Do you believe in "bad editing"?

[azi]

I'm seeing a lot of people (mostly Georgina's fans) accusing BB of giving her a "bad edit".
This always happens every series.
But do you actually believe it?

I mean they can't really edit someone as someone they are not. They just decide what to show.
And in Georgina's case she hasn't been giving them good material.

However in the first eviction I noticed how they tried to "influence" the viewers to vote her out in order to save Marco. Same as last year with Sarah.

https://media.giphy.com/media/BgJumFO4ZuV7a/giphy.gif

Thoughts?

[Lostie!]

Yeah bad editing definitely exists, it's just that it's an overused excuse.

I remember in BB11 there was a night when John James got a bit too vigorous when playing around with Sunshine, she ended up hurt but the other HMs just accused her of being over dramatic and trying to get people against John James (and this is how the show portrayed it too). On Big Mouth after she was evicted she showed a severe awful looking carpet burn on her thigh which you'd never have known she had from the highlights (the highlights that happened to air the night before she was evicted).

So yeah it definitely happens, but people do rely on that as an excuse far too often when it's not actually the case.

[hot2go]

I believe in bad mouths and no amount of editing can fake those

[reece(:]

Yes, Natalie was a victim of bad editing as they only showed her angry moments.

[dopegatsby]

Tinfoil hat donned, bb posted a clip on their website of Georgina basically making up with Laura and Evelyn but didn't air it on last night's hls. Also from the news recap from yesterday did not air her in the diary room saying how she would want to try with Jackson on the outside. These were last night's only. I guess it's up for interpretation but I do think they are playing up Georgina's bad traits and none of her redeemable ones for reaction since she's all tellymix or the bbuk twitter posts about.

Same with Natalie. I thought she was hysterical.

[joeysteele]

Yes, especially when it comes to an eviction, I think BB control a lot of that by really bad editing for some housemates.

[Jack_]

Yes, it's a factor in pretty much all edited reality television shows.

That said, without live feed there's no possible way to cross check the edit with reality so I'm always baffled and annoyed when people overuse the 'yeah well they're probably just not showing x and y but I bet they're great housemates!', it's completely pointless conjecture. If they were doing stuff they'd be shown, and supporting housemates based off of imaginary footage that's all hypothetical is pretty stupid as far as I'm concerned, why evict a housemate you know is delivering on the gamble that someone else will?

Like I said, it's different when there's live feed because you know how people are truly being portrayed - but without it all we have to go off and trust is the edit, there's no point basing our opinions off anything else

[y.winter]

If the viewers fall for it easily, then well, I blame them more than the production tbh.

I don't think that Georgina is a victim of a bad editing, she's victim of her own action. And as for Natalie, even with a good editing she's still a nasty and rude woman - being nice and funny at times wouldn't have saved her.

[Ashley.]

I think it's a case of the producers attempting to shape storylines around the housemates which, as Jack said, seems to be the case for the majority of reality television. It's not necessarily a "bad edit", but they may attempt to portray someone in a certain light, such as a villain, or in Georgina's case the "stereotypical controlling girlfriend".

[Maru]

Really any edit is not objective, therefore could be considered "bad". How can they possibly provide full context in a 45 minute show?

[Jan S]

this is one of the reasons i used to like watching the 24 hour feed on tv - though all that birdsong and aeroplanes was frustrating :D

it's also one of the aspects to watching BB i enjoy: seeing how BB manipulates the viewers as well as the housemates.

having said that, when georgina comes out with the kind of comments she made to jackson as 'feedback' when he was called into the office, BB doesn't have to do anything except grin at classic footage in the can. and how passive-aggressive was that? jackson was damned if he did, damned if he didn't - she's uber controlling.

[vesavius]

But do you actually believe it?


I 100% believe in the power of the edit. And image manipulation. And (under C5) the scripted direction of the HMs.

The edit is clearly used to push some HMs and get rid of others. If the production team were on the Grinch's side a lot of her being a manipulative entitled bitter harpy would have been not used.

BUT, they aren't, and it was.

[vesavius]

this is one of the reasons i used to like watching the 24 hour feed on tv - though all that birdsong and aeroplanes was frustrating :D


Indeed. LF kept them a lot more honest. Modern BB doesn't do honest though, sadly.

[Jan S]

If the viewers fall for it easily, then well, I blame them more than the production tbh.

I don't think that Georgina is a victim of a bad editing, she's victim of her own action. And as for Natalie, even with a good editing she's still a nasty and rude woman - being nice and funny at times wouldn't have saved her.
^^THIS!

[vesavius]

Yes, Natalie was a victim of bad editing as they only showed her angry moments.

Agreed.

[Marsh.]

Of course there's such a thing as a bad edit, as others have said, context to a situation is key.

However, when it comes to outright bad actions like Daley or Helen Wood's behaviour then it's not about an edit, they couldn't show them doing awful things unless they were doing awful things.

So it's a bit of both.

[starry]

They may not show all a scene or what the build up was, and so not show what someone is responding to or more sides to what's happening. They can even put in a reaction shot which isn't actually a reaction to what it's purported to be. They can just concentrate on when someone is unhappy than when they are more relaxed. Vote to evict is about building up the hatred, and the audience is ready exactly for that, all they need are clues as to who the target of the week is.

[Vicky.]

I definitely believe in bad editing. It was most blatant in bb12, they used to actually splice convos to mask it sound like it was about something else. Was proved by watching the FB vids at the time..then watching the HL show

[vesavius]

I definitely believe in bad editing. It was most blatant in bb12, they used to actually splice convos to mask it sound like it was about something else. Was proved by watching the FB vids at the time..then watching the HL show

Was this the same time when all that evidence came out of them using video editing to splice together different shots taken at different times to remove from and add people to situations?

It's amazing that folks still think that they are getting an honest view of events, tbh.

[Rob!]

Not nessecerily bad editing but bad combilating is definitely a problem that every single housemate faces. Georgina is a prime example - I imagine it's very easy to compile all the times she's miserable but there must be moments where she's happy and enjoying herself or everybody would hate her.

[Vicky.]

Was this the same time when all that evidence came out of them using video editing to splice together different shots taken at different times to remove from and add people to situations?

It's amazing that folks still think that they are getting an honest view of events, tbh.

I'm not sure...they were cutting the cameras away from people when they were speaking and adding audio from a different time in the day to make it seem like it was part of the same convo. Also cut housemates off mid-sentence. Never seen anything of them adding extra people to scenes and that though

I know LF wasn't too good, but it gave a much better picture of how things actually are...though they can edit that down too really the amount of birdsong and garden shots there used to be :bored:

[vesavius]

I'm not sure...they were cutting the cameras away from people when they were speaking and adding audio from a different time in the day to make it seem like it was part of the same convo. Also cut housemates off mid-sentence. Never seen anything of them adding extra people to scenes and that though

I know LF wasn't too good, but it gave a much better picture of how things actually are...though they can edit that down too really the amount of birdsong and garden shots there used to be :bored:

Yeah, it was a few years back, when we had LF, and used an argument in the garden to demonstrate how they used digital manipulation to remove HMs that they didn't want present by simply replacing half the screen with another shot from the same camera taken at a different time.

I loved LF, not in the least for how it helped keep them honest. Plus, the bedroom at night was always the funniest part of the show and 90% of it was never used in the HL show.

[Mystic Mock]

When there used to be Live Feed (even in BB10) you would notice that there was a difference between highlight footage and Live Feed footage.

In particular Charley Uchea could actually be civil in BB8, and rarely started any of the arguments, but the highlights just showed you her starting the arguments all of the time and played her up as a stereotype.

Freddie said that he thought that he was gonna lose to Marcus in BB10 on Live Feed, yet the highlights just showed him being miserable and acting arrogant all week about taking on Marcus.

Luke and Rebecca had fun on the Live Feed, yet all they showed them being like on the highlights was moody bitches.

So yes I do believe in bad editing and it definitely could've clouded my judgement of Housemates on Ch5 that I might've otherwise liked.

[Mystic Mock]

Oh and in BB8 they never showed Gerry shoving Charley in the Bedroom on the highlights, this was about a week before she called him a paedophile so it wasn't understandable like that.

[Strictly Jake]

Yes I do believe in bad editing! Yeah if someone does something bad then it's their own fault and they can be judged on it but they may have had lots of good moments that day too that don't get shown, therefore it's bad editing whereas a different housemate may have done one good thing that day and tons of bad things and only the good thing is shown, or they may decide not to show a housemate at all if they don't want to

Read Ben eltons dead famous! The editing in that is so accurate

[nonstop]

Yes.

24/7 footage can be manipulated into whatever view the editor chooses.

[coffee]

Bad editing is 100% real but i liked Georgina's edit haha

[Jamie89]

Everyone has good and bad sides so I definitely think the edit can be manipulated to make someone look worse than actually are.

[DrunkerThanMoses]

I mean the editors cant edit someones action, if they come across as a bitch or a arsehole, the editors for sure will highlight it because its a entertainment show and they need a villain. Sure they might not highlight their good moments because they cant show them as not the villain.

Georgina's edit was basically the same through out, she came across as a miserable and moaning bitch since week 1, the difference being in week 1 she had Marco and Emma jumping down her throats which made her seen as some sort of victim. But now since Jackson returned and she formed a clique, she went from the victim status to queen bitch, but she still had the same edit of miserable and moaning.

[Tom4784]

I think it happens sometimes. There's been quite a few times that someone who is perceived as boring on the outside has been seen as the life of the house by the other HMs.

I don't think Georgina is a victim of bad editing though.

[Jason.]

I think Lea BB7 was a victim of bad-editing. When everybody came out of the house they were surprised at how she'd come across as a crying, controlling, paranoid wreck when in reality she played the mother role in the house or something.

[Beso]

No.

Take georgina for instance, most people liked her for her bitchyness so how can it be a bad edit.