I've seen a lot of people say that "Jon is the real winner of BB4" but what does that mean? Does it simply mean that he is the person you will remember the most?

Its like saying that England were the "real winners" of the World Cup 2002 when in reality they got knocked out in the quarter finals.

But do you have a reason why England could be considered the real winners?

No because they weren't. They got knocked out in the quarter finals.

You could say the real winner is the person who had their life improved the most. Another way could be the one who came out with people liking or respecting them the most.

I would say that Fed is the real winner of BB4. Although he was human and messed up big time he now seems the most interesting and genuine. Even if he sometimes only says things for effect - at least he doesnt try to hide it or take himself too seriously. He may use big words and bullshit at times but if he's picked up on it he takes it in good part.

Okay I can agree with that but then the argument falls down because they did not win, what is effectively a popularity contest.

I think you've missed the point!

But my amp goes to 11!

Great example that made me listen

In what way? They weren't the "real" winners, Brazil were! They might be my favourite team but that doesn't mean they won it, does it?

It's a statement of personal belief as to who the real winner of a Big Brother was....It's noting sinister....Clearly the "real" winner will be Cameron as was the "real" winner last year Kate...But...In financial and popularity terms it was *hack hack....cough cough....rrrgh rghh....J....J....Jesus...Spit it out* Jade....and after the part time fans and to many the real winner was Alex......In a popularity contest with no real skill and so many voting (with the potential to vote more than once) for some seriously superficial reasons then it's to the individual to decide who the real winner was.......

What will also happen is that it will annoy fans of the person who did win...they'll point out that there boy had won because they were more popular...the reply is that more votes were cast, that isn't the same as people etc etc etc....Fun and games for another year......

Popular in what sense? If one person votes 100 times and another votes once is that the difference in popularity?

Ah Matt, just the person! I'm sure you can tell me what you mean by the term "real winner" .

Are you saying "the winners" and "the real winners" are interchangeable?

Thank you Mem, thats the explanation I was after.

As an aside, the most fun to be had on this forum is watching the "debate" between fans of opposing housemates. What some people get away with saying is hilarious.

Cheers

In some ways yes, the more obsessed you are by the HM, the more you will vote IMO. Which is why you saw people willing to spend £20 or more to get Jon back in.

No, I'm trying to say the opposite. Whether you think someone is the "real winner" doesn't really change the fact that they are not.

Yes. People get so worked up about a lot of people who seem pretty neck and neck to me.

The one's I really disliked were Lisa and Justine but of the one's competing now there's not much to choose between them.

its a stoopid quote equivalent to someone saying "jade was the real winner of BB3"

the fact that people may use multiple voting in the BB competition obviously ruins the result of who is the real winner.

one person one vote wouldnt be allowed obviously for endemol financial reasons.

i really do believe that there is a difference between who the public would like to win and would see as the real winner and the person who gets the most votes.

i know this seems obvious but just putting in my two pennorth

The term "real winner" can also be used to refer to the person who gains most either financially, increased publicity, etc, but didn't actually win.

Dont demonise me, demonise

What I mean with the term is Jon

It's a personal view, based on a combination of many factors to include amongst other things........... which HM made the most impact whilst the show was on air, which HM continues to make an impression, which HM has some real talent, which HM has acted & reacted with honesty & integrity, which was the most entertaining & interesting, which HM raised the most stimulating issues, which HM was a stimulating issue !

Then add some consideration of their potential earnings, newspaper and magazine cover appearances, TV appearances, the passion of the fans etc and you begin to get close to finding a Real Winner.

But remember, some HMs are real winners for very different reasons, mainly in that they have refused to prostitute themselves to the BB experience & have remained true to their principles.

SO, for example

- Kate was last year's official winner but Jade and Alex have both earned far more than her. Alex still has a very active fan site, where as Kate's various fan sites collapsed within a few weeks of her coming first etc.

- Alison was evicted after just 2 weeks in the BB3 House, yet has managed to maintain quite a high profile throughout this last year, far higher than some of those HMs that 'lasted' longer like PJ, Lee & Jonny.

- Sandy was a real winner in that he is one of the few HMs to ever state that he was going into the BB House for the experience & mean it ! He has never sought to make financial gain from BB.

I can see there is a difference but why is it there?. Surely the person that the public would like to win is the one who does eventually win otherwise they would be evicted.

Are you sure you are saying the opposite?

In your view who is the following:

(A) the winner?
(B) the real winner?