If Channel 10 bought back BBAU...

[Brekkie]

If Channel 10 was to be the saviour of BBAU and Big Brother was to return home how do you think they should do it?

I think live is a no-brainer we'd all agree on, but would we want a return to the no-frills format of 2001 or should they actually build upon the competitive format Seven implemented (and indeed was a minor part of the later 10 seasons and Nine seasons) and rework that into something that plays out live, either BBUS/Canada style or more along the lines of BB Brazil with the public vote retained.

Also how long should it go on for - would 12-14 weeks be too big a risk or actually a big statement they're doing it correct, or should they go for 6-8 weeks for a first season at least?


It's easy to say just recreate what they did in the early years but we need to be realistic too in that the budget they had then is not going to be available to them now and as much as an improved show can win back some viewers even if "successful" it would likely only get half the audience it once had. How the networks schedule programmes have changed too, so we need to think about how a revival could work in the television landscape of 2024/25 rather than assume what worked in 2004/05 will do so again.

 

[sav0001]

If Channel 10 was to be the saviour of BBAU and Big Brother was to return home how do you think they should do it?

I think live is a no-brainer we'd all agree on, but would we want a return to the no-frills format of 2001 or should they actually build upon the competitive format Seven implemented (and indeed was a minor part of the later 10 seasons and Nine seasons) and rework that into something that plays out live, either BBUS/Canada style or more along the lines of BB Brazil with the public vote retained.

Also how long should it go on for - would 12-14 weeks be too big a risk or actually a big statement they're doing it correct, or should they go for 6-8 weeks for a first season at least?


It's easy to say just recreate what they did in the early years but we need to be realistic too in that the budget they had then is not going to be available to them now and as much as an improved show can win back some viewers even if "successful" it would likely only get half the audience it once had. How the networks schedule programmes have changed too, so we need to think about how a revival could work in the television landscape of 2024/25 rather than assume what worked in 2004/05 will do so again.

I think go for 6-8 weeks to start with and if it's a success extend it for later seasons, would be too much of a risk to go for 12+ weeks straight away.

I would also try to include some kind of competitive element to draw in old fans and new.

 

[Gayspie]

If Channel 10 was to be the saviour of BBAU and Big Brother was to return home how do you think they should do it?

I think live is a no-brainer we'd all agree on, but would we want a return to the no-frills format of 2001 or should they actually build upon the competitive format Seven implemented (and indeed was a minor part of the later 10 seasons and Nine seasons) and rework that into something that plays out live, either BBUS/Canada style or more along the lines of BB Brazil with the public vote retained.

Also how long should it go on for - would 12-14 weeks be too big a risk or actually a big statement they're doing it correct, or should they go for 6-8 weeks for a first season at least?


It's easy to say just recreate what they did in the early years but we need to be realistic too in that the budget they had then is not going to be available to them now and as much as an improved show can win back some viewers even if "successful" it would likely only get half the audience it once had. How the networks schedule programmes have changed too, so we need to think about how a revival could work in the television landscape of 2024/25 rather than assume what worked in 2004/05 will do so again.

I have a plan, will post in the coming days.

 

[up_all_night]

I honestly don't know where the notion of younger people these days having no attention span would fit into trying to get Big Brother popular again.

30-minute daily show on commercial TV.

1 hour extended daily show on Paramount+ (doesn't need to be an hour, just what it needs to be).

Uncut on Paramount+

Some form of live streaming. Even if it is something like Uplate was. I also think there's potential for some panel discussion show. Maybe a weekly wrap up on Friday Nights. While I was never a Friday Night Live watcher. Incorporate something like that if need be.

1.30 Hour Sunday Weekend show and eviction.

Just cater to all bases. I know nothing about budgeting and cost of a TV production, so it's probably all too much. One thing I know for sure, there's the people who actually watch the show and pay attention. There are also the people who just casually watch and don't really pay attention.

I will watch the extended show. Those who just casually watch who probably don't want to spend 1 and a half hours on the daily show will be fine with a shorter one. Potentially split it up if there's some longer shows. Nominations/competition shows 1 hour on FTA.

The downsides to this idea is that it'll probably lead to a bigger disconnect between casual and more attentive viewers views on the housemates but that already exists and has even in the 10 era.

Also, whether live streams or not. Aggressive social media during the show giving live updates and clips of what is going on in the house.

 

[Isee]

This article https://darwinverne.com/en/blog/how-gen-z-consumes-entertainment/ (posted content below) shows a study that gen Z are probably craving something similar to what some of the American shows like survivor are doing with the longer content and Authenticity, 1 min shorts, podcasts, etc. according to this viewership is way up this season for Survivor and Amazing race. https://variety.com/2023/tv/news/survivor-ratings-paramount-plus-the-amazing-race-1235760860/

How Gen Z consumes entertainment​

The consolidation of social media and streaming platforms has redefined the world of entertainment. Competing for attention nowadays is more voracious than ever: creators, media, brands, production companies, platforms… everyone is clamouring for our interest on the screen. But, how does Generation Z consume entertainment? What do they expect from brands in the sector? How can companies reach out to them and encourage valuable consumption?
To answer these questions we present the study ‘GenZ and Entertainment’, which we have carried out together with Mazinn, the consultancy firm specialising in generation Z within our ecosystem; a report that delves into the content consumption habits of this generation on their screens, mainly in terms of social networks and streaming platforms.
Here are some of its conclusions:

• Series on platforms (80.1%), videos on YouTube (65.7%) and podcast conversations (59%) are the three most popular content and formats/channels for Generation Z.
• Approximately 67.6% are in favour of the platform making all the episodes available to the audience rather than spreading them out.
• When it comes to choosing a platform, they value watching ad-free content (54.3%), and for the service to have a diversified library (45.4%) and exclusive content (43.4%).
• The combination of formats and the variety of content typologies consumed by GenZ expands the range of opportunities to connect with an audience that is demanding and unfaithful by nature. According to the study, these are some of the recommendations on how to achieve this:
• The new value of entertainment. Real and authentic stories connect with the concept of entertainment for GenZ and bring them closer to the brand’s reality.
• The short video as a means of discovery. Short videos are the key to reaching new audiences from your terrain and subject matter. Combine them with other formats which are more interaction-focused.
• Use long content to connect. Series, the television as a device or landscape formats are still alive. Innovate by finding ways to organically have a presence there and by adding value. Note also that the videopodcast, adapted to your themes and brand personality, is a gateway for generating engagement with GenZ.

The research was carried out with the participation of 700 young people between 18 and 28 years of age from all over Spain. In addition, the study has also taken into account the opinions of several managers who are experts in the world of entertainment, as well as those of young content creators related to this territory.
View the full study here: https://www.mazinn.es/zshots-entretenimiento/

​

 

[Kingston]

I honestly don't know where the notion of younger people these days having no attention span would fit into trying to get Big Brother popular again.

30-minute daily show on commercial TV.

1 hour extended daily show on Paramount+ (doesn't need to be an hour, just what it needs to be).

Uncut on Paramount+

Some form of live streaming. Even if it is something like Uplate was. I also think there's potential for some panel discussion show. Maybe a weekly wrap up on Friday Nights. While I was never a Friday Night Live watcher. Incorporate something like that if need be.

1.30 Hour Sunday Weekend show and eviction.

Just cater to all bases. I know nothing about budgeting and cost of a TV production, so it's probably all too much. One thing I know for sure, there's the people who actually watch the show and pay attention. There are also the people who just casually watch and don't really pay attention.

I will watch the extended show. Those who just casually watch who probably don't want to spend 1 and a half hours on the daily show will be fine with a shorter one. Potentially split it up if there's some longer shows. Nominations/competition shows 1 hour on FTA.

The downsides to this idea is that it'll probably lead to a bigger disconnect between casual and more attentive viewers views on the housemates but that already exists and has even in the 10 era.

Also, whether live streams or not. Aggressive social media during the show giving live updates and clips of what is going on in the house.

I think the notion that Gen Z have short attention spans is only a half truth. If the series is quality they’re more than willing to make the investment. That said the days of a 100 day series are definitely behind us… 8 to 10 weeks is likely all the series can sustain.

Where I think short form content is going to come in is actually through the live feeds and social media. Where ITV went wrong in this regard was their relentless crackdown on re-posting of content. It’s clear BB doesn’t have the bandwidth to pump out an endless stream of short form content so it seems rather counterproductive to shut down an army of people willing to do the work for free. Fun feeds and having the fans promote the show on social media will pull in a loyal audience.

 

[Gayspie]

I think the notion that Gen Z have short attention spans is only a half truth. If the series is quality they’re more than willing to make the investment. That said the days of a 100 day series are definitely behind us… 8 to 10 weeks is likely all the series can sustain.

Where I think short form content is going to come in is actually through the live feeds and social media. Where ITV went wrong in this regard was their relentless crackdown on re-posting of content. It’s clear BB doesn’t have the bandwidth to pump out an endless stream of short form content so it seems rather counterproductive to shut down an army of people willing to do the work for free. Fun feeds and having the fans promote the show on social media will pull in a loyal audience.

Couldnt a compromise between live feeds (which can be legally problematic hence require the employment of censors around the clock) and no live feeds (which can leave us in the lurch) be some form of live updates (like the odd Facebook Live video or Insta Photo or Twitter tweet) from official social media pages which can then be shared by followers to generate interest?

 

[Kingston]

Couldnt a compromise between live feeds (which can be legally problematic hence require the employment of censors around the clock) and no live feeds (which can leave us in the lurch) be some form of live updates (like the odd Facebook Live video or Insta Photo or Twitter tweet) from official social media pages which can then be shared by followers to generate interest?

No need to compromise as cost was nothing more than an excuse… It’s very clear Nine simply didn’t want live feeds.

 

[timmy]

I was just watching the first two eps of BBAU3 and there was an incredible amount of padding that could be cut from the (two) launch episodes. Tim Ferguson doing audience vox pops, Carmel Hill doing extensive analysis in the second, with Marty and Blair having their 2c. Extended audition clips as HMs transited from stage to the house (that obviously slows things down). Obviously they learned better not to do launches live later on.

As for daily eps I'd be happy with 30 minute ones, but definitely no longer than 60 mins (like, strictly, not 70 mins, not 80 mins, 60). And pump it out it six days a week. I really liked ITV's BBUK overall format so they should just replicate that IMO. The silly tasks that humiliate them in funny costumes or whatever, BBUK.. is good at that... none of this underwear and squirting with crap that Seven did. A serious lack of ideas going on there. It was so juvenile and unimaginative it was just pathetic.

In BBAU3 launch 2 I actually enjoyed hearing Carmel's views and the insights into why HMs were cast. They should bring her back on a side show. HMs nominating, viewers evicting. If you want HMs competing in the house do it for some kind of personal prize or reward.

 

[Gayspie]

I was just watching the first two eps of BBAU3 and there was an incredible amount of padding that could be cut from the (two) launch episodes. Tim Ferguson doing audience vox pops, Carmel Hill doing extensive analysis in the second, with Marty and Blair having their 2c. Extended audition clips as HMs transited from stage to the house (that obviously slows things down). Obviously they learned better not to do launches live later on.

As for daily eps I'd be happy with 30 minute ones, but definitely no longer than 60 mins (like, strictly, not 70 mins, not 80 mins, 60). And pump it out it six days a week. I really liked ITV's BBUK overall format so they should just replicate that IMO. The silly tasks that humiliate them in funny costumes or whatever, BBUK.. is good at that... none of this underwear and squirting with crap that Seven did. A serious lack of ideas going on there. It was so juvenile and unimaginative it was just pathetic.

In BBAU3 launch 2 I actually enjoyed hearing Carmel's views and the insights into why HMs were cast. They should bring her back on a side show. HMs nominating, viewers evicting. If you want HMs competing in the house do it for some kind of personal prize or reward.

I agree on both 60 min show limits and no live launches.

 

[CarmelHill]

Thanks for mentioning me!

 

[timmy]

Thanks for mentioning me!

We need our thexy thycologist back!

 

[Hunter's_Mckay]

I would absolutely go back to the non strategic format. The issue isn't with that format, it's mostly with the people they cast. Get some genuinely funny and entertaining non influencers in the house, throw it a few token hot influencers and bobs your uncle really.

 

[timmy]

I would absolutely go back to the non strategic format. The issue isn't with that format, it's mostly with the people they cast. Get some genuinely funny and entertaining non influencers in the house, throw it a few token hot influencers and bobs your uncle really.

I agree. There are two things I can't be bothered with: one is strat chat and the other is strength/endurance challenges. And Seven came along and based an entire format on them (at least we were spared the latter this season, but they cast it entirely with Tiktokkers so ...meh). Definitely go back to a ban on nom talk.

 

[Gayspie]

I agree. There are two things I can't be bothered with: one is strat chat and the other is strength/endurance challenges. And Seven came along and based an entire format on them (at least we were spared the latter this season, but they cast the it with Tiktokkers so ...meh). Definitely go back to a ban on nom talk.

freedom of speech, let them talk.

 

[Brekkie]

After a decade watching only the US/Canadian version one thing I didn't like about the revival of BBUK was the ban on noms talk - just found it pathetic. I also don't think it's healthy - openly strategising and discussing the nominations is probably better for housemates mental health than them all wondering who night be nominating them.

There are compromises though - if they went down the challenge route to have some kind of HoH you could have a rule where noms can be discussed but only with the HoH.

 

[Gayspie]

After a decade watching only the US/Canadian version one thing I didn't like about the revival of BBUK was the ban on noms talk - just found it pathetic. I also don't think it's healthy - openly strategising and discussing the nominations is probably better for housemates mental health than them all wondering who night be nominating them.

There are compromises though - if they went down the challenge route to have some kind of HoH you could have a rule where noms can be discussed but only with the HoH.

let them talk about whatever they want, obviously highlight the best/most suitable bits of their conversations for the daily shows.

 

[kamui]

I also don't think it's healthy - openly strategising and discussing the nominations is probably better for housemates mental health than them all wondering who night be nominating them.

When the Swedish version returned a couple years ago, they initially allowed them to discuss nominations for exactly this reason: to improve their mental wellbeing in the house.

There's also a middle way between discussing nominations and strategising: to allow one thing, but not allow the other. It's not 100% clear which rules Germany follows, but it appears that they can discuss nominations, reveal who they want to nominate before nominations and discuss other people's potential votes. Big Brother also tells them after announcing the nominees that they can talk about nominations. The only thing they can't do (anymore) is making proper agreements, but it's hard to tell where they draw the lines... e.g. if housemates could ask people to nominate somebody or if they'd only be against making handshake deals.


That said, that's one thing any new/old broadcaster should follow: Be clear about the rules. Don't make things up along the way. Happens to often these days.

 

[Brekkie]

I think it's much more interesting - and healthier - to have people nominate for strategic reasons rather than out of hatred or worse - petty reasons like not doing the washing up. I think the divide in the BBUK house which seems to go on forever (in reality it was about a week) would not have painted HMs in such a bad light if they could just be openly strategic about it rather than having to paint their target out to be an awful human being in order to try and get others to be on the same page as them when it came to nominations.


That said though it would be completely understandable if doing a complete reset of the show not to go down that route.

 

[Zcsund1234]

Personally I would do away with housemate nominations. They just let the same boring, easy to live with kind of people fly through to the end. And most of the time I feel like they don't benefit storyline wise by being there longer. I think for those who do enjoy challenges there could be one night a week where the housemats compete in FNL style challenge or something. But of course I would not like to see strength/endurance challenges, but instead see some more variety or randomness of challenges that suit all body types. And then have 3 nominees decided by a challenge of some sort.

Alternativly, I will admit I do like the addition of the second chance challenge in the 2022 season on 7. I also liked how in 2013 4 housemates were nominated and one was then saved by showdown. If nominations still existed then it would be fun to have some sort of challenge to allow housemates to save themselves. But I can do without replacment nominations, as without the strategic format in play the idea just feels like a screw over to me.

To me, there needs to be some change in how nominees are decided. I feel like general nominations end up predictable and are a bit dated. Positive nominations would be a nice change to see as well for a whole series. I would just say having nominees decided by a random fair challenge would diversify the nominations line up each week and could also add a level of unpredictability. I don't mind some form of competitve format to be there, but I'd like to see a new merge with the old school format. Otherwise, if something new is to come of the fomat then I'd simply like an Australian replica of the US format. Plain and simple.

As for the scheduling I do often think just airing live shows on FTA and then daily shows/live streaming would be a great test, but then I feel like having the episodes online only would alienate alot of the casual audience specifically older ones. Or alternativly, if there were to be 30-60 (I agree NO MORE THAN 60) minute episodes aired daily on FTA, then there could be bonus episodes/clips or daily/weekly recaps uploaded online for those who want more of a fix. And of course live streaming is a non-negotiable. Having live updates/clips pop up on tiktok would allow for many younger viewers to be able to keep up with minimal effort.

Oh, and after thinking about I think I may be of the opinion that the weekly tasks need to go. Or at least their current structure. A lot of the ideas in recent years have been lazy and childish. I will also have to admit I didn't mind how 7 had their tasks play out, with housemates participating and earning x amount of $ for how they perform. Such as catching a ball to earn $20 and missing would result in no increase. They don't need to be so extra with silly costumes.