http://bigbrother.channel5.com/faqs#...in-big-brother

Am I voting to save or evict in Big Brother?
Unless otherwise directed, you will be voting to EVICT a housemate. In the final, you will be voting for the housemate you want to WIN.


When do vote lines open and close?
Vote lines are opened at the discretion of the editorial team and may open outside programme times. Notifications may be posted on bigbrother.channel5.com, the Big Brother app, Facebook and/or Twitter to advise that the vote is open. An announcement will also be made on air. Vote lines will be frozen or closed at the times specified in the programmes. Please do not vote before the vote has opened or after the vote has frozen or closed, as your vote will not be counted but you may still be charged. Please be aware voting times may change.


Can I watch on Demand 5 or other catch-up service?
Yes, you can watch on Channel 5 +1, Channel 5 +24, Demand 5 or MTV. If you are watching Big Brother on Demand 5, or are following through a website or any other time-shift, catch-up service or cross channel, you should not vote unless you have checked whether the vote has closed.

How much will it cost me to vote?

Up to and including 30 June 2015: Calls from BT landlines to the vote numbers prefixed with ‘09’ will cost 50p, calls from other landlines and mobiles may cost considerably more. Please check with your network operator or mobile provider for exact call charges before calling.

From 1 July 2015: Calls to the vote numbers prefixed with ‘09’ will cost 50p plus your Network Access Charge. Please check with your network operator or mobile provider for details of your Network Access Charge before calling.

Calls from mobiles to the 7 digit mobile short code prefixed with ‘65’ will cost 50p from any UK mobile (excluding the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man).
Vote credits for use with the Big Brother App are sold in packs of 2, or 10. You can buy: 2 vote credits for 99p or 10 vote credits for £4.99.

Seriously? That automatically means that my favourite housemate is gonna go quickly the new. I mean, what can I say? I like the bad ones.

I wouldn't worry as we need to get them nominated before we can evict , look at last year Helen was put right through to the final .

same, this just means the ones i want to stay will go one by one week by week until it becomes absolutely mind numbing viewing by week 5.
producers never learn.
however it helped me to stop watching earlier last year and the year before, which frees up some time.

So they weren't paying attention last year, where the producers had to blatantly rig the whole competition to keep in their prized asset, as Helen would've been evicted the second she was up - a tacit admission that the format wasn't fit for purpose.

I guess they'll have to do the same once again to keep the "interesting" characters. The producers obviously know vote to save gives the best chance of retaining the "controversial" types for longer - that's why they use it for CBB - but for reasons best known to themselves, they don't seem all that bothered by the same logic for the regular series.

A cynical person might think that they're not confident that their cast will be interesting enough to generate the headlines and that the plan all along is to use the constant producer interference and scant regard for the viewership to stir up the desired controversy and outrage that is the lifeblood of the show.

I like the normal housemates

Good. As it should be. If you're not popular, you go.

Unless the producers desperately need you to survive. Then you stay.

All vote to evict does is confirm that you - the voting public - are being taken for a ride. You don't really get to decide.

if you are not popular you would go if its vote to SAVE.
you could be a potential winner and still get evicted under vote to evict.

I love vote to evict.

To be honest I care more about if they're going to have a consistent rule over nominations.
If it's two or more with the most votes fine. If it's the three or more fine. If it's anyone with x amount or more nominations that's fine too. Just say what it is and keep it that way.

I see that very differently. I think the tricks used to protect loathsome Helen show the proper, unmanipulated, format IS fit for purpose, but for the purpose BB should and used to have, not for the pernicious purpose the producers now pursue. Without the pass to the final, it's most likely that voting to evict would have got rid of Helen, which I think would have improved that series immensely.

If we'd had vote to evict in bb13, we might even have got rid of Conor before he could walk away with £50k.

It should definitely be a vote to evict. A vote to save makes it more likely that a nasty, two-faced HM stays and that a quieter HM goes. When someone who's been really nasty gets evicted, it lets other people have a chance to come to the forefront. It takes some people longer than others to settle in a group, (just like it does in normal, everyday life), so they should be given a chance. And in any case, even if they stay quiet and don't get shown much, I'd still rather them staying over someone that's nasty, confrontational and argumentative who hogs all the airtime.


Sorry if I've misunderstood you, but Helen would have stayed all the way to the end even if it was a Vote to Save. The only time she ever faced the public vote was in the final when people were voting to win.

So I do it - I which is why my winners never do !

I don't think it serves the show to continually reward the housemates who take part the least. Regardless of what kind of an arse such and such is making of themselves, at least they're giving something to the spectacle. There'd be no show without them.


She won. She was the most popular in a popularity contest (for some unknown reason). Yet the format as the producers set it out would have given her no chance of surviving even a few weeks - let alone win - without their intervention to circumvent the rules everyone else was forced to play by. Which suggests, I think, that even they didn't believe vote to evict was a good choice.

And yet here we are again.

If someone nasty like Helen wins, I think in a way, it sends out a message that it's okay to behave like that; you can behave really badly and act in a nasty way and effectively get rewarded for it. It very nearly happened again with Katie Hopkins, but thankfully, she didn't win.


Oh, I don't think there's any doubt that had she not had the pass to the final, then she wouldn't have made it to the final and won. But the producers couldn't have known who Pauline was going to pick. I doubt they would have done something like make hints that she should be the one to get the pass to the final.

I don't think vote to evict rewards the HMs who take part the least.

It does tend to get rid of nasty, obnoxious, excessively irritating, or otherwise unpleasant HMs whose contributions make the show worse, however. It's a better show without them.


It would have been much better if she hadn't survived even a few weeks. And she wasn't the most popular, or she wouldn't have needed a twist to keep her in.

Besides, for all we know, the producers are as unhappy with Helen winning as many of us are -- at least now that they've seen how she behaved after BB.

It's not only the winner who's rewarded. Besides, it was bad enough that Katie Price won.


The producers gave Helen a lot of help, though, via things that were in their control. And if they'd wanted to, they could have found a way to suspend her immunity, just as they suspended Jale's killer nom for a week.

I don't like the sound of "Unless otherwise directed"
It should be one way or another.

Good, Vote to Evict should be compulsory for both BB and CBB, as pie-eyed said if a housemate is hated by the publc then we vote to get rid them.

I really can't see what all the fuss is about Vote to Save, we NEVER had it on Channel 4 (apart from a few rare occasions) so why should now be any different.

If BB & CBB were like I'm a Celebrity in that ALL housemates were up for eviction then yeah we could save our favourite but BB aint like that so VtE should stay for good.

I wish the producers would be transparent,and give a week by week plan to the public of whats going to happen.For instance,lets say in a 12 week run.votes 1-3 and votes 5-7,9-10...vote to save,change it up with weeks 4 and 8...vote to evict.all diary room nominations,no revealing nominations ever to the house.leave us know in advance,so we know whats coming and there can be no allegations of changing it a particular week to save/evict someone.

Voting is absolutely pointless and a waste of money. We clearly do not get to decide, neither do we have ample opportunity to get to know any individual housemate without a live feed, it's impossible. Asking the viewers to vote for a virtual stranger is an insult in itself never mind being encouraged to cast a decision upon a usually completely false edit!

I won't be giving Channel 5 any of my money when I'm being continuously mislead with regard to the true nature of the show's course.

The regular series is always vote to evict. The CBB series' are the ones they use the save vote.

I'm not bothered either way, as voting is truly pointless unless you are betting, bored, or tired of having a few extra quid lying around. I am resigned to fact that BB's selective editing is directly responsible for the eviction results.

No chance of that happening. The PTB always alter the noms rules to make sure their favourite HMs are safe.

An example that springs to mind is Week 4 of BB8 when Billi and Charley's noms were voided which coincedentally (!) meant Charley wouldn't be up for eviction


I stopped voting on BB a couple of years ago for pretty much the same reasons

Nonsense ! The CBBs would not have been half as good using VTE !
And you say ythe 'fuss' overbthe vote to save, you realise that nearly all the BBs in the world which allows the public to vote actually uses vote to save ?
So what's the 'fuss' with vote to evict?

I don't onow why the producers have done this to the civilian series, from a production point of view it makes no logical sense because it means there will just be more manipulation to keep the ones they want to stay in.
And more faffing about with the nominations.

Do we even have nomination rules anymore ??
I mean VTE wouldnt be so bad if there was just 2 up every week .