Quote:
Originally Posted by vesavius
Remember 'You Decide'?
Short of actual physical violence that should always be the case, not removing HMs because 'members of the public may be offended'. Why bother voting when all you have on offer is an ideologically approved shortlist of who the production team and RedditX deems appropriate for mass consumption?
Vote between Daley, Jack, and Chris! Wo0o0o0h, interesting.
Someone is always offended. About everything. Every single interest group has an axe to grind. It never ends. You can't run an actually decent version of BB like that.
I watch BB for human behaviour, it's highs and lows, not for some enactment of a sanitised vision of some post Stalinist dystopia where everyone is grimace smiling and afraid to say anything while policing the HM next to them in case THEY say something that is worth social credit points.
Chris! Quickly say "you can't use that word" multiple times so that Reddit sees you and thinks you are one of them!"
Unless they are physically assaulting someone in any sense, leave them in and let the public decide.
|
Genuine question, let's say on the civilian Big Brother there is an out and out homophobe, and throughout their stay they're just grossly homophobic. That person then goes on to win a lot of money for the homophobia, and it's voted for by the public, so you have a homophobe rewarded for homophobic behaviour by fellow homophobes and other people who think words don't matter.
Swap out homophobe for racist or sexist. Can you not see why such a result would be dangerous in giving people carte blanch to act in the same way.
I get what you're saying, and think the only think worth Mickey being removed for was the tie you up comment, but television can't be seen to be rewarding or promoting hateful rhetoric. It's puts real people in real danger.