[Beetlejuice]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

And the feeds throughout 8 and 9 which dropped just as the main shows did. Then the online coverage for BB14 which was dropped after the series ended because.... you guessed it, lack of viewers.

I don't believe anyone has ever given that reason actually. I suspect the Daley incident didn't help in the minds of the people making these decisions. The issue with the live coverage during the Channel 4 one certainly had something to do with the increase in regulations for television.

Did it rise significantly or was it hovering around the same marks as before and floating up and down? Wiki tells me the latter.

You'd have to define a significant rise. The fact is week 2 and 3 were lower than the weeks that followed. That's quite unusual.

Did the live feed attract viewers other than the hardcore, forum browsing variety? The producer's response and subsequent axing of it tells me no.

Who can answer that question. The fact is though that even if only hardcore fans are watching, that means they are talking about it much more on forums and social networking sites and word of mouth always helps.

So did the viewing figures rise and stay at 1.8 in the last couple of weeks because of live feed or because of the Hazel/Daley drama and the subsequent bitchfests with Gina?

Daley was ejected in week 5. It maintained a 1.8+ rating all the way to week 9.

Who needs that when they can simply nominate in front of one another or not nominate at all and let the producers do the choosing?

The reason for it is that it would get the viewers onto the website to watch things unfold live.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Beetlejuice

I don't believe anyone has ever given that reason actually.

That has been the reason ever since the move to channel 5. Lack of interest makes it completely not worth it.

[Beetlejuice]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

That has been the reason ever since the move to channel 5. Lack of interest makes it completely not worth it.

Show me someone involved in Channel 5 giving that as the reason for anything other than the axing of the 7 pm live coverage.

[Rob!]

Originally Posted by Beetlejuice

Show me someone involved in Channel 5 giving that as the reason for anything other than the axing of the 7 pm live coverage.

You do realise that the live feed that was shown on 5* was getting 70k for the majority of it's run and then towards the end was going as low as 8k?

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Beetlejuice

Show me someone involved in Channel 5 giving that as the reason for anything other than the axing of the 7 pm live coverage.

I really don't care to search at this time in the morning. Maybe search the terms in google might bring stuff up.

But it's certainly not a bizarre notion that it's not worth the money having a 24/7 feed for a show thats life span is spinning out.

[Jay_Roberts441]

With the falling ratings and negative press and reaction for BB16 I think instead of Channel 5 axing the civillian BB just yet they could change the format and change the times of year BB is run in 2016 and see if running the civillian series in January followed by a CBB is better, also stick to 75 days for BB and 31 days for CBB.

Say for example:

2015:
CBB16: 3 Aug - 31 Aug (31 days)

2016:
BB17: 4 Jan - 18 Mar (75 days)
CBB17: 6 Apr - 6 May (31 days)
CBB18: 31 Aug - 30 Sept (31 days)

Big gap between CBB17 & CBB18 due to:

Euro 2016 from 10 June 2016 to 10 July 2016
Olympics from 5 August 2016 to 21 August 2016

[Rob!]

There has never been a live feed for the Diary room even in the show's hey day.

[Beetlejuice]

Originally Posted by Rob!

There has never been a live feed for the Diary room even in the show's hey day.

You're right. I was suggesting that as an extra they could do to get more people involved. I really do think creating a great modern website is the key to the future for BB if there is to be one.

They did do live nominations on E4 for one series I can't remember which.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Beetlejuice

They did do live nominations on E4 for one series I can't remember which.

I really don't think they did.

Apart from special occasions when they would nominate live in a show presented by Davina. Such as the timed nominations in BB10 and CBB7.

[Beetlejuice]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

I really don't think they did.

Apart from special occasions when they would nominate live in a show presented by Davina. Such as the timed nominations in BB10 and CBB7.

Pretty sure there was one series with live nominations on E4

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Beetlejuice

Pretty sure there was one series with live nominations on E4

Which series would this be?

They used to announce nominations results to the house live on BBLB?

[Rob!]

I really think a year's break wouldn't do any harm. Just give them a chance to recharge and come up with something completely original. The fact that C5 have aired SO many series of BB compared to Channel 4 suggests that they have simply run out of ideas. Maybe a break and a relaunch is what could help it, but the question is whether they think it's worth it.

[abhorson]

Could they just not be radical. And whoever was up for eviction (whether two or three etc) be the ones up, and leave it to the GBP.

Not difficult.

[Rob!]

I remember they did live noms from the Diary room ONCE in Julie Goodyears series but it failed massively as it was only on for half an hour and they spent the entire time getting Julie to clarify her nominations and to get some bitchier reasons out of her.

[Marsh.]

Anyway, found something...

Ford claimed that people had "moved on" from watching the live feed and cited a drop in numbers of live feed viewers in the later Channel 4 years as a primary reason for the decision.

"We could have done it if we wanted to," he said during a Q&A session at the Edinburgh TV Festival. "Channel 4 did do live streaming, but then they did less and less and less, then it became subscription so it hasn't completely changed radically.

"There was a time when people sleeping or something major happening was the most interesting thing and you had to watch Big Brother['s live feed], but then we all moved on."

Ford said that they had opted to spend the cash on Facebook and Twitter applications and the biggest ever house rather than the feed.

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/s149/...pfV4cDhb6rNzOZ

Axed because of low figures, low figures means waste of cash so the money was placed elsewhere.

Pretty much the obvious.

[Beetlejuice]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Anyway, found something...



http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/s149/...pfV4cDhb6rNzOZ

Axed because of low figures, low figures means waste of cash so the money was placed elsewhere.

Pretty much the obvious.

No one denies less people watch it now. The point is can you keep the viewers you still have without it... And they are now losing them each year. And the complaint is the same every year. And Jeff Ford stated clearly they could have done the live feed but chose instead to put the money into things that have not worked.

And there is no reason it cannot be put on the website. FFS they give housemates in secret rooms a chance to watch it every bloody year. It's not as if there isn't a 24/7 feed going all the time.

And the benefit to the website it could bring could help with costs and possibly lead to a lot more people visiting the site.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Beetlejuice

No one denies less people watch it now. The point is can you keep the viewers you still have without it... And they are now losing them each year.

Uh....

1) I provided those links because you said Jeff Ford said cost WASN'T the issue. Those articles quite clearly state it was the issue. It wasn't worth the money with no one watching it.

2) Of course they can keep hold of viewers without it, they've done it before. The entire show being bollocks is pushing the viewers away, not simply a lack of live feed, which when provided has shown doesn't attract many viewers at all.

And there is no reason it cannot be put on the website. FFS they give housemates in secret rooms a chance to watch it every bloody year. It's not as if there isn't a 24/7 feed going all the time.

Well unless you actually work for them at Elstree or are involved in commissioning at channel 5 then this doesn't really add much.
The housemates watching a screen in a secret room is not the same as broadcasting live footage over television or the internet.

Not to mention the feed for the housemates in a secret room does not require all of the filtering/monitoring/costs that a public feed would require. They don't just click a button and that's it forever.

[Beetlejuice]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Uh....

1) I provided those links because you said Jeff Ford said cost WASN'T the issue. Those articles quite clearly state it was the issue. It wasn't worth the money with no one watching it.

People were watching it. Just less. But then less people would be watching it when you have less viewers in general. Ford clearly stated they could have done it but chose instead to put money into other things. Those other things failed miserably. And the lack of the live coverage has left fans disappointed with the show ever since and they have struggled to get involved in it.

2) Of course they can keep hold of viewers without it, they've done it before.

No, they haven't. The viewing figures have been going down every year with the one exception of BB14. The series with the extra coverage.

The entire show being bollocks is pushing the viewers away, not simply a lack of live feed, which when provided has shown doesn't attract many viewers at all.

And I must repeat the same argument again to you... The pointless twists, the desperate stunts, the reliance this year on past housemates. All the things that make the show bollocks comes from one simple problem... No one can get to know the housemates anymore and the show lacks all of the immediacy it once had. As a result they feel they have to constantly interfere with it to a point that is offputting.

[Jason.]

Originally Posted by Beetlejuice

No, they haven't. The viewing figures have been going down every year with the one exception of BB14. The series with the extra coverage.

Incorrect.

BB12 averaged 1.55m, then BB13 came along and averaged 1.64m. That's a slight increase. Despite, the Olympics slashing the ratings.

BB13 would've done better than BB14, had the Olympics, and the fact that only 3 people watched Caroline's eviction not ruined it.

BB14 then averaged 1.9m. Which is another increase.
BB15 averaged 1.57m. A 0.3m decrease, but still higher than BB12. And a reasonable rating.

It's this year that the ratings are seriously plummeting, to the low end of 1m. And are not on par with the loyal 1.6m audience that were present in 2011-2014.

[GLENN BILL BB7]

Would everyone prefer BB if there was no nominations and everyone was just up every week but I think that would be too boring?

[Jason.]

Originally Posted by GLENN BILL BB7

Would everyone prefer BB if there was no nominations and everyone was just up every week but I think that would be too boring?

Like I'm A Celeb?
It would be more of a popularity contest, that way.

But nominations is fundamental.

[Jason.]

The reason why viewers are decreasing every year, particularly in the last two years is because of the decrease in quality of the show. The production is to blame for that.

BB14, despite being the highest rated civilian series has ironically damaged Big Brother, as it's pretty much set the stone for every future series that has come.

BB15 came along a year later, and set the stone for the last 2 CBB's as well.

[GLENN BILL BB7]

Originally Posted by BB6

Like I'm A Celeb?
It would be more of a popularity contest, that way.

But nominations is fundamental.

Yea it wouldn't be interesting as its a big part of the show.

They need it nowadays to constantly **** stir!

Also your spoiler always makes me LOL

[Jason.]

Originally Posted by GLENN BILL BB7

Yea it wouldn't be interesting as its a big part of the show.

They need it nowadays to constantly **** stir!

Also your spoiler always makes me LOL

Glad you noticed.

I had it as my sig, but the buzz kill mods made me resize it.

[Marsh.]

Another article in the run up the first January C5 CBB

Channel 5 is bringing back a limited amount of live feed for the new series of Celebrity Big Brother.

The reality show, which is based around the concept of 24-hour surveillance, did not feature any live feed during its first series on the network.

Despite protests from fans of the programme, Channel 5's controller Jeff Ford gave reasons including cost and a lack of significant interest from viewers as an explanation for the resource's axing. The broadcaster opted instead to focus more finances on social networking elements such as Facebook and Twitter pages.

No viewers. Waste of money.