[MassiveTruck]

Originally posted by BB22

Quite. But it simply does not follow from that that there is any effort whatsoever to influence the eviction vote.

No. You have interpreted those incidents as examples of the phenomenon you are trying to provide evidence for. I see no reason to believe that any of those incidents involved the attempts by the programme makers to influence the public vote.

Absolutely. Yet it still does not follow from that that the programme is edited in order to influence the vote.

As I have pointed out on numerous occasion, it is utterly preposterous to suggest that Channel 4 would cancel the biggest event of their television week to "save" any Housemate. Nor is there any evidence to suggest that such an unlikely event took place.

I am happy to review any evidence of "hatchet jobs" or attempts to influence the vote but so far none has been presented. All we have is a series of anecdotes of dubious merit plus a few highly questionable interpretations.

So what is your explanation for keeping Nikki in the house, or returning her to the house? Or the constant need to up Mikey's reputation while pushing Rachel's lower last season. Saving Sree earlier in the season until a story was available.

You may call it dubious but there is evidently a story there - otherwise what do we have in it's place? Will the housemates play ball?

In BB8, Chanelle left and after the house next door had been done and all romances were over - the only think left was Brian and Sam or Amanda (can't remember which) and it went stale. There was no storyline left at all.

In BB9 the switchover came in bringing Sara into prominence.

The difference, what I am trying to say is, either you think that these people are like this or stressors and influences are projected onto them to react. They are given a scenario where they will and must behave in accordance to what is available.

In this case, you need only look at other housemates who do nothing while others do something. You give a housemate power, like Noirin gained through Marcus/Siavash and they will start to have romances and such to show their power. Even if in Big Brothers eyes this will backfire as it always does.

Your view is these things just happen but for all we know in life - nothing, just happens and in this house things are controlled.

The whole idea of hatchet jobs kicked into gear when Jon and Federico - two of the biggest draws of BB4 were removed along with Anouska (who I disliked) on the first night of BB4. They removed big ratings boosters and were left with people who just read books and Cameron who was unbelievably dull.

So as much as you may believe it's dubious - numerous events in the past show how easily removable housemates have been saved for the show's ratings.

On top of this we have numerous interviews from producers and ex housemates. We have books written about this as well as articles that indicate that romances and storylines are encouraged. Housemates have come out of the diary room saying, they keep asking about a certain (storyline based) housemate and Rodrigo even said this season openly that if they want some material for the next days highlights, they call him but otherwise they don't even call him at all.

Other evidence of this came from Sree who said clearly that Marcus had argued with production staff and doesn't listen to them. Another factor of the intervention that production has on the show and what occurs.

I know some fans would love to believe that producers don't intervene but apart from this being illogical on the basis of what evidence we have, collectively, it also is illogical on the basis of why we have producers in the first place. They are there to produce and encourage that the show has continuity and that is why they do hatchet jobs.