[Conzors]

Do You Think The Voting Is A Fix, Like Moist Other Tv Shows?

I Dont?

Do You?

[phil1715]

Well to be honest I felt asthough the thing with Suzie was a fix because she had auditioned for BB before and she had her husband buy her loads of Kit Kats. Don't tell me that was just luck.

[Conzors]

yeh i agree, but do you think she got boo-d cos the public thought that?

[phil1715]

Definately. After all it is funny how the "good looking" woman gets in.

[Conzors]

i know, and she was posh aswell!

and broing

[Conzors]

cm,on ppl

i need more lol

[Arneldo]

It is possble that some votes where not counted, but since BB usally closes the lines a good few mins before, i doubt it happens as usally as it does on the ITV shows.

[Conzors]

i agree -]

[Conzors]

do you think shilpa winning was a fix?

[andybigbro]

No i honestly dont

[Conzors]

I Dont Either

[Red Moon]

In the case of Big Brother no. It is one of the few shows that has an outside body that checks the voting.

[Bells]

There are always going to be some who say it is even if it isn't though. It's just one of those things.

[Ruth]

I don't think it's a fix as such. But I definitely think that Endemol manipulate situations because they want certain housemates kept in, and certain housemates chucked out.

[Mrluvaluva]

When Susie was picked to go in the house, in the style of a lottery draw. When the numbered ball was picked out, wasn't there a bit of a furore as there was no independent adjudicator present at the time? That's why people said it was a fix.

[the_chosen_one]

Noooooooooo it can't be. Its reality tv. If they fixed the voting what would be the point of us phoning up. Not a fix.

[Stentionhouse]

BB is heavily manipulated by the producers. By I don't think it's blatantly fixed, in that they lie about the number of votes cast.

[Stentionhouse]

Yep, there was. And there was also a rumpus over the fact that Aisleyne picked one ball but BB said it hadn't been done right and made her put it back and choose another.

Originally posted by MrLuvaLuva
When Susie was picked to go in the house, in the style of a lottery draw. When the numbered ball was picked out, wasn't there a bit of a furore as there was no independent adjudicator present at the time? That's why people said it was a fix.

[nodisharmony]

Originally posted by Conzors
do you think shilpa winning was a fix?

No I don't!!

She was voted to win by the majority and that is that.

I also can't see any point in fixing who should win and who shouldn't win.

When you watch a show like the X-Factor or another talent show. I feel that there could be a motive for fixing.

But for Big Brother or CBB, there is no motive and I agree totally that "no fixing" is the correct conclusion.


nodisharmony

[spacebandit]

Yes

Due to the power of the edit,
its easy to spot the winner - they don't get punished for things, or if they're really really blatant - the "punishmnet" takes jokey form.

Rules are broken to placate them.
More supplies, more fags etc etc.


In any week where they are up for eviction they are edited well, weeks they are not, the edit shows them being "naughty" - so the sheep don't get suspicious, and the claim of "fair editing for all" can be trotted out.

the bookies knew BB3 was fixed and stop taking bets on it.
except for Paddy power, which IMO are essentially Endemols Bookie, I mean the number of times they "predict" who has been nominated before the actual noms are made public is more than a little suspicious.

Practically everyone knew Pete had won last year as he was walking in -
only the braindead Nikki fans thought otherwise, and you all know that to be true.

he was picked to win, and they damn well edited him accordingly, set him up for a "love story", engineered putting the ex prostitute back in to carry it on nad even threw God in at the end in the most shameful, risible and pathetic development of reality TV - ever.


Other than for Series 1 the winner is picked from the getgo - then it was realised just how much ancilliary money could be made.