Lowest Viewing figures ever...
 

Taken from the Independent Newspaper website
* BB1: 4.7m/26 per cent share

* BB2: 4.6m/24 per cent share

* BB3: 5.8m/28 per cent share

* BB4: 4.6m/22 per cent share

* BB5: 5.0m/25 per cent share

* BB6: 4.4m/22 per cent share (not consolidated, does not include tonight's final)

This shows that this BB has had the lowest viewing figures of them all.
This I guess will be a combination of various factors, including
- people have more and more alternative channels to watch every year
- people are generally moving away from reality TV show (some are fed up with the idea - it's no longer a novelty)
- the BB show has been bad this year, due to the format being messed around too much and the housemates being poor.

Why do you think the numbers have gone down?

Source: http://news.independent.co.uk/media/article305345.ece

Please remember to add a link to the new story in the post

I agree with the reasons you just said

But so long as Big Brother is cash cow for Channel 4, they will keep on transmitting it.

It's cheap television. All they need to build a house, which is a lot cheaper than hiring expensive actors and sending them to glamourous filming locations to make a classy drama.

Not only that but there are so many ways for Channel 4 to make money: merchandise, money from the calls/text, sponsorship and the chance to fill the airwaves of two channels.

So long as it makes money for C4 they will carry on with BB. In spite of my cynacism, still like BB!

The reason viewing figures are lower is because BB6 is/was rubbish compared to previous years.

The only reason they are as high as they are will be because BB faithfulls like me keep watching in the hope that it will get better...This year it did not. I can only grade it as 99% rubbish this year.....:devil:

Why do you think this year in particular was rubbish? Awful housemates?

Nah we had good housemates but they soon got evicted by the silly public and then people turned off because their fav went and not many others could entertain them.

I think the housemates at the start had to many big characters and some similar characters like kemal and makosi...i dont see why we needed them both..

I think Big Brother has messed around with the nominations too much - the first week, it was Roberto, Sam and Makosi who got the most votes (I think), but Makosi's mission meant that she had to choose who was up. Fair enough, but it meant that the two people who were up wouldn't have been normally. Then we had the whole 'optional nominations' thing, then there was the nominating who you want to save. I think there was too many twists and turns.

Also, I don't like all the secret missions - more group tasks were what was needed, rather than secret missions.

The secret garden was a daft idea - I think new housemates should only be brought in if someone leaves.

And although I've said this before, I'll say it again...too many of the housemates were very OTT, and were typical stereotypes. I would like to see housemates that viewers can identify with, like in the earlier series. Regular people, with big personalities.

Not so much the housemates but BB turning it in to an 11 week long kindergarden with over the top childishness that beggars belief. The house mates could have been better but were over manipulated by BB so we never really got to know them for real......Most story lines were BB generated instead of being BB enhanced as things develop of their own accord.

BB has messed with the purity of the format one step to far...:devil:

Sorry my last post sounded like a right moan! There have been some great moments in this series, but I got bored of it, especially after Science left.

Just more TV to watch every night.