★★★ In each broadcast of the long-running reality show, whose brand-new edition exploded the rating of open television with double-digit numbers in most of its daily shipments, the charismatic, effective and current host, Santiago del Moro, reminds the audience and competitors that “Big Brother sees everything”. He highlighted it again to announce the punishment of the reprehensible sexual joke of a participant with the inclusion of him among the potential eliminated for that week.
No one doubted that it was the most sensible thing to do at the television table that meets on Mondays, Tuesdays and Wednesdays, to exchange views on the development of the successful contest. Made up of the journalist, political scientist and writer Ceferino Reato, the television presenter (and almost a lawyer) Sol Pérez, the former participant and producer Gastón Trezeguet, the entertainment chronicler Laura Ubfal, the panelist Nati Jota and a random guest, the motley mix of voices of the “analysts”, it always provokes heated dialogues and reveals personal preferences (which should not happen).
But last Sunday, the one expelled by the viewers was not that questioned player but another, characterized by his continuous reprehensible actions, complete disinterest in healthy coexistence, or clumsy tricks to promote the postulation of someone depositary of his hatred. It is that with these times, the true and most heated debate about the people locked up for a month, in a spacious, comfortable and modern house, to be observed 24 hours a day, is concocted on social networks. Users reproduce and amplify words, gestures and attitudes that leave no doubt about individual intentions or group complicity.
Thus, in the different applications, other equally treacherous and premeditated acts were condemned that exposed a certain myopia or the debatable sanction criteria applied by Big Brother. Objectively, it was very unpleasant to witness how, in two different weeks, some people stole food and the repeated verbal and physical harassment suffered by a young man for his alleged homosexuality, even though the victim kept silent. In none of these cases did those responsible receive corrective measures. That is why, without limits, the contestants banished until now by popular vote are the ones who acted in a malicious, disrespectful and arrogant manner.
It would then be important to place greater emphasis on harmful behaviors and, why not, question Big Brother’s omissions or decisions. In short, fulfilling the journalistic duty of making the sound of the two bells heard.
by Marcelo Pavazza