Chloe would have been evicted twice on a vote to save, she would not have survived the four in four out, Harry would have also won a vote as well last week against her

I think the lack of live feed is more important that VTE being a problem. With live feed you can get a better representation of each housemate as whole, you get to see more what they are like. Over extended period of times LIVE. Which means it could effect the way some people vote.. when they have a more overall view of housemates.

You might be right, that definitely would have changed the series. I think they should start having vote to evict only when two people are up, that way if you've got a controversial housemate, it's clear how their supporters can save them. If there is three or more up, it should be vote to save. It's too hard to keep controversial, but entertaining housemates, when there's no clear target for their supporters.

Thinking back on the four-in/four-out week, what were they thinking? They want to get rid of the dead wood, so they have four people evicted on a vote to evict, almost ensuring that only the least offensive, least interesting nominees stay? Have the producers never seen Big Brother before? It was pretty predictable.

VTE means the person least liked goes bye bye.. but everyone knows the score. Yes split voting and shit can come into play, but it can also come into play with VTS. As I said my view live feed is more important we need that back.

All the original and best years had vote to evict. It was only in recent years that they introduced vote to save. After all, the HMs nominate to evict so the public should do the same. It all depends what you call boring. To many viewers, sensible HMs who can hold a proper conversation are boring. People who rave and shout and generally cause havoc and unpleasantness are thought to be good. That's why Helen won last year.

You have to wonder what the real reasoning is for the no live feed. I used to believe them that is was too expensive and not enough people watch, but with the advent of Big Brother Canada, I now have to question that. BBCanada has 24/7 live feeds for free, and its not like it's on a huge television channel with tons of money, it started on a basic cable channel that most Canadians didn't know they had, so they didn't have piles of cash, so why can they make it work, but in the British market, they can't?

Yep all the decent BB's with many decent housemates actually getting to the final they were all VTE. Helen was massively helped with the finals pass. As i've been saying though, imo the lack of live feed needs to be addressed more than the voting system does.

I agree...remember when it use to be on all night with messages running underneath....those were the days.

I filled in the BB Survey and I answered one of the questions saying this, I pointed out how back in the day no contact with the outside world meant just that, the interviews should be done indoors so the HM's can't hear the awful crowd

If I was going to write an article about BB it would have been very similar to that^^

Why don't the producers listen to the viewers and critics?

i cant bear this argument being trotted out.
just because something started off one way does that mean it needs to carry on that way?
negative voting was a novelty, and a good idea at that time, as far as i am aware no other show did it.
but for me it became pretty obvious after BB7 that it was time for a change. especially after the nicki debacle !
i kind of thought that voting to 'save' was channel 5s 'thing' and putting their stamp on it. i have absolutely no idea why they brought back negative voting for the civilian series, i can only presume it was to please the moaners - but then again that does not make much sense because when do they EVER listen to the audience?

and ''sensible conversation''? if the series was made up of housemates having ''sensible conversation'' then nobody would be watching, = show axed = no show at all!!

think its time people accepted the show is not what it was 15 years ago.

I did the survey and also mentioned this ! Hoping that a lot more people mention the crowd / outside contact thing too so it drums into their skulls

Bland tasks...the only one that was remotely good was the hotel task, but even that wasn't challenging. Just a lot of sitting/standing around.

The bunker could have been good, and fun, but it turned into a nightmare by having Helen involved.

Too much he said/she said/the viewers said...in fact the whole show was based on information/misinformation.

I think they actually picked a good group of housemates, we've certainly had worse, but the whole show was based on negativity rather than real challenges and fun. I don't care if someone can't spell canoe fgs.

About halfway through various housemates were kept up to date with how they were getting on and each week were coached by at least one celebrity or ex-housemate who went into the house on how to adjust their game to appeal to the public.

BB will like this because it's closer to the scripted reality TV genre of the likes of TOWIE.

But the inherent problem with that is that people are forced to dislike somebody. Suddenly in the space of a day after nominations somebody is hated who wasn't hated the day before.

With a vote to save it has a tendency to be more consistent. You like your favourites and may like them for weeks on end. You don't need to have BB trying to get you to suddenly dislike somebody after nominations just because they need somebody to be hated because they're up.

Why do you think Chloe would have been evicted if it was voting to save? I doubt she'd have won the show if she had so little support.

I was glad to be rid of most of the HMs evicted this year, and that includes Harry.

I think all of these points are great. The Hotel BB task should have been great, it should have allowed some of the actual housemates to shine, but the legends/guests seemed to take the limelight and focus with their petty arguments and desperate quest for airtime.

Much more live feed is still the most important thing though in my view. A better overall representation of all housemates is gained. Good finals line up's have still been obtained with VTE.

I imagine the reason they do vote to evict is that it is easier, especially in the beginning, to get people to pay money to get someone out than to keep someone in. You have to really be invested in someone to spend money to keep them in, but someone like Helen will motivate a lot of people to spend money to "teach her a lesson". I think their reasoning is sound, but it doesn't always create the best show, so I guess they try to manipulate the show to make up for that fact.

I don't agree that people are forced to dislike, and I don't think it causes a HM to be hated who wasn't hated the week before either. When 'hate' suddenly seems to appear, it's generally because they were already strongly disliked, but they hadn't been nominated or hadn't recently done anything to provide 'ammunition', so other things took precedent as motivations to post.


I don't agree with that either. I am just as consistent when it's vote-to-evict as I am when it's vote-to-save, and BB does the same sort of getting you to dislike regardless of the voting system.

There was no improvement at all in BB when it was vote to save. If anything, it made the show worse because it was too hard to get rid of HMs like Conor.

Interesting ... but if that was true, why would they let Helen keep her pass to the final?

I don't think C5 or Endemol care that much about money from votes anyway. Having good ratings would be much more important.

I think the fundamental problem this year is that they picked a very poor set of housemates.

Whenever there's lots of people arguing that vote to save is needed to keep the big characters in, or the "ones providing the entertainment" or whatever, it's a sign that BB messed up when selecting HM. BB should never rely on a small number of HMs who must be kept in at all costs.

The crowd are most likely told by the staff to boo when a certain housemate's name is mentioned because it could bring in more money from votes, or, it'll be because they want to keep in the house because they think that housemate will make them more money as far as adverts go.

The launch was a disaster. Scheduled for election night, hurriedly re-scheduled, launched without fanfare whilst BGT was still hogging the tabloid space, launched without even Daily Star backing.

Lame opening night twist removing a housemate no-one cared about then or subsequently.

Then they panicked over low ratings and made things up as they went along.

didnt they also claim that C5/BB had run out of money and cashbomb was a result of them having to spend all the dosh on desperately getting the legends in

(you know, the same legends that had been planned before the series started as per the rumours then)

that feed is sucker news for idiots