[AndyJK]

Originally Posted by vesavius

Pretty pathetic by BB tbh.

What a jaundiced and anemic representation of Ben's punishment, his behaviour in it, and the houses general reaction.


They didnt even show Ben's lies being blown over the speakers when they were all around the sofas, and the house reaction to it.

Why not show him talking about how he approves of the level of MP expense abuse (because our MPs deserve the best...) in the snug, or any of the 4 or so moments that would have been worthy of the HLs and shown his true character.

Why not show him saying that the show is 'sad', and anyone that queues up is 'sad', as are people that have launch and finales parties.

Why not show him talking about how his agent put him through and got him straight in, because 'it would be good' for Ben's career.

Why not show Ben's sniping, bitching and whispering in peoples ears about other HMs?

I think we all really know why not though.


If anyone tells me now that BB isnt whitewashing this show for Ben I will just openly laugh at them.


If anything this show was a hatchet job on Nathan as control freak and bully as a deflection from Ben.


This has even gone beyond Ben for me, and I have no fear for my Josie (she had another awesome little show), but the obvious and clear bias shown tonight was pretty disgusting for a 'reality show'.



Ben needs to go on Friday, if only to prove to BB that we arnt idiots and morons who blindly and stupidly fall for their blatant manipulation and show fixing.

To be fair to BB they can only show so much in the highlights. I don't think the viewers, most of whom are teenagers, want to see large sections of limited air time devoted to Ben talking about politics and his career. let's be reasonable.

On the subject matter, I don't think MPs get paid enough for what they do. I am not condoning the MPs' scandal and some of the outrageous expenses claims for a second, but compare their salaries to a lot of BBC presenters.

[JEJ]

Originally Posted by oddballmisfitsFTW

will he surprise everyone and win save and replace TASK?

Not unless the save and replace task is mincing

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by AndyJK

To be fair to BB they can only show so much in the highlights. I don't think the viewers, most of whom are teenagers, want to see large sections of limited air time devoted to Ben talking about politics and his career. let's be reasonable.

On the subject matter, I don't think MPs get paid enough for what they do. I am not condoning the MPs' scandal and some of the outrageous expenses claims for a second, but compare their salaries to a lot of BBC presenters.

I think just about everybody would have liked to see the section where BB played Ben getting the TOT task and then blatantly lying about it to the rest of the group.

Personally, I don’t think people should run for Parliament in order to make money. Our MP’s salaries are low in comparison to just about every other country but to compare them to TV presenters is a bit silly.

[vesavius]

Originally Posted by AndyJK

To be fair to BB they can only show so much in the highlights.

Yes, and thats central to the point I am making, but its what they choose to show, and why, is whats being questioned here. Their choice of what to include is so selective and biased it amounts to a whitewash.


Why, do you think, honestly, they chose to not show the rest of the HM hearing the speakers revealing more of Ben's lies to them on the sofas, and the further fall out? In that Ben is revealed about having lied to them about being asked to do 'something nasty' to the group and they found out that he cost them their suitcases. It's a really important event in terms of the house.

There is no entertainment value in that? Ofc there this, it just didnt suit the obvious agenda and how they want people thinking.

Why show Shabby, for instance, having yet another (minor) tantrum instead, when thats ALL they show of her? Is that really entertaining? Really? or does it just suit their agenda for her?

I think the answer is obvious though.




No one is saying they should put out an hour of political debate, thats ridiculous, but if you had actually watched that debate in full then you would know that the snippets of it they chose didnt show Ben at all to be what he is, to the point of condoning the expensies abuse we have seen recently.

Instead they used it to present Nathan as a thugish bully (as is their agenda for him).

I'm not even a Nathan supporter, but it's just obvious. I am amazed that adults are even rationalising it.

[AndyJK]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

I think just about everybody would have liked to see the section where BB played Ben getting the TOT task and then blatantly lying about it to the rest of the group.

Personally, I don’t think people should run for Parliament in order to make money. Our MP’s salaries are low in comparison to just about every other country but to compare them to TV presenters is a bit silly.

Not just presenters, other BBC employers. For example some news readers get over 80,000. I am all for showing clips exposing housemates lying. But I don't suspect any whitewash to protect Ben.

Originally Posted by vesavius

Yes, and thats central to the point I am making, but its what they choose to show, and why, is whats being questioned here. Their choice of what to include is so selective and biased it amounts to a whitewash.


Why, do you think, honestly, they chose to not show the rest of the HM hearing the speakers revealing more of Ben's lies to them on the sofas, and the further fall out? In that Ben is revealed about having lied to them about being asked to do 'something nasty' to the group and they found out that he cost them their suitcases. It's a really important event in terms of the house.

There is no entertainment value in that? Ofc there this, it just didnt suit the obvious agenda and how they want people thinking.

Why show Shabby, for instance, having yet another (minor) tantrum instead, when thats ALL they show of her? Is that really entertaining? Really? or does it just suit their agenda for her?

I think the answer is obvious though.




No one is saying they should put out an hour of political debate, thats ridiculous, but if you had actually watched that debate in full then you would know that the snippets of it they chose didnt show Ben at all to be what he is, to the point of condoning the expensies abuse we have seen recently.

Instead they used it to present Nathan as a thugish bully (as is their agenda for him).

I'm not even a Nathan supporter, but it's just obvious. I am amazed that adults are even rationalising it.

I would personally have liked to have heard more of the conversation as it seems absurd for anybody condoning the MP's scandal. Even the MPs themselves have condemned some of the claims from colleagues in their own respective parties, so there's very little justification for it. And the scandal is still not over as there are 3 Labour MPs being charged with fraud.

But as I haven't heard what Ben said exactly its hard for me to comment in any more depth. I dare say that Ben is using his time inside the house to further some career he wants after leaving the house. Perhaps as the series continues we will know more.

[Tamtam]

Originally Posted by vesavius

Yes, and thats central to the point I am making, but its what they choose to show, and why, is whats being questioned here. Their choice of what to include is so selective and biased it amounts to a whitewash.


Why, do you think, honestly, they chose to not show the rest of the HM hearing the speakers revealing more of Ben's lies to them on the sofas, and the further fall out? In that Ben is revealed about having lied to them about being asked to do 'something nasty' to the group and they found out that he cost them their suitcases. It's a really important event in terms of the house.

There is no entertainment value in that? Ofc there this, it just didnt suit the obvious agenda and how they want people thinking.

Why show Shabby, for instance, having yet another (minor) tantrum instead, when thats ALL they show of her? Is that really entertaining? Really? or does it just suit their agenda for her?

I think the answer is obvious though.




No one is saying they should put out an hour of political debate, thats ridiculous, but if you had actually watched that debate in full then you would know that the snippets of it they chose didnt show Ben at all to be what he is, to the point of condoning the expensies abuse we have seen recently.

Instead they used it to present Nathan as a thugish bully (as is their agenda for him).

I'm not even a Nathan supporter, but it's just obvious. I am amazed that adults are even rationalising it.

I was very taken aback myself how much of what they didnt show about ben as well in the highlights... why reveal what he said on the sofa and then not use it!? it dosent make sense and just confuses the highlight watchers who dont know about it when its talked about later.

ben is BBs loved one right now though, thats clear, but that wont last forever. we deserve a good hearted honest funny winner for the last BB and that isnt ben by a long shot.. well... he is funny sometimes, but to laugh at, but not with if you get me? only 10% of ben has been shown on TV and i honestly think thats why so many dont see him for what he is, but that will change

[vesavius]

Originally Posted by AndyJK

Not just presenters, other BBC employers. For example some news readers get over 80,000. I am all for showing clips exposing housemates lying. But I don't suspect any whitewash to protect Ben.



I would personally have liked to have heard more of the conversation as it seems absurd for anybody condoning the MP's scandal. Even the MPs themselves have condemned some of the claims from colleagues in their own respective parties, so there's very little justification for it. And the scandal is still not over as there are 3 Labour MPs being charged with fraud.

But as I haven't heard what Ben said exactly its hard for me to comment in any more depth. I dare say that Ben is using his time inside the house to further some career he wants after leaving the house. Perhaps as the series continues we will know more.

yeah, I get that it's hard to make a judgement on it without seeing it, but thats exactly why the obvious whitewash is so bad.

There is a lot of people out there with completly wrong impression of what Bens about, simply because he is constantly protected (while other HMs such as Govan, Shabby, and Nathan constantly only have their bad sides shown) by BB's whitewash editing.

It's honestly them just laughing at how easily the viewing public is manipulated like unquestioning morons.

[pixee]

BB is an edited show, even the live feed is edited so i guess they can miss bits out etc but i'm sure HM's i dislike have said things which i wouldn't like but it hasn't appeared on LF.

It does appear you are taking out your political angst on a gameshow contestant which is fine just think it is a bit misdirected lol.

[vesavius]

Originally Posted by pixee

BB is an edited show, even the live feed is edited so i guess they can miss bits out etc but i'm sure HM's i dislike have said things which i wouldn't like but it hasn't appeared on LF.

It does appear you are taking out your political angst on a gameshow contestant which is fine just think it is a bit misdirected lol.

You miss my point Pix.

I get the show is edited, obviously. I get that they can only get so much in, obviously.

What this thread is dealing with is why they chose to leave out what they did on Ben, which was massively important in terms of the house story and very entertaining, and show what they did on others in much less important situations (shabby having yet another minor rage for instance).


It's talking about the whitewash that obviously happening with him.

It's also about how that blatant bias shows how little they think of a public that blindly accepts it (or, indeed, rationalises it) and the fact that they think we are all moronic saps.

The thing is, if you agree with it and rationalise it for HMs you happen to like you give away any kind of moral high ground for complaint when they do it your fav in turn.

[Amhuinn]

I agree that not showing Ben defending the MPs over the expenses scandal robbed the entire debate of its context. It made it seem as though Nathan was just having a go at Ben and suggesting that MPs were lazy, apropos of nothing.

[lynz]

Originally Posted by vesavius

Yeah, they raped it... I can't believe they actually skipped the part where Ben's cover as a liar and BSer was further blown though. That was so important, and so whitewashed.

If one person applauding it now b1tches about BB fixing the show and choosing who to promote/ destroy in the future (when it hurts their HM) though I am gonna have great great pleasure in telling them to just **** and stop being ***** hypocrites.

How people can complain openly about show fixing and blatantly biased editing and then cheer this because it suits them right now is confusing to me. They seem so short sighted.

Even the HMs have not made a big thing about Ben's cover being blown so it obviously is not as big a deal as some make out. In fact Shabby after coming out said that she would like to see him win because although they had their differences she thought at least he is an individual. Anyone who thinks that BB has favourites and fixes the show to keep them in although they are unpopular HMs must surely be slightly dim because it just does not make any sense at all. I watch LF and am intelligent enough to realise that it is not possible to fill an hour of HL with everything that goes on over a 24 hour period. So much happened yesterday that today's HL could only show bits of each drama.

[AndyJK]

Originally Posted by vesavius

yeah, I get that it's hard to make a judgement on it without seeing it, but thats exactly why the obvious whitewash is so bad.

There is a lot of people out there with completly wrong impression of what Bens about, simply because he is constantly protected (while other HMs such as Govan, Shabby, and Nathan constantly only have their bad sides shown) by BB's whitewash editing.

It's honestly them just laughing at how easily the viewing public is manipulated like unquestioning morons.

I quite like Ben so can speak impartially and from some of the highlights I have seen he hasn't always come out in a good light. I have watched him in some episodes and cringed, so if they are protecting Ben they are not doing a good job.

From all the series of BB I have seen I don't think there has ever not been a discussion about BB manipulating highlights making house mates look either good, bad, boring or whatever, and this has been the case right from series 1.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by pixee

BB is an edited show, even the live feed is edited so i guess they can miss bits out etc but i'm sure HM's i dislike have said things which i wouldn't like but it hasn't appeared on LF.

It does appear you are taking out your political angst on a gameshow contestant which is fine just think it is a bit misdirected lol.

It's a bit unhealthy if you ask me,the obsession is weird every post contains derogotary things about Ben,I mean to dislike a hm,that's fine but this is something else,but they say there is a fine line between love and hate,i am quite happy to be supporting BBs best HM Ben.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by lynz

Even the HMs have not made a big thing about Ben's cover being blown so it obviously is not as big a deal as some make out. In fact Shabby after coming out said that she would like to see him win because although they had their differences she thought at least he is an individual. Anyone who thinks that BB has favourites and fixes the show to keep them in although they are unpopular HMs must surely be slightly dim because it just does not make any sense at all. I watch LF and am intelligent enough to realise that it is not possible to fill an hour of HL with everything that goes on over a 24 hour period. So much happened yesterday that today's HL could only show bits of each drama.

Quote:Even the HMs have not made a big thing about Ben's cover being blown so it obviously is not as big a deal as some make out.


Exactly,it's more of a big deal for the desperados that want everyone to dislike him,pathetic really.

[vesavius]

Originally Posted by AndyJK

I quite like Ben so can speak impartially and from some of the highlights I have seen he hasn't always come out in a good light. I have watched him in some episodes and cringed, so if they are protecting Ben they are not doing a good job.

Did you mean 'can't' when you said 'can'?

Tbh, If thats how you feel from the HLs alone, then I dread to think what you would think of him with his full picture of his sniping, whispered bitching, manipulating, grooming, back stabbing his friends, and outright lying

I know you like him from the kind edit from the HLs, but thats actually my point here.

The HL Ben isnt the real Ben, it's the BB whitewashed Ben.

[lynz]

Originally Posted by vesavius

You miss my point Pix.

I get the show is edited, obviously. I get that they can only get so much in, obviously.

What this thread is dealing with is why they chose to leave out what they did on Ben, which was massively important in terms of the house story and very entertaining, and show what they did on others in much less important situations (shabby having yet another minor rage for instance).


It's talking about the whitewash that obviously happening with him.

It's also about how that blatant bias shows how little they think of a public that blindly accepts it (or, indeed, rationalises it) and the fact that they think we are all moronic saps.

The thing is, if you agree with it and rationalise it for HMs you happen to like you give away any kind of moral high ground for complaint when they do it your fav in turn.

Shabby's "minor rage" was hardly less important. Today she left the BB house after so-called "minor rage".

[vesavius]

Originally Posted by lynz

So much happened yesterday that today's HL could only show bits of each drama.

Again, you are missing what I am saying.

I get that only parts can be shown, people don't need to keep saying the same thing here. I have addressed that already.

This thread is about what they choose to include and what they obviously aim to achieve with it's inclusion.

And how they are playing you.

[vesavius]

Originally Posted by lynz

Shabby's "minor rage" was hardly less important. Today she left the BB house after so-called "minor rage".

The minor rage I am referring to was very minor.

The one she left because of obviously wasnt.

This is scrabbling somewhat now to support the point tbh.

[vesavius]

Originally Posted by Amhuinn

I agree that not showing Ben defending the MPs over the expenses scandal robbed the entire debate of its context. It made it seem as though Nathan was just having a go at Ben and suggesting that MPs were lazy, apropos of nothing.

Just another day in the BB edit suite tbh.


Context dosent matter, as long as the producers get the public thinking according to their agenda for each HM.

And you still have supposedly veteran BB viewers lapping it up and rationalising it. Amazing really.

[vesavius]

We could also talk about the obvious ommission of Bens 'I have a dolce & gabbana jacket that costs more then all your clothes together" sneering retort to being asked to not get JJs good shirt sweaty in a physical task.

Enough people remarked on it here to start a sizable thread, it obviously sparked interest, but it was obviously cut off the end of the tiff in order to protect Ben from looking like a sneering b1tch.

More whitewash.

[Amhuinn]

I've fallen for their biased editing before. In fact, people who do watch the livefeed have missed context before and been surprised when things emerged later that were twisted by BB.

[vesavius]

Originally Posted by Amhuinn

I've fallen for their biased editing before. In fact, people who do watch the livefeed have missed context before and been surprised when things emerged later that were twisted by BB.

Sorry, a little confused... do you mean 'highlights'?

[Amhuinn]

I meant that even the livefeed can be misleading. They can cut away from conversations and miss out important bits that give stuff context, but everyone assumes the livefeed is utterly reliable.

[Kazanne]

Live feed may be reliable,but some posters quoting from it are not.