I'm sorry to start yet another thread but there is something that badly needs to be addressed here.

Whatever your opinion on free speech, 'PC' and Ofcom, the fact that both Jeremy and Ken have been removed from the CBB house has very little to do with it (despite what Ofcom complainers may be claiming elsewhere).

The facts are:

1. Both signed a contract to follow the CBB rules within the CBB house. They didn't. In any workplace (which the house effectively is for them), that is grounds for termination.

2. Jeremy was removed before any of the public even knew what had happened. To claim that the public had any influence on that decision is improbable.

3. BB producers have regularly decided to keep contestants in the house, despite Ofcom complaints (see: Helen Wood). Whilst it may seem easy to blame the 'PC brigade' and the 'professionally offended', as some forum members put it, for the removal of Ken, history of BB tells us this is unlikely the case. It is quite clear to see that it has more to do with rule breaking, severity of rule breaking, the effect the rule break has on the other housemates, and the random perspective that BB producers have on each individual incident (which, I am categorically saying I do not agree with, but it is clearly a factor according to their agenda on the show edit).

All in all, it is fairly obvious that while BB do have to think about Ofcom, because they do have to follow certain standards after all, it was nowhere near the main factor in booting out Jeremy or Ken.

If you come in with all this logic and reason, all the popcorn will go to waste.

So the 'freedom of speech' advocates should really be taking issue with the BB rule book.

Far too much sense reason and logic going on here.

I think so. In fact, if they have such an issue with the rules, perhaps they should complain to Ofcom

Sorry! It needed to be said though...

The perpetually offended are ruining the show. They claim offence on behalf of others and then will complain when beige woodchip like Kavana and Chegwin get to the final. The offended get the show they deserve.

well now i don't know who is repugnant

I see you regularly make a habit of missing the point, then.

You missed Magnolia.

^^^^^ THIS ! i find it amusing when people get riled up.

fact is, we cant really fully judge cause NO FEEDS

I nominate any female pug with a sibling that's produced 2 or more offspring

Leave poor pugs alone!

The mock offended will be the same ones complaining the show is boring without a hint of irony. They have created the environment that has made the show a PC bore fest of brainless models parading about in their bikinis in the final or Nadia and her pearls of wisdom about being a Z list nobody.

The advertisers pay for the show and they will have put pressure on C5 more than anyone else.

I am, for the most part. I'm merely singling out as repugnant the auntie pugs which have been made an aunt more than once

I think that although the OP makes a fair point in principle, BB itself doesn't adhere to the rules of logic of reason and treats housemates arbitrarily depending on their own point of view on situations. Sometimes housemates have been kicked out for rulebreaking, sometimes they are kept in.

The argument of reason and logic falls apart because it assumes that BB's rules are real and have any true meaning. They twist and turn depending on what BB feels like.

BB rules aren't like laws in real life, they're more like the game rules in a game of monopoly, but which they interpret any way which suits them. They choose at their own discretion who gets ejected and who doesn't, and often the forum is in disagreement because the 'rules' which they claim to go by aren't worth the paper they're written on.

Once you start to believe that BB rules are actually real, then that's when you've really got yourself hooked into their world of unreality.
The only rules that matter aren't CBB rules, they are the general broadcasting rules and regulations which every TV programme has to abide by.

a very boring one

That's entertainment...................la la la la.

I addressed this in my post. I don't agree with it, but it still doesn't mean that the ejection of Jeremy and Ken has much to do with being 'PC'. If what you are saying is correct, then it has everything to do with the producers' own agendas, which, as much as we can speculate on, we don't truly know.

Don't tell me that would have actually fitted into the song.

Well, yes really.

I take your points on board of course re consistency and the like (this is true for many if not most tv shows of this ilk) but the point still remains that the original post contains reason, logic and sense, hence my post.

I stand by it.

i don't want to be accidentally pugaphobic...

With an odd slight adjustment, it would work.

Maybe Ofcom have come down on them since the inconsistency of the last civvy series and told them to get their house in order, given how many complaints were made. They must be sick of having to deal with it.