Grr
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...cle2067725.ece
How silly of them. I dont see why they dont just let us know, how can they say its unfair on the contestants
Its not as they knew it was a public vote when they signed up.

Whereas The X Factor was being fair on the contestants in revealing the figures??? Especially with a 16 year old being the main loser. What a cop out!
Last edited by Fudd : 23-12-2008 at 23:13

exactly. It does make it look like someone the producers favoured didnt get many votes. My guess is Lisa.#
Or the judges have been voting people out in the dance off that were well ahead in votes.

If there's an agreement or understanding with previous contestants, the BBC shouldn't renege on that. That would be extremely poor.

I hope they reconsider this for future series though...as long as it's not detrimental to putting together the best cast possible.

fair enough but surely the contestants who appear in the bottom 2 must know they arent getting the votes?
I dont think there would be any shocks to us if they did leak the results.

I wouldn't be surprised if Austin was way ahead with the votes (well apart from the week he was in the dance off :yawn. Let's not forget that the judges decided to get rid of Austin over Lisa. Lisa was in the dance off 3 times, and was voted out first in the semi's so it's fair to say that she had very little public support. There would be even more furore if the public knew for sure exactly how popular Austin was with the public.

Yes...and by doing the show they've implicitly accepted that that limited information is going to be disclosed.

I'm simply pointing out that if celebs are cast on the understanding that the voting figures in detail are not revealed, the BBC shouldn't reveal them....particularly as they've never given the voters any reason to expect this information.

It's not a question of 'shocks'. It's a question of treating cast members fairly.

Thats fair enough but it should be more transparent in future.

Methinks revealing the figures would lay bare the judges bias and manipulative scoring even more....

Because it'll produce a whole bunch of new "farce", "scandal" and "fiasco" stories for a series that's supposedly over, and which has a winner who needs to be at least a little bit honoured.

John had a consistent lead = fresh "John was forced out CONSPIRACY!" stories

Austin had a consistent lead = fresh "Austin was forced out CONSPIRACY FIX!" stories

Men have a consistent lead over the women/Don & Heather consistently get very few votes = fresh ZOMG SEXISM/RACISM CONSPIRACY SCANDAL! stories

Leaderboard week on week bears no relation to dancing ability as preoscribed by judges = fresh "ZOMG it's just a popularity contest SCANDAL CONSPIRACY stories

Lisa and Rachel get very few votes = fresh "OH MY GOD TEACHERS PET FORCED THROUGH NO RESPECT MAKES A MOCKERY WHIP THE JUDGES WITH BIRCHES FIX FIX FIX FIX FIX FIX FIX" stories.

Far better to just leave it be. I'm A Celebrity can release its figures because the press don't have any vested interest in taking it down (as they seem to have created with Strictly this series) and its a straight vote. X Factor can because its in the show's interest to have had as many different leaders as possible so Cowell can pimp as many of them out for their 7 month "careers" afterwards. With Strictly it'd just create bad feeling, resentment and more scandal, which the show has already had its fill of for this year.

I'd like it to happen in future...as I wrote...but not at all costs.

In what way do you imagine that revealing the voting figures would expose further the judges' bias and 'manipulative scoring'? What exactly do you think this information will prove?

Can you stop posting sane reasons and let us plea for some more outrage material please???

Why am I NOT surprised?

Well- if the voting figures revealed week after week that Lisa was amongst the lowest scoring contestants in the public vote and yet was getting 40's and very high scores then the judges high scoring would be revealed as attempting to avoid her reacting the dance off by making sure she had a higher overall score using the old system. Very obvious this series!

Not really. What I would deem to be the "overscoring" of Lisa began in wk 4 with her second dance - the rumba - which was very poor indeed but scored in the 30s. This was immediately following wk2 when the judges put her in the bottom 2 and she was saved by the public (I know, hard to believe, but it happened). The overscoring started way before her public vote collapsed, if it ever did. I think you're putting the cart before the horse somewhat.

How about the "freedom of information act"?

Where does it say about the I'm a Celeb people? Is it on the ITV website?

I find it wrong that they are not made to disclose the onfo.

Someone (rather oddly imo) tried that and it basically boiled down to 'no, the BBC don't have to tell you anything'.

Can't say I'm bothered myself. We know who won, we have an inkling who was popular and who wasn't. Revealing the figures wouldn't do much except show up those who weren't doing well and perhaps put other celebs off of doing it in the future.

I think people didn't realise she was getting over scored till later on when the competiton got more "serious"
She was in the bottom 2 three times despite getting good scores so i'll be very suprised if after say week 5 or 6 (when it was more apparent what the judges were doing )her vote wasnt very very low.

When it got down to Jodie, John, Christine, Austin, Tom and Rachel i think she was always bottom of th epublic vote right up till the final.

It might show up the judges too. And maybe stop them from doing the same thing next year if people were to complain.
I dont want another scenario to happen next year where someone gets 80 but the public dont like them and know they were over scored so they are booted out first. It just makes a mockery of the judges scoring.

http://www.itv.com/Entertainment/cel...s/default.html

I think you're probably right, but the poster was saying that the low public vote led to the overscoring to "protect Lisa". I'm just saying it looks to me to be the other way round. The low public vote didn't lead to the overscoring, the overscoring led to the low public vote. Two very different scenarios. The overscoring can't have been to protect Lisa, because she wasn't unpopular when it started.

No it won't. They would simply argue that they are voting based on the dancing talent and skill they see in comparison to the public who are voting on favouritism. The two obviously don't have to match.

Is Strictly unique in reality TV shows involving a public vote where the two least popular people in the public vote week after week make it into the final.

I expect this is what happened - and the Beeb don't want us to know that!

That's the argument for stopping the dance off later on in the series though so that popularity with the public has an equal chance as perceived favouritism with the judges of getting you through. The fewer couples there are, the more the power balance shifts to the judges.

It's the system that's at fault really, not the judges themselves.

We don't have to agree with their ranking and equally they don't have to agree with ours.