He made no reference to it inside the house until BB forcibly brought it onto the agenda, meaning they well and truly stitched him up. If the producers (and their minions Emma and Rylan) had an issue with his opinions on gay adoption, then why did they invite him on the show?
Winston made his comments on gay adoption *outside* the house
1 of 2
But he chose to go into the house.
He chose to going knowing he had made well publicised controversial comments.
He chose to going knowing he had made well publicised controversial comments.
Originally Posted by AndrewPd:
“But he chose to go into the house.
He chose to going knowing he had made well publicised controversial comments.”
“But he chose to go into the house.
He chose to going knowing he had made well publicised controversial comments.”
Indeed, but the entire premise of BB is that you are judged on your behaviour inside the house. We had the weird scenario tonight of Emma arguing with and castigating Winston about something he said in a newspaper interview several years ago and this took up much of the interview.
It doesn't matter. These celebrities come in with personal baggage every series. Previous series have had tasks where what they've done or said in the outside world has been used against them.
Originally Posted by Fanntastik:
“It doesn't matter. These celebrities come in with personal baggage every series. Previous series have had tasks where what they've done or said in the outside world has been used against them.”
“It doesn't matter. These celebrities come in with personal baggage every series. Previous series have had tasks where what they've done or said in the outside world has been used against them.”
I'm not sure it has been used to the extent where it is the main ammunition in getting them evicted.
Originally Posted by Eurostar:
“Indeed, but the entire premise of BB is that you are judged on your behaviour inside the house. We had the weird scenario tonight of Emma arguing with and castigating Winston about something he said in a newspaper interview several years ago and this took up much of the interview.”
“Indeed, but the entire premise of BB is that you are judged on your behaviour inside the house. We had the weird scenario tonight of Emma arguing with and castigating Winston about something he said in a newspaper interview several years ago and this took up much of the interview.”
Isn't it the case that his comment were raised in the house and he defended them.
I think putting someone in with these opinions was problematic in the first place.
I think the whole scenario was interesting and possibly valuable because it provided a frank public exploration of his opinions.
If I went onto to BB with controversial opinions I wouldn't be surprised if people didn't like them and me. It is not as if his views were progressive and factual. It is not like he went in the house saying " Hitting children is wrong" He wasn't being attacked because he said something progressive and constructive.
I am gay person who grew up in a strict Christian house and his view points are very harmful and degrading to people especially when they are your own family.
Originally Posted by Eurostar:
“He made no reference to it inside the house until BB forcibly brought it onto the agenda, meaning they well and truly stitched him up. If the producers (and their minions Emma and Rylan) had an issue with his opinions on gay adoption, then why did they invite him on the show?”
“He made no reference to it inside the house until BB forcibly brought it onto the agenda, meaning they well and truly stitched him up. If the producers (and their minions Emma and Rylan) had an issue with his opinions on gay adoption, then why did they invite him on the show?”
I largely agree with you and I posted a thread with very similar points with some additonal points too. It was definetely a major set up by BB, but there is one consideration I will give towards BB and that is that Winston probably only got invited on because he has been a controversial politician on the outside and I don't think he's actually ever been elected to a role like an MEP or MP.
BB on that basis probably thought, we only bought him on because of his controversial personality and saw fit to extract the controversy out of him that they did in an attempt to get ratings going via the press which seem to have covered it bigtime.
I tried to google Winston's previous contraversial comments/situations but the best part of the first 10 pages on the search were all to do with the press covering his eviction, so it looks like BB has got what it wanted but the real proof will be in the ratings for the rest of the show. Now that Winston has been booted out, any increase in viewers might be very short lived. I hope that does happen as I think BB have acted very low on this one.
Originally Posted by Styker:
“I largely agree with you and I posted a thread with very similar points with some additonal points too. It was definetely a major set up by BB, but there is one consideration I will give towards BB and that is that Winston probably only got invited on because he has been a controversial politician on the outside and I don't think he's actually ever been elected to a role like an MEP or MP.
BB on that basis probably thought, we only bought him on because of his controversial personality and saw fit to extract the controversy out of him that they did in an attempt to get ratings going via the press which seem to have covered it bigtime.
I tried to google Winston's previous contraversial comments/situations but the best part of the first 10 pages on the search were all to do with the press covering his eviction, so it looks like BB has got what it wanted but the real proof will be in the ratings for the rest of the show. Now that Winston has been booted out, any increase in viewers might be very short lived. I hope that does happen as I think BB have acted very low on this one.”
“I largely agree with you and I posted a thread with very similar points with some additonal points too. It was definetely a major set up by BB, but there is one consideration I will give towards BB and that is that Winston probably only got invited on because he has been a controversial politician on the outside and I don't think he's actually ever been elected to a role like an MEP or MP.
BB on that basis probably thought, we only bought him on because of his controversial personality and saw fit to extract the controversy out of him that they did in an attempt to get ratings going via the press which seem to have covered it bigtime.
I tried to google Winston's previous contraversial comments/situations but the best part of the first 10 pages on the search were all to do with the press covering his eviction, so it looks like BB has got what it wanted but the real proof will be in the ratings for the rest of the show. Now that Winston has been booted out, any increase in viewers might be very short lived. I hope that does happen as I think BB have acted very low on this one.”
It definitely stinks. They knew he had strong opinions on gay adoption and yet he didn't discuss them at all in the house. So they decide to force it onto the agenda with their rigged quiz. The most bizarre part for me was Emma spending the bulk of her interview arguing with him with his opinions on gay adoption as if she was Jeremy Paxman on Newsnight, even though he had never brought up the subject in the house.
Another low blow is that they set him up with the quiz in the house knowing he was up for eviction and that this would be shown while voting lines were open.
Whatever anyone's opinions on gay adoption is, the facts are that last year they booted someone (American girl) out of the house for comments that she had made in their past - And this year they had an arranged and preorganised televised witch hunt, they totally stitched him up.
Rightly or wrongly,he is entitled to his opinions,and the entertainment luvvies just cannot handle or be seen to empathize with any opposing views.
Rightly or wrongly,he is entitled to his opinions,and the entertainment luvvies just cannot handle or be seen to empathize with any opposing views.
Originally Posted by AndrewPd:
“Isn't it the case that his comment were raised in the house and he defended them.
I think putting someone in with these opinions was problematic in the first place.
I think the whole scenario was interesting and possibly valuable because it provided a frank public exploration of his opinions.
If I went onto to BB with controversial opinions I wouldn't be surprised if people didn't like them and me. It is not as if his views were progressive and factual. It is not like he went in the house saying " Hitting children is wrong" He wasn't being attacked because he said something progressive and constructive.
I am gay person who grew up in a strict Christian house and his view points are very harmful and degrading to people especially when they are your own family.”
“Isn't it the case that his comment were raised in the house and he defended them.
I think putting someone in with these opinions was problematic in the first place.
I think the whole scenario was interesting and possibly valuable because it provided a frank public exploration of his opinions.
If I went onto to BB with controversial opinions I wouldn't be surprised if people didn't like them and me. It is not as if his views were progressive and factual. It is not like he went in the house saying " Hitting children is wrong" He wasn't being attacked because he said something progressive and constructive.
I am gay person who grew up in a strict Christian house and his view points are very harmful and degrading to people especially when they are your own family.”
I'm playing devils advocate here but ....
Do you not think that some people might still consider gay adoption as controversial,or it controversy only allowed when it suits ?
Originally Posted by Eurostar:
“It definitely stinks. They knew he had strong opinions on gay adoption and yet he didn't discuss them at all in the house. So they decide to force it onto the agenda with their rigged quiz. The most bizarre part for me was Emma spending the bulk of her interview arguing with him with his opinions on gay adoption as if she was Jeremy Paxman on Newsnight, even though he had never brought up the subject in the house.
Another low blow is that they set him up with the quiz in the house knowing he was up for eviction and that this would be shown while voting lines were open.”
“It definitely stinks. They knew he had strong opinions on gay adoption and yet he didn't discuss them at all in the house. So they decide to force it onto the agenda with their rigged quiz. The most bizarre part for me was Emma spending the bulk of her interview arguing with him with his opinions on gay adoption as if she was Jeremy Paxman on Newsnight, even though he had never brought up the subject in the house.
Another low blow is that they set him up with the quiz in the house knowing he was up for eviction and that this would be shown while voting lines were open.”
I agree with you, I was trying to think of who else has had a lot of controversy and goton onto BB and they haven't bought up their controversial past. What about Vinny Jones? He's had lots of controversial times in the past and they didn't really stich him up in this way did they?
And with one of their winners in Jim Davidson, he got chucked off Hell's Kitchen for making homophobic comments towards another former BB winner in Brian from BB2 didn't he? If he did, how come BB didn't go after him in the same way?
BB went very easy on Michael Barrymore too and I was never convinced that he was the runner up in his year's CBB either.
Originally Posted by Eurostar:
“It definitely stinks. They knew he had strong opinions on gay adoption and yet he didn't discuss them at all in the house. So they decide to force it onto the agenda with their rigged quiz. The most bizarre part for me was Emma spending the bulk of her interview arguing with him with his opinions on gay adoption as if she was Jeremy Paxman on Newsnight, even though he had never brought up the subject in the house.
Another low blow is that they set him up with the quiz in the house knowing he was up for eviction and that this would be shown while voting lines were open.”
“It definitely stinks. They knew he had strong opinions on gay adoption and yet he didn't discuss them at all in the house. So they decide to force it onto the agenda with their rigged quiz. The most bizarre part for me was Emma spending the bulk of her interview arguing with him with his opinions on gay adoption as if she was Jeremy Paxman on Newsnight, even though he had never brought up the subject in the house.
Another low blow is that they set him up with the quiz in the house knowing he was up for eviction and that this would be shown while voting lines were open.”
Agreed.
I don't like the guy never have done & I am glad he has gone. The voting Public should decide who should leave the house & no one else.
But Emma was totally wrong, his comment about Gays adopting children had nothing to do with what happened in the house, this was said last year during the General Election.
Big Brother set Winston up with that impromptu task.
This is why BB only paid Winston 60K because they knew he wouldn't last & he was just a patsy for ratings and nothing more.
But Emma was totally wrong, his comment about Gays adopting children had nothing to do with what happened in the house, this was said last year during the General Election.
Big Brother set Winston up with that impromptu task.
This is why BB only paid Winston 60K because they knew he wouldn't last & he was just a patsy for ratings and nothing more.
Daniella and Christopher have been engineered into a reconciliation over something that happened outside the house.
This is nothing new. If they could get David Bowie he'd be popping in next week.
This is nothing new. If they could get David Bowie he'd be popping in next week.
Originally Posted by Skyrah:
“I don't like the guy never have done & I am glad he has gone. The voting Public should decide who should leave the house & no one else.
But Emma was totally wrong, his comment about Gays adopting children had nothing to do with what happened in the house, this was said last year during the General Election.
Big Brother set Winston up with that impromptu task.
This is why BB only paid Winston 60K because they knew he wouldn't last & he was just a patsy for ratings and nothing more.”
“I don't like the guy never have done & I am glad he has gone. The voting Public should decide who should leave the house & no one else.
But Emma was totally wrong, his comment about Gays adopting children had nothing to do with what happened in the house, this was said last year during the General Election.
Big Brother set Winston up with that impromptu task.
This is why BB only paid Winston 60K because they knew he wouldn't last & he was just a patsy for ratings and nothing more.”
Exactly. Winston comes across as an unlikeable chap, but I am sickened by BB's treatment of him.
Originally Posted by Skyrah:
“I don't like the guy never have done & I am glad he has gone. The voting Public should decide who should leave the house & no one else.
But Emma was totally wrong, his comment about Gays adopting children had nothing to do with what happened in the house, this was said last year during the General Election.
Big Brother set Winston up with that impromptu task.
This is why BB only paid Winston 60K because they knew he wouldn't last & he was just a patsy for ratings and nothing more.”
“I don't like the guy never have done & I am glad he has gone. The voting Public should decide who should leave the house & no one else.
But Emma was totally wrong, his comment about Gays adopting children had nothing to do with what happened in the house, this was said last year during the General Election.
Big Brother set Winston up with that impromptu task.
This is why BB only paid Winston 60K because they knew he wouldn't last & he was just a patsy for ratings and nothing more.”
Well said...I think Channel 5 hit a new low last night.
I don't agree with anything Winston said , but did BB go too far . A lot of people of different religious backgrounds worldwide still hold these views along with a gay couple cant marry in a church because of the bible.. I long for the day when its live and let live. But its against the law to stir hatred up against any religious group. The Christians were mentioned a lot, I am wondering if there will be any come back on BB.
Tila last year got kicked out for what she said which was never brought into the house and I'm sure Danny (from last years Civilan BB) got into shit when people when back and looked at his older tweets.
So while it should be based on what you do in the house sometimes it isn't
So while it should be based on what you do in the house sometimes it isn't
Originally Posted by roseblue1:
“Well said...I think Channel 5 hit a new low last night.”
“Well said...I think Channel 5 hit a new low last night.”
IMO everything was geared to humiliate Winston.
Inviting him to the house, setting him up with that task, that ridiculous twist & to top it all Emma's interview.
Originally Posted by Skyrah:
“IMO everything was geared to humiliate Winston.
Inviting him to the house, setting him up with that task, that ridiculous twist & to top it all Emma's interview.”
“IMO everything was geared to humiliate Winston.
Inviting him to the house, setting him up with that task, that ridiculous twist & to top it all Emma's interview.”
That's exactly what they did and what did happen. I think the wrong house mates were up and that Winston would have been good to watch in terms of creating a lot of interesting situations in there in general and I think we saw that a lot in the 2 days he was there.
The younger ones I am finding so boring and Angie Bowie is coming across as someone who will fly off the handle really easily and will get aggressive and I won't find any of that entertaining and I won't rule out giving up on the show if it turns out with the young ones flirting with each other becasue they have no one else to flirt/get it on with and then the boring stupid arguments/back biting, seen it all before and have had enough of it.
I do want to learn more about the older ones and their life experiences and what they are like in general but if the young ones get saved and the older ones all get picked off this I think will be a very boring series.
1. you're dealing with celebrities, who clearly bring baggage from outside the house. you can't expect public people to be judged solely on the "inside the house""
2. even if you judged winston for "inside the house", his reaction/reply to all that was thrown at him was poor. a savvy man would've said "yes, i said that in the past; but i'd like to discuss my views on the topic now", for which he would CERTAINLY better judged.
3. even in the civilian version there are these "X once was ..." kind of tasks...
2. even if you judged winston for "inside the house", his reaction/reply to all that was thrown at him was poor. a savvy man would've said "yes, i said that in the past; but i'd like to discuss my views on the topic now", for which he would CERTAINLY better judged.
3. even in the civilian version there are these "X once was ..." kind of tasks...
Originally Posted by Styker:
“BB went very easy on Michael Barrymore too.”
“BB went very easy on Michael Barrymore too.”
Blimey, that would have been a harsh one mind! "Please place your sticker on the housemate who once fled a crime scene!"
The guardian have written a piece about Channel 5
"Homophobia is not entertainment Channel 5 should be ashamed"
http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...l-5-tyson-fury
"Homophobia is not entertainment Channel 5 should be ashamed"
http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...l-5-tyson-fury
Originally Posted by Eurostar:
“He made no reference to it inside the house until BB forcibly brought it onto the agenda, meaning they well and truly stitched him up. If the producers (and their minions Emma and Rylan) had an issue with his opinions on gay adoption, then why did they invite him on the show?”
“He made no reference to it inside the house until BB forcibly brought it onto the agenda, meaning they well and truly stitched him up. If the producers (and their minions Emma and Rylan) had an issue with his opinions on gay adoption, then why did they invite him on the show?”
Totally agree.
There have been so many HM's who have made worse comments and treated their fellow HM's atrociously (i.e Katie Hopkins) and Emma and Rylan were kissing their @rse!
Emma especially, i've lost all respect for.
Her interview with Winston was a disgrace!
Originally Posted by mysty211:
“The guardian have written a piece about Channel 5
"Homophobia is not entertainment Channel 5 should be ashamed"
http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...l-5-tyson-fury”
“The guardian have written a piece about Channel 5
"Homophobia is not entertainment Channel 5 should be ashamed"
http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...l-5-tyson-fury”
That's an interesting article mysty, might be worth its own thread?
1 of 2
