Why didn't they show Jack's full speech?

[Ashley.]

Jack's speech was about 2 minutes long and they showed us the start and the end of it. What the hell? Why are they favouring this lump?

[jackc1806]

Time probably

[hannah.]

i didn't know that and it was bad enough as is. They've been favouring him since the start :sleep:

[cookiemonster]

your title and post say the opposite thing

but his speech was only 20 seconds? thank god for that

[Ashley.]

your title and post say the opposite thing

but his speech was only 20 seconds? thank god for that

- They didn't show Jack's full speech

- They only showed the start and end of it

What's the problem?

[hannah.]

- They didn't show Jack's full speech

- They only showed the start and end of it

What's the problem?

I think they meant 'if they were favouring him they'd have shown the whole thing'

[hannah.]

which is obv not the case anyway because those 10 or whatever seconds were so cringe. 2mins I don't think I could have coped

[cookiemonster]

yeh. it's not favouring him, only showing the start and end is it. who wanted to see that anyway, 20 seconds was enough

[Ashley.]

I think they meant 'if they were favouring him they'd have shown the whole thing'

No, because showing the whole thing would've given the viewers more reason to hate him. The producers are protecting him by not showing the entire thing.

[Rorkimaru]

The full speech is probably my highlight of the whole show so far. It was just such a perfectly laid trap that he annihilated himself in. And what do they do? Cut it to fit in those awful contrived interviews. Such a shame. At least we got to see it online.

[rusticgal]

The short version was cringe enough...I think I would have disappeared into my sofa had I heard the whole thing..:joker:

[hannah.]

No, because showing the whole thing would've given the viewers more reason to hate him. The producers are protecting him by not showing the entire thing.

Less snappy please, I understood what you meant but was explaining what CookieMonster meant (see their post above) :nono::nono::nono: