DS Forums

 
 

Voting Figures


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 21-12-2015, 18:22
LaughingSock
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 440
I'm curious why there'd be a demand for the voting figures. Are people really treating this like some unpopular celeb who danced like Chris Hollins won? Do they really think there was some conspiracy?

I don't get it.
LaughingSock is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 21-12-2015, 18:27
sparkle_78
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 111
It makes no sense though as I'm a celeb can book people.

Also as I said in another thread, SPOTY award results are piblished and sports people rely heavily on sponsorship, so to see that they finished last with very few votes could really impact on their careers, yet the BBC do not mind publishing the number of votes for each person.
I agree as I said in my other post above. I was just explaining what the bbc claim they mean by saying it could affect participants. I think it's a load of rubbish.😁 Just wondering if SPOTY is different as it's an awards show to celebrate previous achievement so the sports people don't have to be involved whereas SCD has to convince celebrities it's worth their while to participate.
Part of me would love to see the figures to see how close the voting was but then it doesn't change anything and could result in a few egos being shattered
sparkle_78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-12-2015, 18:37
Fatima502
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,664
They were both runner's up. No reason to make one of them third.
Also they can both say they were runners up on their CVs, which I am sure is something the celebrities want.
Fatima502 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-12-2015, 18:40
spider9
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: On the sofa
Posts: 4,319
It makes no sense though as I'm a celeb can book people.

Also as I said in another thread, SPOTY award results are piblished and sports people rely heavily on sponsorship, so to see that they finished last with very few votes could really impact on their careers, yet the BBC do not mind publishing the number of votes for each person.
I get the feeling that it's easier to attract people to I'm a Celeb. They pay more (to my limited knowledge) and it's for a fixed period so easier to plan around other work. By contrast someone could be in Strictly for 4 weeks or 14 weeks.

And although I'm a Celeb isn't nice conditions, Strictly can be physically hard which might put many off.
spider9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-12-2015, 18:46
sparkle_78
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 111
I get the feeling that it's easier to attract people to I'm a Celeb. They pay more (to my limited knowledge) and it's for a fixed period so easier to plan around other work. By contrast someone could be in Strictly for 4 weeks or 14 weeks.

And although I'm a Celeb isn't nice conditions, Strictly can be physically hard which mighput many off.
That's true I'm a celeb is tough for max 3 weeks. If you make it to the end especially, SCD is a massive commitment and hard work.
sparkle_78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-12-2015, 18:49
amelia_lee
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,055
I agree as I said in my other post above. I was just explaining what the bbc claim they mean by saying it could affect participants. I think it's a load of rubbish.😁 Just wondering if SPOTY is different as it's an awards show to celebrate previous achievement so the sports people don't have to be involved whereas SCD has to convince celebrities it's worth their while to participate.
Part of me would love to see the figures to see how close the voting was but then it doesn't change anything and could result in a few egos being shattered
Oh yes I know, I agree with you, a load of rubbish!

I'm not sure, but I think if you are nominated you cannot pull yourself out, so your votes would still be revealed, even if you want no involvement.
Sponsors look so much to who is popular and pay them according to it.

I do think they should reveal bit as they are asking people to spend money. They show the judges scores and how that correlates into points on the leaderboard, but then nothing more is known about voting figures and scoring.
amelia_lee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-12-2015, 18:57
Gerry_Sheldon
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 67
Sure it could affect participants, just like the judges' comments can -- if someone like Craig spews out some venomous criticism at least it can provide food for thought and correction, and similarly poor public response if revealed gives an indicator as to whether a contestant needs to look to improving their media response.

What would it be like if the judges didn't comment or reveal their votes?
Gerry_Sheldon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-12-2015, 19:00
sparkle_78
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 111
That's probably why they continue to reveal the SPOTY results then if the sports people don't get any say on involvement. 😕
Maybe rather than showing the actual percentage of voting, they could reveal who was in what position in the voting i.e. 1st, 2nd etc. we already can kind of guess in some instances because of the dance off and it wouldn't be revealing anything too embarrassing such as celebrity x only received 0.2% of the public vote. 🙀
sparkle_78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-12-2015, 19:04
Fred.
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 1,587
Certain celebrities get work based on their perceived popularity. If voting figures revealed for example that a celebrity did very poorly with the public, it may affect their employment possibilities in the future. That threat would make it hard for the producers to convince celebrities to take part.
This^^^^

Strictly needs to attract good celebrities to get good viewing figures.

If it's known they didn't get many votes it could affect their future prospects, so not as many would do it - Strictly's viewing figures would go down - just what some tabloids want.

The dance-off is partly designed for the same reason - so it's less clear who got the least votes.

X-Factor isn't the same at all - the contesants aren't well known and have nothing to lose.

I'm a Celebrity isn't the same either. Some popular Celebrities do it for fun or for a change, but most are either trying to re-boot their careers or are B Listers - or even Z Listers. Again they haven't much to lose.

Sports Personality - it's an honour to be chosen, and you don't have to work hard for weeks to stay on the List.

Why would the BBC care who wins? - it does nothing at all with the Winner and the BBC has really very little to do with the Tour.

All this fake fuss over a fix - mostly in the 'highly respected' tabloid press - rolls eyes.
Fred. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-12-2015, 19:19
Liparus
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,262
They were both runner's up. No reason to make one of them third.
Having two runners up has annoyed me for the last few series. If I came second or third in a competition, I'd like to know.

No other competitions I can think of have two runners up.
Liparus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-12-2015, 19:19
A.D.P
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 7,319
This^^^^

Strictly needs to attract good celebrities to get good viewing figures.

If it's known they didn't get many votes it could affect their future prospects, so not as many would do it - Strictly's viewing figures would go down - just what some tabloids want.

The dance-off is partly designed for the same reason - so it's less clear who got the least votes.

X-Factor isn't the same at all - the contesants aren't well known and have nothing to lose.

I'm a Celebrity isn't the same either. Some popular Celebrities do it for fun or for a change, but most are either trying to re-boot their careers or are B Listers - or even Z Listers. Again they haven't much to lose.

Sports Personality - it's an honour to be chosen, and you don't have to work hard for weeks to stay on the List.

Why would the BBC care who wins? - it does nothing at all with the Winner and the BBC has really very little to do with the Tour.

All this fake fuss over a fix - mostly in the 'highly respected' tabloid press - rolls eyes.
Great and well written post.
A.D.P is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-12-2015, 22:55
gingercodgers
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 131
If they gave out the figures it could put some off from participating in the next SCD. Afterall who would sign up for a programme that could make you look unpopular unless they were desperate for the money?
gingercodgers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-12-2015, 23:21
Debatable
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: London
Posts: 60
For me I don't care about the actual voting figures I'd just like to know who came 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc each week - I don't think that's too much to ask; nor would it have to affect public perceptions of a celeb; it's just interesting to know
Debatable is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2015, 00:32
Cadiva
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: In sunny (hah!) Yorkshire
Posts: 13,940
http://www.tellymix.co.uk/reality-tv...ed-by-bbc.html

I'm totally confused here ...

How does releasing the voting figures AFTER the series has ended affects the way the public votes

"also have an impact on the participants" ...
what impact would that be on the participants

It maybe due to old age that I don't understand the reasoning behind the BBC's statement
They never reveal the voting figures because it is considered commercially sensitive information for BT who provide the service.

On top of that, the show's production team have generally said they feel that revealing that any particular celebrity doesn't get public support throughout a series would not be encouraging for them attracting people to take part, which makes perfect sense when it's a show based on someone's popularity with the public learning a new skill.

I wonder if you'd get them under a Freedom of Information request?
Nope, it's been tried and refused as I said because of commercial interests as it would give BT's competitors financial information based on the voting figures - i.e. people would know how much money they were getting from providing the voting service to the BBC.

It makes no sense though as I'm a celeb can book people.

Also as I said in another thread, SPOTY award results are piblished and sports people rely heavily on sponsorship, so to see that they finished last with very few votes could really impact on their careers, yet the BBC do not mind publishing the number of votes for each person.
SPOTY is a one night only voting event in which sports people have been nominated by an independent panel of experts to be voted on by the public, which is why the figures are released. SCD takes part over a three month period and is considered by OFCOM who regulates this type of thing, to be covered under commercial sensitivity.
Cadiva is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2015, 00:52
tonycollins100
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 497
As has been said above, the BBC will never reveal the public voting figures because they need to massage the egos of those taking part. If a "celebrity" failed to get public support and this fact was published, they really would have to scrape the barrel to get people to take part.
tonycollins100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2015, 01:03
Cadiva
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: In sunny (hah!) Yorkshire
Posts: 13,940
As has been said above, the BBC will never reveal the public voting figures because they need to massage the egos of those taking part. If a "celebrity" failed to get public support and this fact was published, they really would have to scrape the barrel to get people to take part.
And because OFCOM, the independent body which oversees the communications industry, won't let them because it's considered commercially sensitive information.
Cadiva is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2015, 01:47
Muinimula
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 732
They were both runner's up. No reason to make one of them third.
Except they weren't. The final is a pure public vote, and one of them got more votes than the other, so to say they're tied is untrue.

2nd/3rd place were always clear up until they went to the 4-couple final (series 10). Then they couldn't make the 2nd/3rd distinction work with the format change, so they just lumped them together.

I have no interest in voting figures being released, but the 2nd/3rd thing really annoys me.
Muinimula is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2015, 02:04
thenetworkbabe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
Tbh that's their reasoning behind it but the fact that shows like I'm a celebrity have no problems with bookings suggests that it doesn't really pan out that way.
I'm a celebrity casts people with nothing much to lose - most at career deadends, or in retirement.

X factor it doesn't matter about the voting because every one in the profession knows the voting is silly, and produces winners who can't sell most years. The industry has got quite good at picking up the people who can sing and act anyway - they often come outside the top 3.
thenetworkbabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2015, 02:11
thenetworkbabe
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
Except they weren't. The final is a pure public vote, and one of them got more votes than the other, so to say they're tied is untrue.

2nd/3rd place were always clear up until they went to the 4-couple final (series 10). Then they couldn't make the 2nd/3rd distinction work with the format change, so they just lumped them together.

I have no interest in voting figures being released, but the 2nd/3rd thing really annoys me.
It doesn't tell you anything. Many people will vote for who they think has the chance of winning - If it looks likely to be Jay, and you prefer either of the others, the rational vote is to vote for who you think is ahead of those two. The vote is also likely to be influenced by when you danced, as well as how well you did.

It also depends on fanbases that may not be transferable - most winners of most shows just don't acquire loyal fans - their support melts away quickly. On the other hand, looking unpopular may be a problem for your agent. . Its better for all concerned just not to say.
thenetworkbabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2015, 02:11
TerryM22
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 17,987
http://www.tellymix.co.uk/reality-tv...ed-by-bbc.html

I'm totally confused here ...

How does releasing the voting figures AFTER the series has ended affects the way the public votes

"also have an impact on the participants" ...
what impact would that be on the participants

It maybe due to old age that I don't understand the reasoning behind the BBC's statement


Its all very strange
TerryM22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2015, 02:43
lulu g
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 43,553
People here have suggested possible interpretations, correct or otherwise, of the '[could] also have an impact on the participants' part of the statement, but what possible justification/explanation could there be for the 'Releasing voting figures could affect the way that people vote', when the voting is over?
lulu g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2015, 02:53
Cadiva
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: In sunny (hah!) Yorkshire
Posts: 13,940
People here have suggested possible interpretations, correct or otherwise, of the '[could] also have an impact on the participants' part of the statement, but what possible justification/explanation could there be for the 'Releasing voting figures could affect the way that people vote', when the voting is over?
It doesn't. It has nothing to do with influencing peoples' votes when the show is over but in whether or not it would discourage celebrities to take part if their career is based on being seen to be "popular" and they appear on something like SCD where the public then very clearly doesn't like them and doesn't vote for them.
Cadiva is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2015, 20:10
SeasideLady
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Aberdeenshire
Posts: 15,470
A poster commenting on a Daily Mail article today about Aliona, is saying Jay got 64 % of the public votes. How on earth would they know that - amazing if it's true.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz...d-husband.html
SeasideLady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2015, 20:22
basdfg
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 6,613
Must Mean Kellie came third. Plus they might be in stars contracts not release it.
basdfg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-12-2015, 20:27
Monkseal
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,654
Yes, they must have decided several years ago not to ever release the results totals because in the future they could tell it might hurt Kellie Bright's feelings to come 3rd instead of 2nd.

As for the idea that a Daily Mail comments sectioner knows the public vote, Jesus Christ...
Monkseal is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:49.