Ok there as been a lot of talk about BB being fixed. There are many ways BB can fix the outcome of votes.

1. Editing someone in a good or bad light.
2. Editing someone out of a programme or editing them in with lots of air time.
3. Vote manipulation.

To name a few ways.

I'm going to focus on the vote manipulation.

Note I'm not directly saying the vote is fixed. I'm just giving an example of how if I was BB sat on a big throne and wanted to manipulate the vote, this is how I'd do it.

If BB wants a certain person to win, and lets face it they seem to want the most controversial person to stay in to make headlines, they change the way the voting happens.

An example. If housemates A, B, C and D have fans. If B ends up being a trouble causer then the voting system changes everytime s/he is up for nomination.

A normal vote is to vote to Evict. This means fans of A, B, C or D have a chance to nominate and vote out someone they don't like. So most likely fans of A, C and D would all vote 3 to 1 to evict B. S/He would be voted out easily.

If Big Brother wants B to stay then they change the voting to Stay. This means that instead of fans voting 3 to 1 against B, it becomes a 1 to 1 for B. So the only way B could get voted out is if A) s/he loses their own fan base, or B) that base wasn't big enough to begin with.

I guess this system would work better if the people weren't total unknowns as it rely's on this 'loose cannon' having a sizable fan base to begin with. I suspect it would be difficult to do it with total unknowns as BB wouldnt be able to know who was the loose cannon and if they had a big fan base to begin with. Though, as we've seen in the previous edition of BB with Helen Wood, BB give her an automatic pass to the final. I'm sure that wasn't a setup....

Can you tell me the last time BB (which is still always vote to evict until the final) had a one off vote to save or a CBB (which is always vote to save) had a one off vote to evict ? Not saying anything wrong with your SUGGESTION OF WHAT THEY COULD DO - just that i cant remember them ACTUALLY DOING IT not recently anyway?

I don't know about recently but Jade Vs. Shilpa was definitely VTE.

I don't think they do always want the most controversial character to win. Marco was far and away the most controversial on BB17 and he went out on a VTE.

Arguably in the last CBB they created an effective "vote to evict" by only putting James and Grant in the mix when some of the gruesome four would have been up using any other yardstick normally used. As soon as Bear got the eternal nom it certainly seemed like enough were put up each week to ensure any anti vote would be split.

They are always switching the vote around to save, seemingly at random times.

I wish there was an actual list of what each vote was. Instead it just lists evicted housemate.

@Zarla I think they thought Marco had a bigger fan base than he actually had.

Whether you like or loathe Helen Wood, it seemed very odd that anyone should get a pass to the final, let alone probably the highest paid person in the house that year. Let's not forget other people were relatively unknown, while she had been in the media and everyone knew her. She could have been considered a celebrity by their standards. So BB certainly got their money's worth.. what luck.

it should be the two with the most votes up, in BB2 we had head to head evictions every week, giving the viewer a clear choice

BB can fiddle with who is up for the vote by changing the qualifying nomination numbers (as they did throughout the latest CBB). Hell, in the past they've even put all those with the least noms up for the vote to fiddle the result).

Yes but was that different to the rest of that series? No it wasnt as CH4 CBB was always vote to evict.


Still not actually a change like i was asking - the point i raised was that in any series which started out one way (whether to evict or save) when was the last time there was a sudden switch (i.e a series that started and was always vote to evict suddenly switching to vote to save for one week (or the other way round - a vote to save series having vote to evict one week?))

i do agree with this and have posted on another thread recently about how they dont (any more) announce beforehand (they should say before the series starts how many will be up each week) how many will actually face the vote each week and the fact they dont stick to the same - one figure - every time opens them to claims of fixing. People also seem erroneously to think that there is (or rather was) a minimum no of noms that will guarantee someone being up (almost every noms someone says this on here!) but there isnt/wasn't , its not about how many noms but how many hms they want up, its whether they want top 2 or top 3 or top 4 etc not everyone with one nom or two noms or three noms or four noms etc. and as stated above its never always top 2 or top 3 or top 4 - the number never stays the same, it should be the same number every week (unless they want to change it for one week for some special twist, that would be ok) but it isnt which is what opens them to charges of changing it to fix the outcome.

BB10, week 9 Hira left

ah yes that would be it thanks. I knew it hadnt been done recently - five hadnt done it

It was never 1 vs 1 after laughing boy got put up for eternal nomination. The editing was insane as was the blatant bending of the rules with warning after warning after warning. A lot of the time BB didn't even bother stepping in and we know there were a multitude of things we never saw like the eye 'prank' and kicking of Frankie in the junk.

Embarrassing really. Oh BB, how far you've sunk.

I liked Bear but I can still see that the edit favoured him

BB16's winner, Chloe, was the opposite of controversial, though.

No need to be snarky. I didn't know it was always VTE back in the day.

It should never have been 1 v 1 in week 1. That's what seemed odd. Not that it affected the outcome. Bear, Ricky, Renee and Marnie would have polled more votes than Grant - they were the top 4!

Sorry didnt mean to be rude, just posted without thinking, as you simply referred to one individual eviction vote and made no comment about the rest of that series which was key to the point i was making, so i wasnt sure if you had fully understood my point or if i hadnt made it clear - which knowing me is more than likely !

I watched that entire season recently but it didn't have that many evictions and the only one I really paid attention too was that one. For obvious reasons. I made note of it being VTE because I thought that CBB had always been VTS.

And that is probably the most effective form of manipulation they have - especially if the recipient of the favourable editing is controversial which is usually the case.

If it's VTE, viewers will spend loads of money to get rid and if it's VTS, fans of the controversial character will spend loads to keep them in.

It's win-win for the bigwigs so even though eg Marco didn't stay long, I bet they made a ton on the phone voting that week.

Some never watch any of the LF (such that it is ) so base their opinions of an HM entirely on what's shown in the HLs. If every single HL show is centred around one particular character, not only does it become very boring very quickly, it's obvious that like them or loathe them - the one getting all the airtime is going to make the biggest impression.

And if the one getting all the airtime has almost entirely good edits, it's difficult to argue that they aren't being primed to either win the show or be there until the end, or else what's the point?

Why not show some of the negative stuff too?

I attended a BOTS taping in the first c5 cbbuk series. I actually came all the way from Canada to be there, which suprised the staffers (they remarked the show wasn't that good to be worthy of flying there &#128513 I was talking to one of the PA's about previous series and how I like that season but surprised how Ulrika won. He stated "well they say the show maybe fixed" or something to that effect as its been a few years now (I did post on the forum about it at the time) and gave me a big smile and a wink - and definitely left the impression he wasn't joking. I've never looked at BB or CBB the same way again.

Let's be honest its not worth walking 5 minutes up the road for now.

IMO the show is not edited because they want a particular HM to win - they don't give a toss who wins, what difference would it make to them anyhow? But they do mind who stays to the end - they want a decent show after all.

The problem now is that there is too much of an incestuous relationship with a vested interest in promoting other shows shown under the same broadcasting ownership. It is inevitable when the producers favour HMs (however unsavoury) in that stable many viewers will think "foul".

You can't blame them either.

I remember how unfair we thought it was when it was discovered that John Noel was representing not only Davina and Russell Brand, but some of the Psychs on the show too.

It was impossible to believe that their judgments of the HMs were fair or impartial from that moment on.

As you say, Barra, any number up for eviction is fine, as long as it is announced beforehand and not (apparently) as it suits.