Hah. Two Orwellian blog-post titles in a row.
I watched snippets of Celebrity Big Brother when it began a week or so ago - I switched off for good when the editors allowed one very unpleasant contestant, who decided that she was unable to pronounce Shilpa's name, to hog the limelight.
Apparently many celebrities who take part in this so-called 'social experiment' (an experiment that really did not need repeating more than once, in my opinion) enter the show so that the public can see 'what they are really like'. Well, we've seen that now, haven't we!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
They were talking about that on "World Have Your Say" today. I felt totally out of loop because I haven't watched the show, but the discussion was pretty interesting!
CBB has made me very angry, but not necessarily for the 'controversy'. I am usually very good at avoiding BB as it is a steaming pile of horses**t (social experiment, my arse) and I would rather not sully my eyes with the antics of a bunch of sub-human morons. If I want that, I will watch the Planet Earth episode that includes footage of chimpanzee troops (troupes?).
The thing that has made me cross is that I have been unable to avoid these idiots as they have been splashed all over newspapers, tv, t'interweb. The Guardian ran prominent stories on it, we even discussed it in my PGCE lectures!
This vile and unpleasant TV programme corrupts the potent message that should go with the name Big Brother. I wonder how many of the current housemates even know where the Big Brother concept comes from? Am I being a snob? Probably. Is my head up my own arse? Probably.
The whole thing makes me sad - particularly when I think that the whole thing was probably cooked up by CBB's producers to provide ratings for a dying show - and we fell for it. We allowed ourselves to be manipulated by these people. In the end, the villains of the piece are not the Dopey, Booby and Has-Been (although they do seem fairly repulsive), but the programme makers who have demonstrated yet again that they will do anything for higher ratings.
Maybe we can expect a programme that pretends to 'explore Roman culture' by filming the feeding of unwanted and feared minorities to lions? You know it could happen...
"Endemol sources say that the new programme 'Chew Kitty, Chew' will be an exciting and cutting edge approach to historical programming that will appeal to the youth of today"
I have declared my blog a 'no Celebrity Big Brother Zone' so I am venting here!
I have never been able to 'get into' Big Brother, whether it be the 'ordinary people' or so called celebrities. Watching other people perform in such a way is not appealing and I agree with 9/10ths that none of these people have a clue about the origin of Big Brother and it's sinister background.
Having said that, they obviously chose these particular contestants for a reason, the programme psychologists must have seen these character flaws and suggested they would make good viewing.
I find it appalling and can only conclude that these people don't realise (because they are so shockingly dense and undereducated/uneducatable*) that when we see 'what they are really like' we will like them even less than we did before!
*Yes, I realise I have shown my own lack of education by making words up, but they say what I mean! If you follow...
It's good to hear your views! I don't think it's 'intellectual snobbery' at play here on our part, at all. My formal education came to a close nearly 20 years now (shheeeesh). I've forgotten most of what I learned, I think! But, I want to remain mentally stimulated though - and I find that you simply can not look to the TV for that at all, really (although I do love Corrie.... errr, anyway).
Let's not dwell for too much longer on BB - but I just want to say that the programme could, feasibly, have been of (limited) interest. The study of group dynamics is quite fascinating and valuable to anyone in charge of groups of people - teachers, managers etc. It might also have been interesting to hear a bunch of random people discussing things - politics, religion, and]ything really - in depth. But No. Heaven forbid that TV should be informative, challenge our thinking or provide us with anything thought-provoking to chew upon. TV is too concerned with what 'The Sun' thinks of its output, and 'The Sun' is aimed, so I am told, with those of a reading age of 8.
Sorry my comment's poorly written and full of typos but I'm multi-tasking at the moment!!!
The only two similar programmes I have ever watched were the original Survivor (can't even remember if that was what it was called, a group of people shipwrecked on an island, had to complete tasks and vote each other off, the winner winning one million pounds) and Castaway, when I fell in love with Ben Fogle (oh, do stop dribbling Louise...). They were interesting from a people watching point of view, but then the producers of these sorts of programmes got too 'clever' for themselves and everything has since gone a little 'Pete Tong'!
And my literacy isn't up to much today either. Sorry! But I think you get the gist of it.
Post a Comment