have just caught up with this and could hardly believe the hatchet job that was done on Jim. Blooming disgraceful.

Aren't the experts supposed to impartial?

The blonde one nearly made me sick when she said to Linda "You're my winner"

I have never been the biggest fan of Jim but I am a big fan of fair play.

all done for the simple reason : they knew Linda was fragile - so they pandered to her, and perhaps it was necessary to a certain extent as she was clearly angry that she'd been portrayed and shown by BB as never smiling in HL shows

- but the extent they went to, to put Jim 'down' and brand him the villain just to make Linda's behaviour on BB seem justifiable was disgraceful, but Iain likes Jim, so it kind of balanced it out - because more would be inclined to go with Iain's views than the ..psychos or Carol anyway.

If Linda has been hard done by to such an extent that she self harmed then why was Jim Davidson's footage not edited in such as way that would clearly show him to be the person causing the problem? It's no good the panel on BBOTS buttering Linda up over something that the viewers were never allowed to see.
I think that the producers are scared of Jim winning. I like the guy although I can see how he has quietly retaliated against the collective spite of Linda and Luisa but a large body of public opinion has been taught to think of Jim as one step removed from Hitler.


I've no problem at all with 'experts' expressing their genuinely held opinion but if the Lennox wannabe and her lop eared 'performance coach' friend hate Jim so much and thought that Linda was unfairly treated why were the viewers not shown footage which would back up their opinion?
Or were they spouting the same sort of vile unreasoning grudge fueled antagonism against Jim because it's the dogmatic Politically Correct thing to do and there is no basis in fact for their opinions?
Iain Lee was the only panelist who was left with a shred of integrity, and his rushed last minute intervention almost came too late after the vomit making ass kissing of Linda by the others.

Fragile? I didn't see any fragility..(she's a hard faced madam).she just sat there, basking listening to the others, apart from that short interjection from Iain,tearing Jim to pieces.

Grossly unfair and totally out of order!

I challenge you to find any forum posts, ever, in which a group of men, however bitchy, are described as a coven of witches. It is the ultimate misogynistic cliche, and you know perfectly well it is only ever used to attack groups of women.

Please tell you you don't think there is going to be a court case because a housemate might think he was unfairly described on a reality tv show.

Because Ch 5 era BB is very ruthlessly edited for chosen 'stories'. No one, surely, believes that during her entire stay in the house Casey has not had a single conversation that was not to or about Lee, and her future or lack of it with him. Obviously she is a popular housemate and has had loads of conversations with all of them. Why were they never shown? Because her 'story' from day one has been 'romance with Lee/ triangle with Lee'. Nothing else has ever been, or will ever be, shown.

Linda got things far worse, because he chosen story, again from day one, was 'fights with Jim'. He did not get this at all: endlessly kindly conversations with other housemates have been shown, and a special all-house task was even invented purely to spotlight him having kindly conversations with all of them. He has been edited as a fully rounded character, and we know pretty well who he likes spending time with, what they talk about, what they like about him and vice versa. None of this for linda at all: we have seen loads of conversations about neutral, pleasant topics between Jim and Dappy, Jim and Lee; but none at all, ever, between Linda and Sam, Linda and Casey, Linda and Lee. Who knew, until he said so after her eviction, that Lee 'always got on really well with Linda; I really liked her' because they were fellow musicians and had a common interest? Amount of footage showing that relationship: 0 seconds. Amount of footage in the highlights of Linda and Dappy talking about music (as was shown on the live feed): 0 seconds. Even amount of footage of Linda over-mothering Ollie - a criticism he made, but not a nasty one: 0 seconds. They just had no interest in showing Linda being friendly or affectionate or motherly or interested or amused or anything positive at all: as soon as she stopped talking about or to Jim, she was instantly cut out of the edit.

Yes of course. I don't suppose Linda would have done a whole lot better; she was not, as far as we can see, a bundle of wit and energy; her rows with Jim would always have played badly. But it was a horrible betrayal to bring her in just as part of Jim's story, then just throw her to the wolves to make that story stronger. Shame on them for messing with peoples' lives like that. Linda had no idea, when she was a well-liked housemate, what her image outside the house was; well she knows now, having seen a small fraction of the truly evil abuse on unmoderated places like facebook and twitter.

I think the opposite. There is no advantage at all to them in someone winning who is signed to a rival channel. I think they have hopes that Jim will do some work for them in the future.

They almost never mention medical treatment received by housemates, for obvious reasons.



Something along those lines, though it could have been more kindly put. They may very well belatedly realize that they failed to look after Linda, even though they knew she was on medication for depression and often seemed depressed and obsessive in the house. It would not be the first time they have tried to make some kind of token amends to a housemate who has emerged to an unexpectedly hellish world of ridicule and abuse after BB. Giving a very ill looking Sree the 'most entertaining housemate' award comes to mind; signing up a disturbingly wired and manic Mark to BOTS, ditto. So giving Linda a supportive day on a spin off programme may have been a gesture of apology.


What fragility would you expect to see? Her curled in a foetal postion, rocking backwards and forwards?

I have an issue with the endlessly repeated words 'hard faced' or 'sour faced' because imo people are (perhaps unknowingly) abusing her for her actual FACE. No one smiles all the time, and we all have a characteristic expression when not smiling. For the young and smooth skinned, this is not an issue; a lot of older people find to their regret that as soon as they stop smiling, their face looks naturally glum and grumpy. (Jim is surely worse in that respect; but people love him, so it is fine for him to look grumpy). Linda was constantly reviled for looking 'sour' or 'hard' when she was doing nothing more than listening neutrally to a conversation; often when she actually joined in, she was obviously perfectly all right.

What it is to have a lovely perky face that always looks nice.

The psychologist (@TheRachelMorris) has called everyone on Twitter who has Tweeted her negative comments about last night's show trolls.

Nope. We just have a different opinion and appreciate fair, balanced opinions rather than pandering to Linda for whatever reason.

What a ridiculous thing to say - I'm sure most of us would recognise a fragilty in someone without your ridiculous example.

Really?..I must go and have my say.

I agree UNLESS he is slagging off someone i like

She is allowed hers so stop abusing her.

The abuse of presenters of here is sick. Abusing any of them on twitter is ridiculous.

One must learn to take the 'rough with the smooth' in order to reach true Iain Lee 'enlightenment'.

What a horrendous panel that was last night.

The way that blonde one was kissing up to Linda made me feel physically sick, and that 'performance coach' is always woefully off the mark with her comments. So terribly biased, the lot of 'em.

Dreadful stuff.

I agree and I do like Rylan but he just isnt a patch on Iain. Last nights show was awful, Rylan tweeted saying it was an opinion show but come on they should not have had everyone on with the same opinion, the panel should be split for a debate. Good on Iain for having the guts to speak up about Jim in front of the 4 women. I also think the presenters need to be asking the evictee more gutsy questions everything just seems to be softly glossed over.