"This is a flawed social experiment"

[daniel-lewis-1985]

She literally just described the state of Big Brother down to a T.

The way she said people should be allowed to express themselves and be evicted by the process was spot on.

This woman responded to an advert in the paper 15 years ago to appear in a social experiment which turned out to be the pilot of BB and she is right in saying BB is totally flawed and again she is 100% spot on when saying people shouldn't be censoring themselves.

Shes just worded what ive been feeling for years.

[Kazanne]

She literally just described the state of Big Brother down to a T.

The way she said people should be allowed to express themselves and be evicted by the process was spot on.

This woman responded to an advert in the paper 15 years ago to appear in a social experiment which turned out to be the pilot of BB and she is right in saying BB is totally flawed and again she is 100% spot on when saying people shouldn't be censoring themselves.

Shes just worded what ive been feeling for years.

She was spot on.

[Cal.]

You chanelling KT x

[MB.]

I'm sure Nick being ejected in the first series was all part of the 'social experiment' too.

[Marsh.]

I'm sure Nick being ejected in the first series was all part of the 'social experiment' too.

:clap1:

[Pincho Paxton]

Well social experiments have to have limits, because we are all part of the experiment's effects on society.

[thinkingoutloud]

She was absolutely correct with this. Of course a line has to be drawn when people get offensive though and if there are a ridiculous amount of ofcom complaints etc and Ken had been previously warned about his language yet continued to use it (which I don't think Katie was actually aware of), but she is right in saying that people are too scared to say things because of the possible offences it could cause.

[daniel-lewis-1985]

I'm sure Nick being ejected in the first series was all part of the 'social experiment' too.

A social experiment has no plans.

The Nick situation was something that happened naturally and had 8 million people watching live online.

Sit down.

[the truth]

its been a biased endlessly manipulated piece of man hating trash for a decade

[MB.]

A social experiment has no plans.

The Nick situation was something that happened naturally and had 8 million people watching live online.

Sit down.

In which case, Ken breaking the rules multiple times also happened naturally. Not sure what your point is.

[the truth]

In which case, Ken breaking the rules multiple times also happened naturally. Not sure what your point is.

it was allowed to reach that stage as he was abused group bullied even bitten without the BB producers doing a damn thing about it

[Crimson Dynamo]

I wish they had asked ken about muslims

And immigration

Alas we shall never know

[joeysteele]

She was spot on.

It really pains me to say this as to Katie :joker: but I totally agree with you and Daniel, she was spot on.

[MB.]

I wish they had asked ken about muslims

And immigration

Alas we shall never know

55sjaEDJ65k

[Denver]

I'm sure Nick being ejected in the first series was all part of the 'social experiment' too.

The show was still new and they didnt know what to do if they ejected someone for writing secret messages then they would be laughed at

[the truth]

the uk is a failed social ex[periement with endless biased laws which are corrupting every part of it

[Jarrod]

Wrong thread :flutter:

[abhorson]

As much as Katie offends for a living, even she knows the boundaries. Did you all hear her saying to Ken the other night, when he was talking to Alexander. She went Shhhhhhh Ken.

[the truth]

As much as Katie offends for a living, even she knows the boundaries. Did you all hear her saying to Ken the other night, when he was talking to Alexander. She went Shhhhhhh Ken.

she doesn't offend for a living she gives her opinion...just because the PC twats in the UK pretend to get offended doesn't mean it is actually offensive

[abhorson]

Anyone know the equivalent woman term if a male is a misogynist.

[abhorson]

she doesn't offend for a living she gives her opinion...just because the PC twats in the UK pretend to get offended doesn't mean it is actually offensive

She gets paid for it Truth. Sun, This morning, channel 4 and 5.

[Denver]

Anyone know the equivalent woman term if a male is a misogynist.

Misandrist

[abhorson]

Misandrist


Thank you.

[the truth]

She gets paid for it Truth. Sun, This morning, channel 4 and 5.

shes allowed to say all these things simply because shes a woman. a man wouldn't get away with saying any of it in this sexist man hating basket case of a country

[abhorson]

shes allowed to say all these things simply because shes a woman. a man wouldn't get away with saying any of it in this sexist man hating basket case of a country

My point is with Katie is that iy is now about money much like Liz Jones.

[Pincho Paxton]

Freedom of speech should be called freedom to make money from saying anything you want.

[the truth]

Freedom of speech should be called freedom to make money from saying anything you want.

b if youre a woman, men are banned from saying anything

[abhorson]

b if youre a woman, men are banned from saying anything

I can get away with calling my lovely wife a bitch. I just get her sharp tongue back, We just laugh though!

[the truth]

I can get away with calling my lovely wife a bitch. I just get her sharp tongue back, We just laugh though!

im glad you at least sound like you are able to laugh at life and im sure youre both tongue in cheek when you say these things, lucky you don't ask nadia round for lunch or shed be calling the police if you even admired your own wifes backside or heaven forbid she admired yours

[abhorson]

im glad you at least sound like you are able to laugh at life and im sure youre both tongue in cheek when you say these things, lucky you don't ask nadia round for lunch or shed be calling the police if you even admired your own wifes backside or heaven forbid she admired yours


Sorry for the cliche but if you can't laugh you would cry. Very tongue in cheek.

Nadia i agree went for the kill. But Ken did not help himself.

[armand.kay]

In which case, Ken breaking the rules multiple times also happened naturally. Not sure what your point is.

ken and Nick's situations aren't really the same tho are they.
The original social experiment was to see how people behave when cutoff from the outside world and forced to nominate people for eviction every week, with one being voted off by the public. Now Katie's point was that it's a failed social experiment because the views you're allowed to express are limited meaning you can't really see people true behaviour. This is a problem when the point of the experiment is to measure housemates behaviour.

Now in nick's case he was kicked out for breaking rules to do with the nomination and eviction system which is one of the things that big brother has manipulated in order to see how peoples behaviour changes because of it so rules stopping housemates from altering the system are necessary in order to stop them making the experiment pointless.

Also you have to remember that as well as an experiment it's a game show and nick's rule break cheated the game as it helped him advance further with an advantage non of the others had.

[daniel-lewis-1985]

ken and Nick's situations aren't really the same tho are they.
The original social experiment was to see how people behave when cutoff from the outside world and forced to nominate people for eviction every week, with one being voted off by the public. Now Katie's point was that it's a failed social experiment because the views you're allowed to express are limited meaning you can't really see people true behaviour. This is a problem when the point of the experiment is to measure housemates behaviour.

Now in nick's case he was kicked out for breaking rules to do with the nomination and eviction system which is one of the things that big brother has manipulated in order to see how peoples behaviour changes because of it so rules stopping housemates from altering the system are necessary in order to stop them making the experiment pointless.

Also you have to remember that as well as an experiment it's a game show and nick's rule break cheated the game as it helped him advance further with an advantage non of the others had.

Well said :)

[newsbb]

wow, it also made an reaction on me when i heard it, she was spot on.

[Ammi]

..it hasn't been a social experiment for a long time, it's an entertainment show and I doubt that Katie agreed to go in the house for a social experiment but more for the fee she is getting..(and in the original CBBs the celebrities were raising money for charity and receiving no fee..would you want that as well, Katie..)...she says that people should be able to say what they want without being ejected and yet she's censoring herself because she's very much toning herself down from the things she says outside of the house and she didn't like it at all when Perez questioned her about sleeping with a married guy, so she really doesn't believe in freedom of speech at all when it's a criticism of her....

..anyway, it was a dumb thing to say, there obviously has to be boundaries to either abusing other housemates or sections of society otherwise it would also go back to the 'social experiment' of housemates being open to physical and verbal assaults which has happened in the past...

[Marsh.]

..it hasn't been a social experiment for a long time, it's an entertainment show and I doubt that Katie agreed to go in the house for a social experiment but more for the fee she is getting..(and in the original CBBs the celebrities were raising money for charity and receiving no fee..would you want that as well, Katie..)...she says that people should be able to say what they want without being ejected and yet she's censoring herself because she's very much toning herself down from the things she says outside of the house and she didn't like it at all when Perez questioned her about sleeping with a married guy, so she really doesn't believe in freedom of speech at all when it's a criticism of her....

..anyway, it was a dumb thing to say, there obviously has to be boundaries to either abusing other housemates or sections of society otherwise it would also go back to the 'social experiment' of housemates being open to physical and verbal assaults which has happened in the past...

:clap1:


/thread

[the truth]

..it hasn't been a social experiment for a long time, it's an entertainment show and I doubt that Katie agreed to go in the house for a social experiment but more for the fee she is getting..(and in the original CBBs the celebrities were raising money for charity and receiving no fee..would you want that as well, Katie..)...she says that people should be able to say what they want without being ejected and yet she's censoring herself because she's very much toning herself down from the things she says outside of the house and she didn't like it at all when Perez questioned her about sleeping with a married guy, so she really doesn't believe in freedom of speech at all when it's a criticism of her....

..anyway, it was a dumb thing to say, there obviously has to be boundaries to either abusing other housemates or sections of society otherwise it would also go back to the 'social experiment' of housemates being open to physical and verbal assaults which has happened in the past...
Unless its done to a man............ken was bitten bullied verbally abused and mocked by a pack of bullies....just as so many men on this sexist show before, who have been bullied abused hit in the face had their possessions destroyed lied about falsely accused had their cancer their impotency mocked etc etc and nothing has ever been said or even barely said about it.

[Mystic Mock]

Katie censors herself too, if she really was so un-PC she wouldn't only be attacking fat people and gingers, and peoples names, a lot of people do all 3 of them things, it's nothing exactly breakout.

[Mystic Mock]

I wish they had asked ken about muslims

And immigration

Alas we shall never know

Tbh being against any Religion does not make you a racist or prejudiced really, I personally find a lot of the extremists that join these Abrahamic Religions to be barbaric, and backward in the way that they approach certain situations.

And with Katie she seems the type to me that only wants PC took away just so she can be really offensive, I mean she would have it that you would walk down the street and get abused for the colour of your skin, your weight, your height, nationality, Religion, the colour of your hair, your regional accent, why would some people want to remove just because you don't want to be polite? You can still be mean to someone without having to go too personal.

[Ammi]

Unless its done to a man............ken was bitten bullied verbally abused and mocked by a pack of bullies....just as so many men on this sexist show before, who have been bullied abused hit in the face had their possessions destroyed lied about falsely accused had their cancer their impotency mocked etc etc and nothing has ever been said or even barely said about it.

..I can't say that nothing has been said because most things are discussed in detail on forums and social sites etc, as well as being covered by the media..I don't believe it's a gender thing though, it's more the confined environment when emotions are heightened and it often seems to provoke a 'pack' thing...which is also why housemates cannot behave exactly how they want to without any boundaries...

[arista]

She literally just described the state of Big Brother down to a T.

The way she said people should be allowed to express themselves and be evicted by the process was spot on.

This woman responded to an advert in the paper 15 years ago to appear in a social experiment which turned out to be the pilot of BB and she is right in saying BB is totally flawed and again she is 100% spot on when saying people shouldn't be censoring themselves.

Shes just worded what ive been feeling for years.



yes Katie has a good side
Telling us what the rest will not

[Mystic Mock]

The only time BB was man hating was in BB15, week 4's twist proved it, and BBOTS saying how the men in the house have had their balls chopped in the first week is another evidence.

[arista]

..it hasn't been a social experiment for a long time, it's an entertainment show and I doubt that Katie agreed to go in the house for a social experiment but more for the fee she is getting..(and in the original CBBs the celebrities were raising money for charity and receiving no fee..would you want that as well, Katie..)...she says that people should be able to say what they want without being ejected and yet she's censoring herself because she's very much toning herself down from the things she says outside of the house and she didn't like it at all when Perez questioned her about sleeping with a married guy, so she really doesn't believe in freedom of speech at all when it's a criticism of her....

..anyway, it was a dumb thing to say, there obviously has to be boundaries to either abusing other housemates or sections of society otherwise it would also go back to the 'social experiment' of housemates being open to physical and verbal assaults which has happened in the past...


Yes thats it Official
title.


But many view it in
the Way Katie says

[the truth]

..I can't say that nothing has been said because most things are discussed in detail on forums and social sites etc, as well as being covered by the media..I don't believe it's a gender thing though, it's more the confined environment when emotions are heightened and it often seems to provoke a 'pack' thing...which is also why housemates cannot behave exactly how they want to without any boundaries...

Id gladly drop the subject of gender inequality but the women and the presenters keep dragging it into everything. we men have a right to respond without being called sexisy mysoginist pigs. its gone on for years now unabated. until the level of double standards is a disgusting joke. whats next will we be able to kill a man on tv but be called sexist if we talk about it? were not far away from such insanity

[the truth]

Tbh being against any Religion does not make you a racist or prejudiced really, I personally find a lot of the extremists that join these Abrahamic Religions to be barbaric, and backward in the way that they approach certain situations.

And with Katie she seems the type to me that only wants PC took away just so she can be really offensive, I mean she would have it that you would walk down the street and get abused for the colour of your skin, your weight, your height, nationality, Religion, the colour of your hair, your regional accent, why would some people want to remove just because you don't want to be polite? You can still be mean to someone without having to go too personal.

she a pleasant person. but nadia is worse. nadia is dishonest and controlling. she is a wolf in sheeps clothing, a person who demands rights for her friends and women. but doesn't give a damn for those outside her circle. shes a false prophet in every sense of the word. thoroughly dishonest

[Mystic Mock]

Nadia is the type of Liberal that does my head in too The Truth, but Katie's way of being just plain rude to anyone that's different to herself is someone that's very narrow-minded, and just not a very pleasant person at all if all she can do is be negative about people.

[Ammi]

Id gladly drop the subject of gender inequality but the women and the presenters keep dragging it into everything. we men have a right to respond without being called sexisy mysoginist pigs. its gone on for years now unabated. until the level of double standards is a disgusting joke. whats next will we be able to kill a man on tv but be called sexist if we talk about it? were not far away from such insanity


...that's the thing though with it being edited so much, it's more of a 'hero/villain' thing and sometimes it's a male housemate and other times it's a female one and it's encouraged by BB with the editing to make the public 'hate', with no thought for that person when they leave the house...

[Mystic Mock]

...that's the thing though with it being edited so much, it's more of a 'hero/villain' thing and sometimes it's a male housemate and other times it's a female one and it's encouraged by BB with the editing to make the public 'hate', with no thought for that person when they leave the house...

This is 100% true.

[Macie Lightfoot]

The only time BB was man hating was in BB15, week 4's twist proved it

Or perhaps they just wanted a dude evicted to balance out the three women who were already evicted.

[armand.kay]

..it hasn't been a social experiment for a long time, it's an entertainment show and I doubt that Katie agreed to go in the house for a social experiment but more for the fee she is getting..(and in the original CBBs the celebrities were raising money for charity and receiving no fee..would you want that as well, Katie..)...

But Katie never actually said she wants things back to how it was in season 1, people are just assuming that. All she actually did was point out the flaws in the "social experiment", she could think that's its always been flawed since the first ever episode. :shrug:
she says that people should be able to say what they want without being ejected and yet she's censoring herself because she's very much toning herself down from the things she says outside of the house and she didn't like it at all when Perez questioned her about sleeping with a married guy, so she really doesn't believe in freedom of speech at all when it's a criticism of her....

Katie outside the house is obviously very exaggerated version of her true self. All we see of her on the outside is a couple of tweets, a news paper article or a this morning interview or something. We never even really get to see her true personality as she manly uses these formats to express her extreme views. In big brother however she is being filmed 24/7 so it appears as if shes toning down but we're really just seeing her day to day personalty.

Also just because you believe in freedom of speech doesn't mean you have to react positively to whatever anyone says to you it just means that you don't believe they should be prosecuted for what they say. I'm sure Katie didn't expect or wanted big brother to step in and remove Perez from the house when he was grilling her about sleeping with a married man.


..anyway, it was a dumb thing to say, there obviously has to be boundaries to either abusing other housemates or sections of society otherwise it would also go back to the 'social experiment' of housemates being open to physical and verbal assaults which has happened in the past...
She wasn't really calling for there to be no boundaries, like she wasn't upset at all when Jeremy was ejected as he had physically assaulted someone. All ken really did was share his unpopular views and Katie was upset by his removal because she(like I) believes that he should have the right to express his views( views which I am disgusted by btw) without being ejected. You can't really compare someone expressing controversial views to someone physically assaulting another housemate.

[Pincho Paxton]

..it hasn't been a social experiment for a long time, it's an entertainment show and I doubt that Katie agreed to go in the house for a social experiment but more for the fee she is getting..(and in the original CBBs the celebrities were raising money for charity and receiving no fee..would you want that as well, Katie..)...she says that people should be able to say what they want without being ejected and yet she's censoring herself because she's very much toning herself down from the things she says outside of the house and she didn't like it at all when Perez questioned her about sleeping with a married guy, so she really doesn't believe in freedom of speech at all when it's a criticism of her....

..anyway, it was a dumb thing to say, there obviously has to be boundaries to either abusing other housemates or sections of society otherwise it would also go back to the 'social experiment' of housemates being open to physical and verbal assaults which has happened in the past...

A social experiment doesn't have to be called a social experiment, the wording isn't important. What is important is that people are taken from normal life, and put into a house with different rules to normal life. That automatically makes it a social experiment no matter what you call the show.

[the truth]

this show has zero value as a social experiment or anything else simply because of the bias shown by producers and the endless manipulation. I believe it would be infinitely better if the producers were even handed fair and far less intrusive

[Chuckyegg]

It is hilarious that anyone would call this a social experiment.

[Stevep]

Anyone who thinks this is or ever was a 'social experiment' is way off point, it's an entertainment show. No more, no less.

It was given the tag 'social experiment' to give itself a cloak of intrigue, a pull to draw viewers in. It's no more a social experiment than what I'm A Celeb is.

Hopkins only mouthed off because she feels it's what her 'free speech' character would most likely say.

[Tip]

It's entertainment.

If there is any social experiment (hardly of any scientific worth so seems a bit grand to call it that) it includes all the social (viewer) reactions, social norms and broadcasting standards and biases.

Basically people like to hate/love, get outraged, get amused and seem to use the program as therapy for their various difficulties with society and people. That's the only interesting part of the social "experiment".

[the truth]

its not entertainment, its contrived drivel that is very dangerous as it takes everything out of context and creates serious problems for individuals. it creates massive media backlash that can destroy lives with its hysterical nonsense. if left alone it could have been a truly brilliant show and a great tribute to the legendary George orwell

[kirklancaster]

She literally just described the state of Big Brother down to a T.

The way she said people should be allowed to express themselves and be evicted by the process was spot on.

This woman responded to an advert in the paper 15 years ago to appear in a social experiment which turned out to be the pilot of BB and she is right in saying BB is totally flawed and again she is 100% spot on when saying people shouldn't be censoring themselves.

Shes just worded what ive been feeling for years.

I agree with you and Katie Hopkins.

When Big Brother was first envisaged, the 'Social Experiment' aspect was indeed claimed and it was a fascinating prospect; How would 'normal' people cope and react living under the 24/7 scrutiny of CCTV cameras in a 'microcosm' of real life?

Unfortunately, we will never know, because a genuine social experiment is not compatible with any kind of TV show.

In ‘real life’ people use the ‘N’ word in everyday conversations, as well as other terms like ‘Polack’, Pakki and ‘Yank’ and ‘Chinkie’ – and most of the time not with racist intent.

In real life, every weekend in our Cities, young women regularly expose their breasts or backsides in public, and young men regularly expose their cocks or backsides in public - and not always fuelled by drink.

In real life men of all ages ogle women’s arses and other parts of their anatomy.

In real life, people do not self censor their speech or behaviour, whilst in the BB house housemates are forced to.

But the above reasons are not the only reasons why the social experiment element of the show will never really work, because there is also the fact that with both CBB and BB, the housemates are only too aware of the cameras and capitalise on their presence to project a false ‘nice’ or ‘interesting’ persona which they hope will be ‘swallowed’ by the viewing public and reflected in their voting.

The only successful element of the show’s claim to be part social experiment, is in the fact that in the real world it can take months, if not years, to discover that certain people are ‘fake’; ‘false friends’ who turn out to be backstabbers and liars for example, whereas in the ‘microcosm’ of the house, facades slip and false personas become exposed within days.

How often do we ‘hate’ one person upon entry and end up liking them as the show progresses, and vice versa with people who we previously ‘liked’?