Skip to main content

Why did BB totally ignore Tully's RL ending?

Tahan, Mikkayla, Heidi, Katie, Matt & Rohan have all managed to not cheat on their partners despite being away from them for so long. Heck, these HMs don't even go as far as to flirt with anyone! The fact that Tully was so easily able to confess her 'love' for another HM says a lot about either her character or her relationship with Tahlia to begin with. I don't think you can use being 'locked up in a house' as an excuse for cheating. ESPECIALLY when you know your partner is at home watching!
This.
 
The first episode showed Tully and Tahlia's home inside and then them walking their dog and mentioned they are in a relationship of several years.

Maybe it would be inappropriate but Sonia don't see anything wrong smiling and talking about Tully's cheating with videoclips for enhanced effect? Why the doublestandard. The tweet was enough for this site to make a big news about it.

Just FYI you don't need a permission to quote Tweets. Or do you? They are public announcements like reading a newspaper.

I don't think Sonia is actually all smiles and happy about Tully cheating. Maybe she is looking at from the perspective of two housemates hooking up. Like she would with Jade and Prince Charming.

Yes tweets can be quoted. But this is a sensitive and personal matter relating to someone who is not a celebrity and did not ask to be have this relationship issue discussed on national TV. An ambiguous tweet is not enough for BB to gossip with Heidi who is not part of Tullys personal life. It would be weird for BB to discuss it with her and with such little information before Tully's run in the house has even ended and she is aware of the situation herself or even spoken with the girlfriend. She can be micro-scoped in the house but I feel BB don't need to and shouldn't meddle with sensitive issues of her outside relationships especially if they have not been given permission from the other parties involved or are unsure of the details. Imagine if the tweet was all they knew about it, and it was wrong, hacked account, misinterpreted or she had changed her mind since then, or anything. The gossip mags can run with this stuff, but I totally get why BB wouldn't.

Like what do you expect her to say to Heidi?
Heidi: Tully has a girlfriend
Sonia: Actually her girlfriend tweeted an image that it's good to be single
Hedi: huh?
Sonia: Drew and Tully have kissed
Heidi: Gasp omg no? Omg really? OMG
Sonia: yes it's on tape
heidi: OMG
Sonia so lets have a look at your relationship with tim...

What purpose does this serve? It comes across as more disrespectful then anything to be spreading that type of gossip on live TV.

Sonia happily discusses stuff that they feel is relevant and appropriate. They probably feel this is not appropriate or necessary. As for not correcting Heidi that they had a kiss, yeah she could have said that because it was in the show. But I don't think we really needed to see Heidis OMG reaction and then chop and change to the next question about how fun it was in the house - that wouldn't be very sensitive to the girlfriend any way.

This is what Tully signed up for. She is in the BB house and while she in there she has no contact or news from the outside world. There will be some exceptions in the contract but this is obviously not one. Other countries might do it differently, but they do a lot of things differently in other countries, that doesn't mean they have to do it here. Just as the other countries don't have to copy what we do here.
 
I don't see how this is any different than Big Brother 2002 when Marty spent the entire time cheating on his girlfriend with Jess, whom he later married. Why should Big Brother or Sonia comment at all? If the housemates are going to cheat on national television then it's just showing the public their character (or lack thereof) and help them make an informed decision as to who should win the competition. Also, let's not forget that the entire premise is to be completely cut off from the world, wouldn't it be a breach of the rules to comment to Tully? All that aside too, the housemates' personal lives and the lives of their loved ones are none of Big Brother's or Sonia's business, so why should anyone talk about them except the two of them?
 
Errrmm..... No that's not true. Tiger Woods is a perfect example.

Kristen Stewart and Rob Pattinson both had partners when they initially hooked up and the public were delighted. Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, they are just a couple of high profile ones theres plenty of others.
 
Kristen Stewart and Rob Pattinson both had partners when they initially hooked up and the public were delighted. Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, they are just a couple of high profile ones theres plenty of others.

I'll give you Kristen Stewart and Rob pattison, but not angelina and brad. They were roasted, people just got over it just like people will get over Tully and Drew. For every example you give about celebrities cheating and the public not caring there will be an example of the opposite!
 
He's a good example of people not holding it against him and hating him for it - and in his case he was a complete sex maniac and hooked up with lots of women!

Lol! Oh I didn't realise losing millions of dollars in sponsors and being dragged through the mud via the media was getting away with it!
 
Lol! Oh I didn't realise losing millions of dollars in sponsors and being dragged through the mud via the media was getting away with it!

I wasn't talking about sponsors with a stick up their arse who take things way too seriously, just public perception. Doesn't take much controversy for sponsors to jump ship at the slightest hint of it, and the tabloids were just entertainment feeding peoples interest and fun over Tiger Woods of all people being a hornbag.
 
I wasn't talking about sponsors with a stick up their arse who take things way too seriously, just public perception. Doesn't take much controversy for sponsors to jump ship at the slightest hint of it, and the tabloids were just entertainment feeding peoples interest and fun over Tiger Woods of all people being a hornbag.
The public perception was the reason the sponsors dropped him! It was very controversial so the fact that it doesn't take much controversy for sponsors to jump ship is an invalid point to me. The tabloids were not just feeding people's interest but their public outrage. He was a dog in the eyes of many.
 
The public perception was the reason the sponsors dropped him! It was very controversial so the fact that it doesn't take much controversy for sponsors to jump ship is an invalid point to me. The tabloids were not just feeding people's interest but their public outrage. He was a dog in the eyes of many.

The only 'outrage' was as usual from the loudest nitwits who don't speak for anyone else just like with all this Tully stuff and gutter journalists trying to drum it up, and come on sports sponsors have a long history of dumping people as soon as anything threatens their impossibly squeaky clean image.
 
The only 'outrage' was as usual from the loudest nitwits who don't speak for anyone else just like with all this Tully stuff and gutter journalists trying to drum it up, and come on sports sponsors have a long history of dumping people as soon as anything threatens their impossibly squeaky clean image.

'The loudest nitwits who don't speak for anyone' are part of the public that you claim didn't care. Oh and the squeaky clean image is what the public liked about him so the cheating scandal would've been bad for the sponsors.
 
'The loudest nitwits who don't speak for anyone' are part of the public that you claim didn't care. Oh and the squeaky clean image is what the public liked about him so the cheating scandal would've been bad for the sponsors.

Yeah a part of it, not more than a tiny noisy part among most people who definitely weren't outraged by the whole thing. Same goes for most situations where 'controversy' is drummed up by the media. I don't think you could argue that sponsors don't tend to demand that a sportsperson/athlete keeps up appearances way beyond what Joe Public expects. It's like the measure of what's acceptable is whatever would please Helen Lovejoy.
 
Just FYI Cass0907, tw2g and everyone else who disagree with the rules thing. In last year's BB Finland one of the hms was informed of her boyfriend breaking up with her and she was allowed to leave the BB house after that. I think it's normal to assume they would do the same in this case. Simply if you don't agree with this there is no need to be dramatic and start ridiculing others because they don't agree with you.

chads, I joined BBB so I could discuss the ethics of BB. And you are right! They can argue till they're blue in the face "those are the rules" etc... but fundamentally BB takes advantage of young, stupid, impressionable people to make money.
Since it's been on Ch9, though, it has been very kind to its young minions, but on 10 it reached a peak in horrendous in 2006, which had me seek out this forum.

I agree. If the producers of the show actually cared about the lives of those involved we might have a show like the one in Finland. If you want to see the other end of the spectrum, check out BB15 in the US. Awful! Housemates being racist and bullying others - and it is public knowledge that those involved have lost their jobs.
 
I have no problem with Sonya not having addressed the Tully dumping issue, but the show should have. They are not taking advantage of one of the potential positives of the program, which is to raise issues that exist in Australia. Many people are in abusive relationships. Why hasnt a psychologist been spoken to, and the dynamics of the relationship analysed? The type of abuse Tully is subjecting Drew to, and the obvious hurt, frustration and fear of her temper that Drew feels is not being looked at, as Sonya and her scriptwriter fawn over the loviness. Thsse types of relationship exist, and here is the perfect opportunity to raise the issue.

The cheating thing, hmm, I dont really care. In urban bohemia, where Drew and Tully both live, people cheat, people fall in love when they shouldnt, and it is not ideal, but, it happens. What is really a problem, and what should definitely be shown is that Girls, this is abuse, this is not okay. It is not the same as a guy punching his wife, but it is in the same realm, it is abuse.

Why has channel nine not addressed this. Seriously, why? BBUK chat every day with a psychologist. I remember that they used to do it on 10 occasionally. It is a chance to change something for the better, making the best of a dreadful situation.

Cause these types of relationships happen. The dynamic is not that dissimilar to John Goodman and Roseannes relationship on that show Roseanne.

Why the obsession with the LCD audience? Why no intelligent, useful discussion?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top