[jaxie]

Should Emma have been given a spot on Bots or should removed mean removed, no interviews, here's your bag, off you go?

I think she should have been given her bags and shown the back door.

[Ellen]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Should Emma have been given a spot on Bots or should removed mean removed, no interviews, here's your bag, off you go?

I think she should have been given her bags and shown the back door.

I agree, she should have had no interview as she was ejected.

[Jamie89]

Yes because her fans want to see her so ultimately it's good for the audience and good for the show. Being removed means you don't get a proper eviction or interview on the main show, so that's the punishment for the HM, I don't see any point in also punishing the fans by banning them from bots as well. Bots is such a small audience it's not like it's good exposure for the HM, or will benefit them greatly, it only really serves to please the hardcore fan base.

[kirklancaster]

Franky my dear- The less I am subjected to her OTT infantile screeching, the better.

[Jan S]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Should Emma have been given a spot on Bots or should removed mean removed, no interviews, here's your bag, off you go?

I think she should have been given her bags and shown the back door.

totally agree

this should apply to all of them - i think it used to, as break-outs didn't get the chance to come back on BOTS some years back but i guess it changed.

break out? buh-bye, no coverage, no fee

demand to leave? open the door, buh-bye, no further airtime, no chance to return to the house, no fee


this way we'd cut back on the fake nonsense and only those who really can't take it will go. maybe housemates will concentrate more on being good people to live with, get stuck into tasks, and generally maybe we'd get a better calibre of inmates ...erm, housemates.