Skip to main content

is channel 9 killing big brother

I don't think that they're "killing" it but they're not necessarily using it to it's full potential.
At the end of the day, I think that what the producers are doing is to keep Big Brother on the air and if they have live feeds then they think that viewership will pay the price - unfortunately, dedicated big brother fans pay the price and what we get is totally edited footage that means we rely on the producers to give us our opinions on housemates. Channel 9 clearly have serious conditions under which Big Brother runs and operates but it'd be nice to see Alex + his team loosen their collars a little and have a bit of fun with the series rather than running it like a soap opera.
 
[/QUOTE]
hafeau said:
I don't think that they're "killing" it but they're not necessarily using it to it's full potential.
At the end of the day, I think that what the producers are doing is to keep Big Brother on the air and if they have live feeds then they think that viewership will pay the price - unfortunately, dedicated big brother fans pay the price and what we get is totally edited footage that means we rely on the producers to give us our opinions on housemates. Channel 9 clearly have serious conditions under which Big Brother runs and operates but it'd be nice to see Alex + his team loosen their collars a little and have a bit of fun with the series rather than running it like a soap opera.
Click to expand...

Having a live feed or live updates hasn't hurt the ratings for any of the Channel Ten seasons or the ratings for any version of Big Brother that I can think of internationally. If anything it drives more people to watch the show not less.
 
Yesterday's episode was 100% out the situation bb had created via the diner etc. The producers are trying too hard to make the show for people who don't like the show. If they also had something on that was just the house mates talking to each other then that would be okay.
 
Miranda MC said:
30 mins show tonight. bad -> worse
Click to expand...
In a way I actually think the 30 minute shows are edited better - we seemed to get a little bit more real action tonight compared to the 60/90 minute editions over the last couple of nights which were all played around the one twist and featured extended scenes of basically the same thing.

Clocked in at 23 minutes too - many of the 30 minute episodes last year were 18-19 minutes.


As others have said though it's what's happening in the hours BB isn't on Channel Nine which is killing the show.
 
The answer is yes!!! demonstration of this killing was the most boring, mundane, PG rated and bland "headline stories" from the housemates - sorry but i highly doubt any of those would have made the front page of the newspaper!! that was seriously painful! At least add some booze to the mix to make it more interesting!!!
 
I don't think nine want to kill a show that was the most talked about on SM last year, I do think that they want to make it their own way, everyone compares it to the Channel Ten days, but those days are long gone. Nine have an idea of where they want the show to go and be. We may not agree, being the true BB fans that we are.

If Nine really wanted to "kill The Show" that would be stupid, they only really have The Block and The voice left if they did, why kill a show that fills week and weeks worth of programing?
 
Inigo Montoya said:
I don't think nine want to kill a show that was the most talked about on SM last year, I do think that they want to make it their own way, everyone compares it to the Channel Ten days, but those days are long gone. Nine have an idea of where they want the show to go and be. We may not agree, being the true BB fans that we are.

If Nine really wanted to "kill The Show" that would be stupid, they only really have The Block and The voice left if they did, why kill a show that fills week and weeks worth of programing?
Click to expand...

By killing off live updates, there's no way in hell they are going to be the most talked about show this year.
 
Michka26 said:
The answer is yes!!! demonstration of this killing was the most boring, mundane, PG rated and bland "headline stories" from the housemates - sorry but i highly doubt any of those would have made the front page of the newspaper!! that was seriously painful! At least add some booze to the mix to make it more interesting!!!
Click to expand...
Cool bulldog
 


Having a live feed or live updates hasn't hurt the ratings for any of the Channel Ten seasons or the ratings for any version of Big Brother that I can think of internationally. If anything it drives more people to watch the show not less.[/QUOTE]
I 100% agree, but I think that it adds to the "suspense" of the show in their opinion.
 
talking with my friends no 1 i know is watching bb this yeah and due to time slot I'm missing more than I'm watching
 
Honestly, I'm not a fan of the uncut stuff and like that Channel 9 has kept BB a little more family-oriented.

But I think not having live updates is a major blow to most of the members on this site, the hardcore fans.

I'd probably consider myself inbetween a hardcore fan and a casual last season, where I'd tune into all the shows, but I wouldn't bother with the live updates. I didn't vote either, nor will I.

However, I'm pretty keen in tuning into the live stuff this season, to get more into BB. Having access to live updates doesn't dilute the daily episodes whatsoever, it's really there for those who want to know more. It's like watching the directors cut of a movie, because you're further interested. You still watch the movie.

Would be nice if they brought back a livestream though. Can someone explain to me why this is not viable? Surely there would be plenty of profit available, running a livestream, even if it's only from like 2-3 cameras.
 
Tahan said:
Honestly, I'm not a fan of the uncut stuff and like that Channel 9 has kept BB a little more family-oriented.

But I think not having live updates is a major blow to most of the members on this site, the hardcore fans.

I'd probably consider myself inbetween a hardcore fan and a casual last season, where I'd tune into all the shows, but I wouldn't bother with the live updates. I didn't vote either, nor will I.

However, I'm pretty keen in tuning into the live stuff this season, to get more into BB. Having access to live updates doesn't dilute the daily episodes whatsoever, it's really there for those who want to know more. It's like watching the directors cut of a movie, because you're further interested. You still watch the movie.

Would be nice if they brought back a livestream though. Can someone explain to me why this is not viable? Surely there would be plenty of profit available, running a livestream, even if it's only from like 2-3 cameras.
Click to expand...

It's because Nine are scared of any controversy such as the turkey slap happening again.
 
Tin Bum said:
Cool bulldog
Click to expand...
right back atcha :)​

I digress, another example of the killing was switching hosts from Gretal who was confrontational and really engaged the housemates on a deeper level to Sonia who is all sunshine and lollipops. Of course the 'family friendly' channel nine formatting will suit the demographics its aimed towards, but BB is not a house of nuclear families, its a house full of over 18's. In saying this it is only the first week and I do find the couples approach of interest, along with some of the cracks of housemates starting to appear.. so we will see how this season pans out.​
 
sav0001 said:
It's because Nine are scared of any controversy such as the turkey slap happening again.
Click to expand...

I can't see how that is a legitimate argument. A "live" feed is generally on a slight delay anyway no matter what the show is. Things like the Today Show are on a slight delay so the producer can cut the feed in the event anything disturbing happens. Why not make a "live" feed available but put it on a 5 minute delay? I would definitely pay for it. $30 per month seems reasonable to me… Even if they only got 1000 people joining that would easily pay for the monkey that sits with his finger over the red button, ready to stop the feed.

What was Alex's argument regarding the live feed?
 
Jon Gatland said:
I can't see how that is a legitimate argument. A "live" feed is generally on a slight delay anyway no matter what the show is. Things like the Today Show are on a slight delay so the producer can cut the feed in the event anything disturbing happens. Why not make a "live" feed available but put it on a 5 minute delay? I would definitely pay for it. $30 per month seems reasonable to me… Even if they only got 1000 people joining that would easily pay for the monkey that sits with his finger over the red button, ready to stop the feed.

What was Alex's argument regarding the live feed?
Click to expand...
Heck, I would be happy with a 30 minute delay. Anything is better than the nothing we have right now.
Alex's argument revolves around the legal aspect of requiring the hiring of a certified classifier 24hrs a day for the duration of the series. It's a legal requirement IF there is ANY possibility of the content going higher than a PG rating. They would also have the legal responsibility of not broadcasting any footage that might cause a legal issue such as defamation. There are also other costs such as bandwidth, servers, etc, but I really do believe it can be viable.
His other reason is that there is often nothing happening which I think is a bit of a cop-out. Sure, in the latter days of CH10 there were many complaints when we used to get "We're sorry but we can't show you anything from the house at the moment.." for quite extended periods of time and very often, but I suspect they were events they wanted to hold over for the TV broadcast. At that point in time it was already evident that there was an attitude that meant they felt they had the right to obscure what was going on and get away with it.
 
I don't follow the live feeds in the US, but I would imagine that a team of classifiers would be needed for various shifts, just like they have a team of directors. Big Brother is a group effort that hires a lot of people.

If there was anything even slightly questionable, 9 could just put up fish (or kangaroos, or whatever it is they wanted to put up on the screen) until it was over. I'm sure there's money in the budget for that, isn't there?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top