Not just the originals: Aisleyne had a bad last couple of weeks as the 'Get Aisleyne out' chants made their reappearance after disappearing or being a lot less noticeable for a few weeks. She was in her own words a 'crying mess' for a lot of the last couple of weeks and Imogen being booted in week 12, depriving her of her last real source of support couldn't have helped.

If those are Aisleyne's best bits, it just shows what a poor housemate she was. I don't think many people, watching that, who hadn't watched bb7, would guess that she was anywhere near as popular as she was.

That argument never made much sense. People had spent money evicting Jon in bb4 too, yet he came back without people campaigning to Ofcom about it.

Anyway, the thing that actually got BB in trouble would have been the same regardless of whether voting was to-save or to-evict.

Jon wasn't an official housemate and therefore couldn't win.

Though I suppose it doesn't say much about BB4 if people were really not at all bothered about someone coming back in.

That Nikki could win is a different argument. People spent perfectly good money getting Jon out, yet there he was, back. Eviction has always removed the HM; HMs don't stay in the house after eviction, just unable to win.


They weren't bothered because most people liked Jon or weren't especially bothered by him. There was an uproar about Nikki coming back because it was Nikki.

I don't seem to agree with Wonkey about very much where BB's concerned, but I agree with most of this (from another thread):


However, re "telecommunications regulations", why the regulator (ICSTIS) found against C4 was just that they hadn't changed the web site to keep it up to date with the rule change. The rule change still seems to be in effect, btw, and the web sites have shown the changed version.

The way Sam was "vindicated" in the eviction interview was very misleading. Basically, BB found a minor point where Sam was right and tried to make it seem the whole thing had been about that.

It's difficult to explain after all this time, but in the "vindication" sequence of clips, BB showed the arse-licking comment in the initial conversation Sam had with Imogen and Lisa, and it again featured in Sam's reply to Lea, which gave many viewers the impression that the middle bit -- Imogen to Grace, Grace to Lea, Lea to Sam -- was about that too. But it wasn't.

The big switch came when Lea went to Sam and said "You told Grace, Imogen and Lisa that me, Aisleyne, and Richard have been slating them behind their backs" -- which is pretty much what Grace had raised with Lea -- and Sam replied "Lisa told me that you said that I was arse-licking everyone." That's changing the subject. Sam was right about what Lisa said, but that's not addressing Lea's accusation about what Sam said. Instead, it's accusing Lisa of something else.

Seen properly, rather than in BB's selected and arranged edit, the whole thing looks very different. Sam made a lot of comments about Richard and Lea in her talk with Imogen and Lisa. BB left all of that out, so that it looked like only Lisa was making harsh comments about them.

Imogen told Grace about what Sam had been saying, and Grace told Lea. I don't think the arse comment was even mentioned. (Note that BB didn't show anyone passing it along.) But in any case what Lea heard from Grace was essentially true, rather than false, and Lea asked Sam about it. Sam raised the issue of what Lisa had said (changing the subject) and only then did it become central.

Viewers were given the impression that Sam said nothing anyone could object to and was just being blamed for something Lisa had said, which is not how it really was.

Oh I always knew that Sam had been saying things about Lea and Richard, possibly as a way to try and fit in with the other group.
But it wasn't necessarily changing the subject. I mean you find out someone's been slating you, the natural reaction is to either confront them or get your own back and slate them behind their back.

Most of the girls in there were talking about eachother so situations like this were bound to happen. There were many lies being told but the biggest lie was Lisa denying that she'd ever said that they were calling Sam an arselicker, so naturally the edit focussed on that.
Sadly for Sam she wasn't savvy enough and had no social currency in there to be able to get away with things other people were.

Every single housemate that year had a gameplan, from what they've all said in the years after their time in the house. In fact, I would go as far as to say every housemate ever would have had one. Even back in BB1, they all had their tactics prepared, with Nick being the obvious example and Anna the not so obvious.
Glyn, however, was very disingenuous with his. I can agree with that.

Interesting,who's best bits show how popular they were with the public?
I don't see how it shows she was a poor housemate either...as I said,I think the editors did a good job of showing her differing sides..you've never liked her so I take your comments with a chuckle.. (Get Grace Out )

I don't know what you mean by "show how popular they were with the public". But surely if a best-bits sequence is one of the "best things the editors have ever done", it ought give those who watch it a reasonably good impression of what the HM was like, and consequently (given some knowledge of what makes a HM popular) how popular that HM was likely to have been.


It's not true that I never liked her.

Sorry, but I can't see what your reasoning is meant to be there.

It's changing the subject because it's not answering what was asked but instead shifting to something else.




It was a trivial detail that wasn't what Grace had gone to Lea about or what Lea had asked Sam about; and BB's misleading clip sequence wasn't just trying to show that Lisa had said what Sam claimed: it was trying to make it seem that the middle part -- Imogen to Grace, Grace to Lea, Lea to Sam -- was about too, when it wasn't.

Lisa's denial wouldn't even have happened if Sam hadn't tried to deflect Lea's anger onto Lisa by bringing up something Lisa had said rather than coming clean about what she (Sam) had said.


Sam got away with an awful lot, not least in having that incident misrepresented by BB as being about what Lisa said and in having BB (Davina) present a clip sequence as one that "vindicated" Sam. Do you remember when Sam had Aisleyne so upset that she was talking of leaving the show? Many people either don't remember it or never knew about it in the first place.

This was all shown during Sam's eviction interview on day 23: the same night as the golden ticket housemate was choosen. The 'vindication' of Sam video, was shown during his/her eviction interview and half an hour later, we had the whole "get Grace out" chants, which IMO, was directly related to showing that video. The rest is history.

From what I remember it was Lea that changed it to 'who said what' in her conversation with Sam. I felt like Sam was explaining why she was mad at Lea, but Lea immediately interrupted her asking for names of who was there.

If Sam was at fault for bringing up Lisa's name, then what was Grace doing mentioning Sam's name to Lea in the first place?


I remember Sam saying some strange things every now and then, but one incident with Aisleyne doesn't make Sam completely at fault for everything and the others blameless.

Sam had a tough time fitting in and got nominated and evicted at the first opportunity. Didn't seem like she got away with much.

I can't quite tell whether you're disagreeing with me or agreeing, but yes, the misleading "vindication" sequence I'm talking about was the video shown during Sam's eviction interview. It's a good, but somewhat worrying, example of the sort of tricks BB can pull in an edit.

Interestingly, there was widespread agreement, back then, that the video that "vindicated" Sam was misleading in the way I've described, and even most people who supported Aisleyne and detested Grace seemed to agree. It's one of the few times when people who supported conflicting HMs agreed about something of such significance.

I can't tell whether you're not understanding what I'm saying or would just prefer to talk about something else. My point is that the video that supposedly "vindicated" Sam was very misleading. My point is not that Sam was at fault for everything or that no one else was at fault for anything.

I am not going only by memory but also by what I and others wrote at the time. But even if Lea did change it to "who said what", that would make very little difference. It STILL wouldn't be the case that the whole thing was about the arselicking comment, as BB's "vindication" video tried to make it seem. It was only when Lea confronted Sam and Sam made an issue of what Lisa said that it started to be about that.


Has anyone said Sam was completely at fault for everything and the others blameless?

Anyway, that incident with Aisleyne had a strong impact on most of those who watched it live (at least the ones commenting here), and yet it largely seems to have vanished from BB history as most people now remember it.

And Sam got away with stabbing Lea and Richard in the back, because BB's "vindication" video made it seem Sam hadn't done anything and was an innocent victim of nefarious machinations.

I'm understanding it fine (apart from the use of the in the previous post, not sure how mocking that was supposed to be).

I think the problem here is the amount of emphasis and influence that is being put on this vindication video.
The arselicking comment was important to Sam because it was the thing that stopped Lea believing anything she was saying. It immediately shut down their conversation and made Sam look like the liar and that she had brought it all on herself.
So really the 'vindication' video was mainly for Sam's benefit because the arselicker comment was the most significant moment when the housemates lost trust in her and being labelled an arselicker was a sensitive subject for her anyway.

I think you put too much stock in this vindication video.
You can't blame it for villainizing people like Lea/Grace/Lisa as there were PLENTY of other incidents that helped with that. That ship had already sailed. They got away with plenty of stuff aswell and deserved this situation to blow up in their faces due to their carelessness.

Does anyone here remember Sam putting toilet paper into her trousers and walking into the bedroom and pretending she didn't realise it was there? It was only on the live feed, but it made Sam look very strange and peculiar. I was surprised it wasn't alluded to on either the highlights or spin-off shows, as it was a very odd moment indeed. As she was preparing her 'stunt', she was laughing and mumbling to herself incoherently.

When I use I just mean I'm surprised. And I have to say I never thought it would be so difficult to get a relatively simple, factual point accepted about how the video was misleading.


I am struggling to make sense of that as a reply to what I've said. I haven't blamed the video for villainising anyone as if there weren't other incidents. (Nonetheless, the video did make at least some people think Grace had lied to Lea about what Sam said, even though what Grace said was essentially correct. If Grace lied, it was to Lisa/Imogen about whether she'd mentioned Sam's name to Lea, not to Lea about what Sam said.)

But if any HMs deserved to have this situation blow up in their face, that would have to include Sam. Indeed, I would say Sam most deserved it in this case. Quite a few who supported Aisleyne thought so too. This was one of the few times when people didn't divide along the usual lines.

Anyway, re emphasis on the video, I was just replying to what you seemed to say about it. When you wrote "Sam was vindicated in her eviction interview though when they showed the footage and Lisa had told her that Lea was calling her an arselicker", wasn't that about the video Davina said "vindicated" Sam? I'm just pointing out that that video was very misleading and did not vindicate Sam except on a relatively minor point.

I'm also finding it hard to make sense of what you say about the significance of the arselicking comment. How can it be "the thing that stopped Lea believing anything she was saying" when Lea didn't even know about it until Sam brought it up?

Do you think that if Sam had come clean about what she (Sam) had said about Lea and Richard -- rather than going to something Lisa had said -- that all would have been well?

Did you watch these things live at the time, btw? Because it seems to me that you've largely bought into the picture BB was trying to present in the "vindication" video.

To try and wrap this up, I'm still not sure what you think this vindication video did or why it needed to be brought up to take away Sam getting any credit in the situation.
All it really intended to do was show that Sam wasn't a liar about a key part of what happened.
It didn't really achieve much else. I don't believe it tried to make out that the word 'arselicker' got whispered around, it just showed what happened leading up to the confrontation with Lea.

Plus I don't think it can be called simple and factual if it needs super long epic posts to describe it all. lol

Why should Sam get any credit? Sam told tales about Richard and Lea behind their backs then, rather than come clean, deflected onto Lisa. When Sam told similar tales to Aisleyne, she had Ash so upset she was in tears and talking about leaving the show.

In any case, I didn't think the video needed to be brought up. You brought it up when you wrote "Sam was vindicated in her eviction interview though when they showed the footage and Lisa had told her that Lea was calling her an arselicker".

I am pointing out that the video was very misleading and did not actually vindicate Sam except on one aspect of a minor point that Sam had used to deflect Lea's anger onto Lisa.


I don't know what you mean by "tried to make out that the word 'arselicker' got whispered around".

But it showed "what happened leading up to the confrontation with Lea" in a very misleading way. Lisa's comment was not a key part of what happened until Sam used it to deflect Lea; making it seem key is one of the video's (and Sam's) distortions. As I said at the start, BB found a minor point where Sam was right and tried to make it seem the whole thing had been about that. The video tried to make it seem Sam hadn't said anything but was an innocent victim (of lies or of "Chinese whispers"). And it wasn't only in that video that BB tried to give that impression.

The arselicker comment was a key part of it because it set the picture in Lea's mind about why Sam would be talking to Lisa/Imogen in the first place.

Sam didn't use it to divert the attention away. The conversation went down that route out of Sam's control. Sam was wanting to continue on from there, Lea's the one that walked off and said "just leave it".

I still haven't heard why the footage was so terribly misleading, instead of just being a brief summation of what happened to show Sam that she wasn't a complete liar in this situation.
Sam didn't come out of it looking completely blameless, perhaps the reason her bitching didn't look that noticeable was because they were all at it.
Hence why I still think Sam was vindicated from the hypocrisy of the house dynamics.