Nobody knows if it's made up of half-truths or not.
Unless somebody reveals where it's from, we aren't going to be any the wiser.
Unless somebody reveals where it's from, we aren't going to be any the wiser.
The real Jonny is revealed -
2 of 3
Quote:
“Originally posted by Tracy
I'm beginning to think that this may be true.
Jonny's just confirmed something that's true in it. He's said he's very short tempered in the outside world, but has hidden it in the house. ”
“Originally posted by Tracy
I'm beginning to think that this may be true.
Jonny's just confirmed something that's true in it. He's said he's very short tempered in the outside world, but has hidden it in the house. ”
But without any source this is just pure propaganda. The whole statement claims to be fact but gets even the basics wrong such as Jonny's surname. And people say that those who voted Adele out are sheep. That Conniving Jonny statement would have done Goebbels proud.
Quote:
“Originally posted by Tracy
I'm beginning to think that this may be true.
Jonny's just confirmed something that's true in it. He's said he's very short tempered in the outside world, but has hidden it in the house. ”
“Originally posted by Tracy
I'm beginning to think that this may be true.
Jonny's just confirmed something that's true in it. He's said he's very short tempered in the outside world, but has hidden it in the house. ”
Spooky. I thought the same when I heard him.
Just as I've caught you here, I'd just like to thank you for what you said the other day. Very kind of you, thanks.
You're right, although I'm not Jonny's biggest fan, I have to say that it's just propaganda if theres nothing to back it up.
I really like your posts. They stand up among a lot of silly and inconsequent ones. I value when people make their point in a smart way without insulting HM or members in the forum. We think in similar ways and you save me a lot of time typing what will never sound the same as my English is still very poor.
Jonny has been quite vindictive and angry tonight and again thew whole thing wasnt about him it was about Kate.
I read that article in a local newspaper ( Cheshire) a day or so ago. I cannot remember the source they quoted but it looks like someone has typed and copied it to the web to post.
I will look if the old newspaper is here. It was in the entertainement columns. I know that other news agencys have also quoted Jonny as being an internet user and having spoken about his plans if he was ever a contestent!
I will look if the old newspaper is here. It was in the entertainement columns. I know that other news agencys have also quoted Jonny as being an internet user and having spoken about his plans if he was ever a contestent!
You're english is fine.
But I'm starting to get lazy, and my posts are getting shorter.
I have to admit that I do post some silly posts when I'm in that sort of silly mood. And yes, I put my hands up, I have insulted a housemate from time to time. But I do try to restrain myself, because Jonny IS a wan*er.
Yes, I enjoy your posts and we do have similar opinions.
You're not a Sandy fan by any chance are you? Hehe.
But I'm starting to get lazy, and my posts are getting shorter.
I have to admit that I do post some silly posts when I'm in that sort of silly mood. And yes, I put my hands up, I have insulted a housemate from time to time. But I do try to restrain myself, because Jonny IS a wan*er.
Yes, I enjoy your posts and we do have similar opinions.
You're not a Sandy fan by any chance are you? Hehe.
Quote:
“Originally posted by catnipxox
Jonny has been quite vindictive and angry tonight and again thew whole thing wasnt about him it was about Kate. ”
“Originally posted by catnipxox
Jonny has been quite vindictive and angry tonight and again thew whole thing wasnt about him it was about Kate. ”
It's not about Kate, it's all about Jade.
What stands out for me with Jonny tonight, is that according to what's been going on, he's been trying to get in the way of Kate and Alex having a bit of time together.
Is he really that paranoid?
He can't keep muscling in on everything that happens in there.
Is he really that paranoid?
He can't keep muscling in on everything that happens in there.
Quote:
“Originally posted by Alrightmate
Yes, I enjoy your posts and we do have similar opinions.
You're not a Sandy fan by any chance are you? Hehe. ”
“Originally posted by Alrightmate
Yes, I enjoy your posts and we do have similar opinions.
You're not a Sandy fan by any chance are you? Hehe.
”
I like characters with a bite. I leave you to guess...
I am going to my bed now. I think I have crossed my own limits. This is becoming too addictive for my own good. Speak to you another day.
But isn't it about Kate in the sense that she's upset with all the stories about her and Spencer and Lee, getting up to a bit of "hows your father".
She was really paranoid about how the public sees her and her sexual behaviour. Coupled with the boos that have been heard.
Talk about booing, we might have three consecutive weeks of it:
P.J., Tim and Jade.
The remaining housemates will end up absolutely terrified of ever leaving.
She was really paranoid about how the public sees her and her sexual behaviour. Coupled with the boos that have been heard.
Talk about booing, we might have three consecutive weeks of it:
P.J., Tim and Jade.
The remaining housemates will end up absolutely terrified of ever leaving.
Quote:
“Originally posted by ontwofronts
how is authorship irrevelent? can these quotes be verified as cominf from Jonny? No they can't, so whats to debate? ”
“Originally posted by ontwofronts
how is authorship irrevelent? can these quotes be verified as cominf from Jonny? No they can't, so whats to debate? ”
You have completely missed the point of the article in TSR's post, ontwofronts.
Whether the quotes can be verified as authentic is beside the point (I agree, one can't prove they are, but on the other hand, can you prove they aren't?)
The "quotes" attributed to Jonny are, in effect, allegations of a gameplan. How valid are these allegations, based on analysis of the evidence from watching the programme? - That is what is worth debating.
eg.
1. Does he indeed play on his Northerner status/North-South divide to promote his appeal? What evidence is there for this?
2. Similarly, how significant is the fireman image as a factor in his popularity? Does he play on this?
3. What evidence is there that he modifies or contrives his behaviour for popular appeal or to hijack camera attention, as alleged?
4. The allegation about an internet influence campaign by his family and friends, to create a 'Jonny will win' bandwagon and stamp on any anti-jonny/pro-other HM (usually Alex) messages, is difficult to prove (or disprove!). Sometimes I do wonder, given the often incoherent arguments and invective posted by Jonny supporters. A favourite tactic seems to be, if unable to refute an anti-Jonny argument, to sidestep the debate and instead direct dismissive abuse towards the forum member responsible (Elysium and Epicurus seem to be prime targets of this).
I will post my own analysis to the above questions raised by the article in TSR's post - hopefully soon - if and when I have some time (Happily I do have a life outside watching BB and looking through BB websites!
).
As promised, to analyze some of the above questions raised... (apologies for the long post)...
1. Sociological research shows that regional stereotypes and accents strongly prejudice our perception of someone, either positively or negatively.
At the beginning, Jonny's club-18-30 rep behaviour reinforced the "cheeky chirpy working-class Geordie bloke" stereotype, of which peeing in the shower is considered acceptable and even 'cool', and anyone who dares say otherwise (ie. Alex) is condemned and ostracized as a "hygiene-freak". (To take an extreme contrast, the public reaction to the Queen saying she pees in the shower would probably be different! A less extreme but more telling comparison is to ask: What would the public reaction be to an exposé of urine-stained showers on a hospital ward? - I can see furious news headlines alluding to 'filthy hospitals'.)
LABELLING (typecasting) is extremely powerful in colouring our subsequent perceptions. Hence despite Jonny being morose and glum on the poor side for weeks, the general popular perception of the "funny Geordie" remains largely untarnished; contrast Sophie or Sandy being glum were both condemned by the public as being "boring". (Similarly, Alex labelled "the moaning model" result in people looking to construe anything he says as whinging, no matter how innocuous the remark -- eg. DS reporter Emma Tingay in a live update: Alex commenting on the weather becomes " 'It is raining,' moans Alex." (Would the same verb have been used if another HM had said the same? I doubt it.)
Does Jonny tries to cash in on his Northerner background as part of a national North-South rivalry?
Undeniably yes. Jonny, in conversation, said that he "represents the North, Scotland, and Ireland"-- by implication, he is appealing to the inhabitants of those areas to support him, by attempting to tap into tribal loyalties. In addition, his impersonations of Alex and Tim's accents panders to prejudice towards both regional and class differences, because - importantly -he does them with derogatory overtones: eg. "Golly gosh, posh people speak like this". (Contrast with the one time Alex imitated Jonny's accent in the diary room when he used it purely to assume Jonny's identity in relaying the conversation between them; the difference here is that Alex did not do it for derogatory effect.)
2. How significant is his fireman status as a factor in his popular appeal?
It helps - and certainly doesn't do him any harm. The general public have a (rightly) healthy respect for emergency service workers, and of these, traditionally firemen have a somewhat romanticized image (even more so after the New York attacks). This makes people naturally well pre-disposed to them. Some Jonny supporters seem to base this positive prejudice as a reason for their support, eg. comments along the lines of "Jonny does a more worthy job" "the world needs more firemen, not models".
Does he play on this?
No, that would be an unfair claim. All the other HMs have talked about their careers, usually in response to questions from other HMs; people are naturally interested in others' jobs, especially interesting ones like firefighting or modelling.
3. Does he contrive his behaviour to appeal to public popularity?
This issue has been extensively covered on the forum already. Read Elysium's threads! Interesting also to note that, in her analysis on last night's Sunday show, BB psychiatrist Sandra Scott described Jonny's "court-jester" behaviour as "artificial".
Does Jonny attempt to 'hijack' camera attention away from others?
Yes he does. Dr Scott got there before me on this one! She highlighted eg. Jonny's frequent "Big Brother" narration during other HM's activities as a method of drawing attention away from them onto himself.
Final point. Why has Jonny managed to successfully create the illusion that, as Jonny-supporters often assert, that "he does not bitch about the others?" One important reason for this is his clever use of language.
Compare and contrast —
1)Adele to Jade: "What do you think of Kate?"…(agrees)…"very dodgy"; "PJ/Jonny is a *****r".
2)Jonny to group: "Who do you trust in here?"… "I only trust you (Kate) and PJ"; "Is there anyone here who gets on your nerves?"
--Their different ways of effectively saying the same thing have different subconscious effects on the observer ie. the viewer.
Adele's use of person-specific ("Kate" "PJ" "Jonny") explicit direct attacks on someone ("dodgy", "*****r") has the effect of focusing observer antagonism towards her own character for obvious "bitching".
Jonny is much more subtle in his "bitching" about HMs he dislike. By phrasing the question in non-person-specific positive language - "WHO do you TRUST?", and stating the positive to imply the negative ("who do you trust?" = who DON'T you trust?; "I only trust [Kate] and PJ" = I don't trust Alex/Tim/Jade), he thus neutralizes viewer antagonism and create the illusion of not bitching. Another important feature (going back to my comments about the powerful effect of labelling) is -- GET YOUR LABEL IN FIRST!!: By referring to himself, Kate and PJ as people who can be trusted, the subconscious effect on the viewer is to identify them as "trustworthy" and, by implication, paints Alex/Tim/Jade as the untrustworthy people.
As the pop lyric (almost!) goes: It's not what you say - its the way that you say it. Politicians, lawyers (think George Carman) - and trained actors (Jonny?) - are very aware of the subconscious power of judicious language use on an audience. It was interesting to note how, in last nights show, when Jonny was in the diary room he was clearly slow and deliberate in searching for the right words in saying (and getting his label in first!) - "Me and Kate are here to have fun... Tim and Alex aren't."
1. Sociological research shows that regional stereotypes and accents strongly prejudice our perception of someone, either positively or negatively.
At the beginning, Jonny's club-18-30 rep behaviour reinforced the "cheeky chirpy working-class Geordie bloke" stereotype, of which peeing in the shower is considered acceptable and even 'cool', and anyone who dares say otherwise (ie. Alex) is condemned and ostracized as a "hygiene-freak". (To take an extreme contrast, the public reaction to the Queen saying she pees in the shower would probably be different! A less extreme but more telling comparison is to ask: What would the public reaction be to an exposé of urine-stained showers on a hospital ward? - I can see furious news headlines alluding to 'filthy hospitals'.)
LABELLING (typecasting) is extremely powerful in colouring our subsequent perceptions. Hence despite Jonny being morose and glum on the poor side for weeks, the general popular perception of the "funny Geordie" remains largely untarnished; contrast Sophie or Sandy being glum were both condemned by the public as being "boring". (Similarly, Alex labelled "the moaning model" result in people looking to construe anything he says as whinging, no matter how innocuous the remark -- eg. DS reporter Emma Tingay in a live update: Alex commenting on the weather becomes " 'It is raining,' moans Alex." (Would the same verb have been used if another HM had said the same? I doubt it.)
Does Jonny tries to cash in on his Northerner background as part of a national North-South rivalry?
Undeniably yes. Jonny, in conversation, said that he "represents the North, Scotland, and Ireland"-- by implication, he is appealing to the inhabitants of those areas to support him, by attempting to tap into tribal loyalties. In addition, his impersonations of Alex and Tim's accents panders to prejudice towards both regional and class differences, because - importantly -he does them with derogatory overtones: eg. "Golly gosh, posh people speak like this". (Contrast with the one time Alex imitated Jonny's accent in the diary room when he used it purely to assume Jonny's identity in relaying the conversation between them; the difference here is that Alex did not do it for derogatory effect.)
2. How significant is his fireman status as a factor in his popular appeal?
It helps - and certainly doesn't do him any harm. The general public have a (rightly) healthy respect for emergency service workers, and of these, traditionally firemen have a somewhat romanticized image (even more so after the New York attacks). This makes people naturally well pre-disposed to them. Some Jonny supporters seem to base this positive prejudice as a reason for their support, eg. comments along the lines of "Jonny does a more worthy job" "the world needs more firemen, not models".
Does he play on this?
No, that would be an unfair claim. All the other HMs have talked about their careers, usually in response to questions from other HMs; people are naturally interested in others' jobs, especially interesting ones like firefighting or modelling.
3. Does he contrive his behaviour to appeal to public popularity?
This issue has been extensively covered on the forum already. Read Elysium's threads! Interesting also to note that, in her analysis on last night's Sunday show, BB psychiatrist Sandra Scott described Jonny's "court-jester" behaviour as "artificial".
Does Jonny attempt to 'hijack' camera attention away from others?
Yes he does. Dr Scott got there before me on this one! She highlighted eg. Jonny's frequent "Big Brother" narration during other HM's activities as a method of drawing attention away from them onto himself.
Final point. Why has Jonny managed to successfully create the illusion that, as Jonny-supporters often assert, that "he does not bitch about the others?" One important reason for this is his clever use of language.
Compare and contrast —
1)Adele to Jade: "What do you think of Kate?"…(agrees)…"very dodgy"; "PJ/Jonny is a *****r".
2)Jonny to group: "Who do you trust in here?"… "I only trust you (Kate) and PJ"; "Is there anyone here who gets on your nerves?"
--Their different ways of effectively saying the same thing have different subconscious effects on the observer ie. the viewer.
Adele's use of person-specific ("Kate" "PJ" "Jonny") explicit direct attacks on someone ("dodgy", "*****r") has the effect of focusing observer antagonism towards her own character for obvious "bitching".
Jonny is much more subtle in his "bitching" about HMs he dislike. By phrasing the question in non-person-specific positive language - "WHO do you TRUST?", and stating the positive to imply the negative ("who do you trust?" = who DON'T you trust?; "I only trust [Kate] and PJ" = I don't trust Alex/Tim/Jade), he thus neutralizes viewer antagonism and create the illusion of not bitching. Another important feature (going back to my comments about the powerful effect of labelling) is -- GET YOUR LABEL IN FIRST!!: By referring to himself, Kate and PJ as people who can be trusted, the subconscious effect on the viewer is to identify them as "trustworthy" and, by implication, paints Alex/Tim/Jade as the untrustworthy people.
As the pop lyric (almost!) goes: It's not what you say - its the way that you say it. Politicians, lawyers (think George Carman) - and trained actors (Jonny?) - are very aware of the subconscious power of judicious language use on an audience. It was interesting to note how, in last nights show, when Jonny was in the diary room he was clearly slow and deliberate in searching for the right words in saying (and getting his label in first!) - "Me and Kate are here to have fun... Tim and Alex aren't."
Quote:
“Originally posted by Tracy
I'm beginning to think that this may be true.
Jonny's just confirmed something that's true in it. He's said he's very short tempered in the outside world, but has hidden it in the house. ”
“Originally posted by Tracy
I'm beginning to think that this may be true.
Jonny's just confirmed something that's true in it. He's said he's very short tempered in the outside world, but has hidden it in the house. ”
Yes I agree - I have heard the stuff about Jonny's short temper and having to conceal it before !
This is all true. Furthermore does it not also 'ring true' because we can see git all happening in front of us every day.....in every move that Jonny makes.
Eejay
The really funny thing would be if Jonny won and then was revealed as an axe-wielding serial-killer. Then the anti-Jonny brigade go "We told you so!" and then everybody who voted Jonny said "Yeah, we knew all along - we just did it to see the furious reaction from your collective dumb ass". It will happen, you know.
I like Alex and Kate but all these bozos with their made up articles and conspiracy theories have swung my support right behind the ugly Northern fool.
Yes, he's terminally unfunny, yes he's from the North of England but Vote! Vote ! Vote! Jonny. Unless voting Tim winds them up more, of course...
I like Alex and Kate but all these bozos with their made up articles and conspiracy theories have swung my support right behind the ugly Northern fool.
Yes, he's terminally unfunny, yes he's from the North of England but Vote! Vote ! Vote! Jonny. Unless voting Tim winds them up more, of course...
Quote:
“Originally posted by mystic_nutmeg
As promised, to analyze some of the above questions raised... (apologies for the long post)...
1. Sociological research shows that regional stereotypes and accents strongly prejudice our perception of someone, either positively or negatively.
At the beginning, Jonny's club-18-30 rep behaviour reinforced the "cheeky chirpy working-class Geordie bloke" stereotype, of which peeing in the shower is considered acceptable and even 'cool', and anyone who dares say otherwise (ie. Alex) is condemned and ostracized as a "hygiene-freak". (To take an extreme contrast, the public reaction to the Queen saying she pees in the shower would probably be different! A less extreme but more telling comparison is to ask: What would the public reaction be to an exposé of urine-stained showers on a hospital ward? - I can see furious news headlines alluding to 'filthy hospitals'.)
LABELLING (typecasting) is extremely powerful in colouring our subsequent perceptions. Hence despite Jonny being morose and glum on the poor side for weeks, the general popular perception of the "funny Geordie" remains largely untarnished; contrast Sophie or Sandy being glum were both condemned by the public as being "boring". (Similarly, Alex labelled "the moaning model" result in people looking to construe anything he says as whinging, no matter how innocuous the remark -- eg. DS reporter Emma Tingay in a live update: Alex commenting on the weather becomes " 'It is raining,' moans Alex." (Would the same verb have been used if another HM had said the same? I doubt it.)
Does Jonny tries to cash in on his Northerner background as part of a national North-South rivalry?
Undeniably yes. Jonny, in conversation, said that he "represents the North, Scotland, and Ireland"-- by implication, he is appealing to the inhabitants of those areas to support him, by attempting to tap into tribal loyalties. In addition, his impersonations of Alex and Tim's accents panders to prejudice towards both regional and class differences, because - importantly -he does them with derogatory overtones: eg. "Golly gosh, posh people speak like this". (Contrast with the one time Alex imitated Jonny's accent in the diary room when he used it purely to assume Jonny's identity in relaying the conversation between them; the difference here is that Alex did not do it for derogatory effect.)
2. How significant is his fireman status as a factor in his popular appeal?
It helps - and certainly doesn't do him any harm. The general public have a (rightly) healthy respect for emergency service workers, and of these, traditionally firemen have a somewhat romanticized image (even more so after the New York attacks). This makes people naturally well pre-disposed to them. Some Jonny supporters seem to base this positive prejudice as a reason for their support, eg. comments along the lines of "Jonny does a more worthy job" "the world needs more firemen, not models".
Does he play on this?
No, that would be an unfair claim. All the other HMs have talked about their careers, usually in response to questions from other HMs; people are naturally interested in others' jobs, especially interesting ones like firefighting or modelling.
3. Does he contrive his behaviour to appeal to public popularity?
This issue has been extensively covered on the forum already. Read Elysium's threads! Interesting also to note that, in her analysis on last night's Sunday show, BB psychiatrist Sandra Scott described Jonny's "court-jester" behaviour as "artificial".
Does Jonny attempt to 'hijack' camera attention away from others?
Yes he does. Dr Scott got there before me on this one! She highlighted eg. Jonny's frequent "Big Brother" narration during other HM's activities as a method of drawing attention away from them onto himself.
Final point. Why has Jonny managed to successfully create the illusion that, as Jonny-supporters often assert, that "he does not bitch about the others?" One important reason for this is his clever use of language.
Compare and contrast —
1)Adele to Jade: "What do you think of Kate?"…(agrees)…"very dodgy"; "PJ/Jonny is a *****r".
2)Jonny to group: "Who do you trust in here?"… "I only trust you (Kate) and PJ"; "Is there anyone here who gets on your nerves?"
--Their different ways of effectively saying the same thing have different subconscious effects on the observer ie. the viewer.
Adele's use of person-specific ("Kate" "PJ" "Jonny") explicit direct attacks on someone ("dodgy", "*****r") has the effect of focusing observer antagonism towards her own character for obvious "bitching".
Jonny is much more subtle in his "bitching" about HMs he dislike. By phrasing the question in non-person-specific positive language - "WHO do you TRUST?", and stating the positive to imply the negative ("who do you trust?" = who DON'T you trust?; "I only trust [Kate] and PJ" = I don't trust Alex/Tim/Jade), he thus neutralizes viewer antagonism and create the illusion of not bitching. Another important feature (going back to my comments about the powerful effect of labelling) is -- GET YOUR LABEL IN FIRST!!: By referring to himself, Kate and PJ as people who can be trusted, the subconscious effect on the viewer is to identify them as "trustworthy" and, by implication, paints Alex/Tim/Jade as the untrustworthy people.
As the pop lyric (almost!) goes: It's not what you say - its the way that you say it. Politicians, lawyers (think George Carman) - and trained actors (Jonny?) - are very aware of the subconscious power of judicious language use on an audience. It was interesting to note how, in last nights show, when Jonny was in the diary room he was clearly slow and deliberate in searching for the right words in saying (and getting his label in first!) - "Me and Kate are here to have fun... Tim and Alex aren't." ”
“Originally posted by mystic_nutmeg
As promised, to analyze some of the above questions raised... (apologies for the long post)...
1. Sociological research shows that regional stereotypes and accents strongly prejudice our perception of someone, either positively or negatively.
At the beginning, Jonny's club-18-30 rep behaviour reinforced the "cheeky chirpy working-class Geordie bloke" stereotype, of which peeing in the shower is considered acceptable and even 'cool', and anyone who dares say otherwise (ie. Alex) is condemned and ostracized as a "hygiene-freak". (To take an extreme contrast, the public reaction to the Queen saying she pees in the shower would probably be different! A less extreme but more telling comparison is to ask: What would the public reaction be to an exposé of urine-stained showers on a hospital ward? - I can see furious news headlines alluding to 'filthy hospitals'.)
LABELLING (typecasting) is extremely powerful in colouring our subsequent perceptions. Hence despite Jonny being morose and glum on the poor side for weeks, the general popular perception of the "funny Geordie" remains largely untarnished; contrast Sophie or Sandy being glum were both condemned by the public as being "boring". (Similarly, Alex labelled "the moaning model" result in people looking to construe anything he says as whinging, no matter how innocuous the remark -- eg. DS reporter Emma Tingay in a live update: Alex commenting on the weather becomes " 'It is raining,' moans Alex." (Would the same verb have been used if another HM had said the same? I doubt it.)
Does Jonny tries to cash in on his Northerner background as part of a national North-South rivalry?
Undeniably yes. Jonny, in conversation, said that he "represents the North, Scotland, and Ireland"-- by implication, he is appealing to the inhabitants of those areas to support him, by attempting to tap into tribal loyalties. In addition, his impersonations of Alex and Tim's accents panders to prejudice towards both regional and class differences, because - importantly -he does them with derogatory overtones: eg. "Golly gosh, posh people speak like this". (Contrast with the one time Alex imitated Jonny's accent in the diary room when he used it purely to assume Jonny's identity in relaying the conversation between them; the difference here is that Alex did not do it for derogatory effect.)
2. How significant is his fireman status as a factor in his popular appeal?
It helps - and certainly doesn't do him any harm. The general public have a (rightly) healthy respect for emergency service workers, and of these, traditionally firemen have a somewhat romanticized image (even more so after the New York attacks). This makes people naturally well pre-disposed to them. Some Jonny supporters seem to base this positive prejudice as a reason for their support, eg. comments along the lines of "Jonny does a more worthy job" "the world needs more firemen, not models".
Does he play on this?
No, that would be an unfair claim. All the other HMs have talked about their careers, usually in response to questions from other HMs; people are naturally interested in others' jobs, especially interesting ones like firefighting or modelling.
3. Does he contrive his behaviour to appeal to public popularity?
This issue has been extensively covered on the forum already. Read Elysium's threads! Interesting also to note that, in her analysis on last night's Sunday show, BB psychiatrist Sandra Scott described Jonny's "court-jester" behaviour as "artificial".
Does Jonny attempt to 'hijack' camera attention away from others?
Yes he does. Dr Scott got there before me on this one! She highlighted eg. Jonny's frequent "Big Brother" narration during other HM's activities as a method of drawing attention away from them onto himself.
Final point. Why has Jonny managed to successfully create the illusion that, as Jonny-supporters often assert, that "he does not bitch about the others?" One important reason for this is his clever use of language.
Compare and contrast —
1)Adele to Jade: "What do you think of Kate?"…(agrees)…"very dodgy"; "PJ/Jonny is a *****r".
2)Jonny to group: "Who do you trust in here?"… "I only trust you (Kate) and PJ"; "Is there anyone here who gets on your nerves?"
--Their different ways of effectively saying the same thing have different subconscious effects on the observer ie. the viewer.
Adele's use of person-specific ("Kate" "PJ" "Jonny") explicit direct attacks on someone ("dodgy", "*****r") has the effect of focusing observer antagonism towards her own character for obvious "bitching".
Jonny is much more subtle in his "bitching" about HMs he dislike. By phrasing the question in non-person-specific positive language - "WHO do you TRUST?", and stating the positive to imply the negative ("who do you trust?" = who DON'T you trust?; "I only trust [Kate] and PJ" = I don't trust Alex/Tim/Jade), he thus neutralizes viewer antagonism and create the illusion of not bitching. Another important feature (going back to my comments about the powerful effect of labelling) is -- GET YOUR LABEL IN FIRST!!: By referring to himself, Kate and PJ as people who can be trusted, the subconscious effect on the viewer is to identify them as "trustworthy" and, by implication, paints Alex/Tim/Jade as the untrustworthy people.
As the pop lyric (almost!) goes: It's not what you say - its the way that you say it. Politicians, lawyers (think George Carman) - and trained actors (Jonny?) - are very aware of the subconscious power of judicious language use on an audience. It was interesting to note how, in last nights show, when Jonny was in the diary room he was clearly slow and deliberate in searching for the right words in saying (and getting his label in first!) - "Me and Kate are here to have fun... Tim and Alex aren't." ”
Well that's a very interesting read... I agree with all of it, what is there not too agree... I think it's on of the rare well balanced, well documented post I have read in those forum... that's for taking some time over it...
Clever how people can twist things. Anything positive said about Jonny from the phycologists they are accused of talking a load of bull. Anything that is said about Jonny that can be twisted such as the jester stuff is believed and they are percieved as right. Its funny how one of these claims in this article that Jonnys family and friends are supposed to stop articles against him airing and replaced by campaigns of what a great guy he is don't seem to be happening. When can you people just get it into your heads that Jonny Alex and co are just ordinary human beings that are on the show to win and maybe achieve some fame and that none are criminals and seem to be very nice funny and entertaining people. I'm a Jonny supporter, but do appreciate Alex, Kates and others contributions to the show. They have all entertained us and deserve respect from everyone not the bulls*** that they all get.
Quote:
“Originally posted by johnson293
Where has this "boast" come from?
And, if it is all true, why doesn't this make him a worthy winner, if he wins it?
I think some people are forgetting......ITS ONLY A GAME SHOW.
But it seems he just doesn't have to bitch about people, and backstab, and play people off against each other to win.
GO JONNY GO GO GO!!!!!!!!
MJ ”
“Originally posted by johnson293
Where has this "boast" come from?
And, if it is all true, why doesn't this make him a worthy winner, if he wins it?
I think some people are forgetting......ITS ONLY A GAME SHOW.
But it seems he just doesn't have to bitch about people, and backstab, and play people off against each other to win.
GO JONNY GO GO GO!!!!!!!!
MJ
”
Exactly! totally agree
Having just read this thread from top to bottom, something just struck me as very interesting.... ok lets just say that all the articles are true and that Johnny has been playing to tactics right from the start. If he has then he hasn't done too badly over it as he's still in the house in it's closing weeks.
As its a 'game show' surely he is allowed to adopt whatever tactics he likes in order to win the prize money, and let's face it, that's what they are there for, to be the last one standing and to walk off with the money.
BUT it seems that the reason that tactics and game plans don't bode too well with the public is that for some reason or another we feel CHEATED!! It's as if.....if the HM's aren't being 100% their true selves (difficult with cameras constantly watching your every move) then they are somehow seen to be cheating, and the general public don't like cheats.
If Johhny wins and its purely because of his game plans then he is surely a worthy winner. The rules don't state that you have to be honest to win.
Personally though I would much prefer Kate to win.....why?......erm because I feel she is more genuine.......damn!
As its a 'game show' surely he is allowed to adopt whatever tactics he likes in order to win the prize money, and let's face it, that's what they are there for, to be the last one standing and to walk off with the money.
BUT it seems that the reason that tactics and game plans don't bode too well with the public is that for some reason or another we feel CHEATED!! It's as if.....if the HM's aren't being 100% their true selves (difficult with cameras constantly watching your every move) then they are somehow seen to be cheating, and the general public don't like cheats.
If Johhny wins and its purely because of his game plans then he is surely a worthy winner. The rules don't state that you have to be honest to win.
Personally though I would much prefer Kate to win.....why?......erm because I feel she is more genuine.......damn!
It doesn't matter that Jonny's employing tactics to try to win. After all, it is only a game. The question is whether you as a viewer feel happy about having your views manipulated in this way. Do you admire the master tactician at work - Jonny - or do you admire the sheer naive honesty of Alex, who clearly says what he thinks without any thought of influencing the viewers.
I think Jonny is a class A a**hole, but even I will dispute the validity of this post.
Jonny isn't smart enough to pull something like this off.
Jonny isn't smart enough to pull something like this off.
Quote:
“Originally posted by robx0666
It doesn't matter that Jonny's employing tactics to try to win. After all, it is only a game. The question is whether you as a viewer feel happy about having your views manipulated in this way. Do you admire the master tactician at work - Jonny - or do you admire the sheer naive honesty of Alex, who clearly says what he thinks without any thought of influencing the viewers. ”
“Originally posted by robx0666
It doesn't matter that Jonny's employing tactics to try to win. After all, it is only a game. The question is whether you as a viewer feel happy about having your views manipulated in this way. Do you admire the master tactician at work - Jonny - or do you admire the sheer naive honesty of Alex, who clearly says what he thinks without any thought of influencing the viewers. ”
Precisely Robx
I personally prefer the honesty.
2 of 3
