Episode Day 27 Daily Show - 5/12/2025

Status
Not open for further replies.
the Theorist said:
To be honest, I don’t think they’ll care. Technically the voting doesn’t matter because it’s free, so they’ll likely just invalidate any votes for whoever got evicted.

Is it immoral? Probably. But thereotetically they don’t need to be concerned - plus, their disclaimer covers them either way. The save votes are used as a guide to give them an idea for how Australia is liking the HMs, but ultimately the end result can be fixed at their discretion if they want it to be.
Click to expand...
They have addressed this now lol

 
sav0001 said:
They have addressed this now lol

Click to expand...
I’d like to believe that’s true, but there’s still a lot of inconsistencies. Especially the fact they continue to choose not to show voting graphs, or provide integrity behind the so-called Instagram voting for tasks, etc. (Also, lol @beardymac check out the article.)

I will add - my quoted comment was more in regards to the voting still being open while Friday’s evicted had already left the house. Something which has not been addressed.
 
Hunter's_Mckay said:
The editing this season...if the Paul and Merlin fight happened they would probably have shown about 1 minute of it and then showed the other housemates talking about it for a minute and then moved on to task footage.....

Assuming there is another season, really whats to stop any of the single housemates from getting into a showmance given they've clearly shown that that's the best way to get airtime by priorising it over any other organic footage? It's only going to get worst I'd say.
Click to expand...
The ratings have been fantastic for 10 which is all that executives care about, 2 more seasons are practically guaranteed.
 
Matty492 said:
So there is a record of each vote? Why can't they show a graph? or could someone put in a FOI request?
Click to expand...

It's a bullshit comment in my eyes...

“Every vote matters. In fact, they matter so much that we have an auditor from Ernst and Young present at the start and stop of every vote to officially confirm and record the outcome.”
Click to expand...

Having an auditor on site doesn't mean anything.

My favorite example for why auditing is bullshit would be the phone-in scams that were popular until a decade ago or so... there was one production company that was criticised because the same voices kept coming through but gave themselves different names each time. Hosts would then keep saying that people can use fake names to stay anonymous and they would eventually state that the payment of the winnings is notarized. Which was true.. but it was proven later on that they paid people to pose as callers but they were only allowed to keep some of their winnings, while the rest was funneled back to the producers.

There is also no guarantee that auditors will spot an issues with the voting. Want a very recent Big Brother-related case where having an auditor didn't help? Take this year's Celebrity Big Brother in Germany. They had a vote to save open and while that vote was running, people were complaining that they couldn't call the line for one of the housemates. That housemate was eventually evicted, went on the spin-off show to do his interviews and all that... and it took more than 12 hours for the channel to admit an issue with the voting and send the guy back in. And I doubt that it was the auditor who spotted the issue. They investigated because people were crying foul on social media.

This statement specifically opens the door for manipulation, too. So they have an auditor "at the start and stop of every vote"? Where is the auditor that is there during the vote? Great thing that somebody will be there on Sunday evening and say "yes, I saw that the voting machine showed x votes for housemate A and y votes for housemates B, so them saying that housemate A has less votes and should be evicted is the right outcome based on the numbers I'm seeing right not". But who guarantees that they're not adding votes on demand during the week? The auditor can't if they are only there for the start and stop of every vote.
 
Spectator O.O said:
What? I thought that was already ended?
Click to expand...
This is the third time.

First time was back in the 80s when 7 didn't want to renew it, so 10 revived it.

Second time was a few years back in 2022 when channel 5 in the UK didnt want to pay for it anymore. It went off for a year or so but was revived by Amazon for their free streaming plan 'freevee'.

Now Amazon has scrapped freevee and so has decided to not renew Neighbours. No other buyer has been found and 10 cant fund it on their own so its going again.
 
Poona said:
This is the third time.

First time was back in the 80s when 7 didn't want to renew it, so 10 revived it.

Second time was a few years back in 2022 when channel 5 in the UK didnt want to pay for it anymore. It went off for a year or so but was revived by Amazon for their free streaming plan 'freevee'.

Now Amazon has scrapped freevee and so has decided to not renew Neighbours. No other buyer has been found and 10 cant fund it on their own so its going again.
Click to expand...
Hopefully for good this time 🤞
But apparently they've written the ending in a way that leaves it open to come back. Good luck with that.
 
the Theorist said:
I’d like to believe that’s true, but there’s still a lot of inconsistencies. Especially the fact they continue to choose not to show voting graphs, or provide integrity behind the so-called Instagram voting for tasks, etc. (Also, lol @beardymac check out the article.)

I will add - my quoted comment was more in regards to the voting still being open while Friday’s evicted had already left the house. Something which has not been addressed.
Click to expand...
PAUL MC-CAT-NEY IS PEDESTRIAN FAMOUS LMAO.
 
I don't doubt that there's an auditor and I don't doubt that the final vote matters. But, um, when do the votes close? Why is Ed still an option to save when he was removed from the house over 24 hours ago?

Ten's publicity team has Pedestrian in their pocket and have been using them to do reputational clean up all season long. Ten providing comment is all the proof needed on that. It's convenient how these "articles" only ever selectively address controversies.

But hey, this was written by Simran Pasricha - the same "journalist" that once produced for a feminist publication and now spends most of her time writing about female-centric internet drama. Integrity!
 
They really should bring breakdowns back. Provide *some* feedback on where the votes are going. Did they just not think about it being a good idea to do so? The most amount of information we have been given on any vote breakdown, is that it has been "close", which happened on two or three occasions (if I remember correctly).

Not the who it was close with.

Just that it was close.

Maybe it's just being woke?
 
D Space said:
They really should bring breakdowns back. Provide *some* feedback on where the votes are going. Did they just not think about it being a good idea to do so? The most amount of information we have been given on any vote breakdown, is that it has been "close", which happened on two or three occasions (if I remember correctly).

Not the who it was close with.

Just that it was close.

Maybe it's just being woke?
Click to expand...
Woke 🤣
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top