Quote:
Originally Posted by Indy
That doesn't really stand up to a vote to save. If you voted for the other person, your money wasn't wasted - they're still in the house (unless they've since been evicted the 2nd time around).
I do think if they put hm's back in, it's one thing that should be done like the US show, but it would destroy BOTS and all the other post-show publicity. Pretty much every year on BBUS, about a month in, there's an audience vote or an evictees only competition to put someone back into the house, but all of the evicted hm's to that point are kept sequestered in a hotel or rented house. They have no tv, news, internet, contact with non-show people, and more importantly, no post-show interviews with anyone not directly affiliated with the show (they'd get the Brian interview, but nothing after that). After the vote/comp, all the ones who don't get back in get to go home, do interviews with the media, etc.
|
I don't go with all that, sorry, people voting to save,some are likely voting and spending more to save housemates especially when more than 2 are up for eviction.
All that time and money spent does not in any way negate the fact that the evicted housemate has been evicted by the public, is therefore at that point the one who got the least time and money spent on them by the public, whereby they get evicted.
To save a housemate/s the public are actually spending more to save their favourites and get the one they least like out.
If the house was full of evicted housemates, that the public felt unable to support strongly,it could well be that very little revenue would then be generated for BB and Channel 5 too.
As to your point as to bbbots being ruined, well that would a good thing for me if their role was diminished greatly, I would rather have another hours of highlights or live feed for an hour than bbbots this series and Emma's biased audiences and pannellists who I think half the time don't even watch the show anyway,just bits so they can appear to make an informed comment.