your article about the phone-in con, you would have to be a complete moron not to realise your being taken for a ride with the phone in or text in programs con,fortunately for itv and the bbc channels that promote these programs there are millions of people who are gullible enough to think they stand a chance of winning a couple of quid if they take part so the masses lose and the companies win then they have the Gaul to be shocked at the suggestion they are acting in a unappropriate way " well I never what a thing" people these days dont seem to consider the cost of mobile phones or care easy come easy go, so go for it itv/bbc the world is full of that kind, easy money for you but a total con for joe public the sad thing is the companies know.

graham fish, honiton/devon, england

I like many others have entered many of these competitions hoping to win a prize, sometimes hoping financially things will improve other times that I would be able to give someone a deserving present or to the charities I support. How stupid I feel that this could happen here in the UK. How sad for all of us.

GB, Birmingham , UK

i would just like to comment on an experience that is connected to the panorama programme that was screened on the 23 April 2007.I was a contestant on C5's Brainteaser back in the summer of 2006 . A few months later i tried on several occasions to be shortlisted to go through to win a cash prize.twice i was shortlisted to my great amazement, thinking i was in with a chance.However on the second occasion as i was leaving my name address etc on the answerphone i noticed Alex Lovell the presenter of Brainteaser was talking LIVE to the successful candidate.I may be wrong but i do feel that does exclude me somewhat from having a chance to win any dosh!!!

Ged Horth, Torquay, Devon

I'm surprised that anyone is surprised.
in my opinion.
I have to agree with those who take a negative view. This was set up to the TV companies/ OIT advantage. They would still be doing it if they had not been caught out.

I would also like to know how were the winners chosen and by who? Was the process monitored by independent adjudicators? Could the result have been manipulated by the operaters in favour of a chosen ally? Who knows?

DOUGLAS LAKE, Horsham, UK

I always tend to enter later in the show so most of my entries didn't stand a chance ! For some reason I trusted GMTV more than a lot of the others!

Anne Swain, Middlesbrough, England

This whole episode is unfortunately only too typical of the dishonesty which seems to have permeated British society and commerce in recent years. Most business seem to operate as close to the edge of sharp practice as they think they can get away with. This applies across the board from high level banking, insurance and utilities companies, through High Street retailers and supermarkets, to such everyday tradesmen as taxi drivers, plumbers & decorators.

Currently in the UK, after decades of boasting about the absence of corruption in our system, we have the spectacle of top level politicians and officials being suspected of selling honours; and at the other end of the spectrum rubbishy TV companies making money by cheating gullible viewers.

Geoff, London, UK

If we can claim money back from banks for overcharging, why can´t we do the same from the TV channels?

Doiminic, Leeds, UK

The BBC website quotes a Samantha Pedder from Saffron Walden who stated "I've spent near on £1,000, but you think, 'Well I'm in with a chance'.

If this is a representative example of the morons that enter these competitions, I say let them carry on scamming - the fools obviously have nothing better to do with their money !

David, Reading,

I ring GMTV several times a week for the competitions and feel that if we have be cheated then they should refund our money.

Rod Tilley, Crewe, Cheshire

I agree that these phone in competitions are a business and they are all out to make money, as are the people calling in. Like Frank said, a fool and his money are soon parted.
But what I find annoying is the fact that embassies use these premium rate numbers. People who are calling into embassies are doing it because it is necessary and they are being exploited since the embassies have a 'monopoly' of the market.

Nicholas, Nottingham,

Im really disapointed this has happend, are we all mugs trying to win a little extra in our lives.
Well they seem to think so as they were the winers not the people trying to win.

Andrea, Londin, UK

Alan's point is relevant and logical only if you don't care about honesty. It would appear that many people don't, unfortunately, when rip-offs such as this can continue for so long despite the awareness of the primary organisers . . . and who else up the chain? The mechanics of the process and the early appearance of shortlists surely gave others cause for concern! Alan's rationalisation doesn't appear to cater for those whose details can't be included in the group from which the winner is chosen. That is the crux surely.

As for the premium rates and the profits: GMTV is a business; it's purpose is profit; the viewers are informed of the costs before they phone; they elect to gamble the cost in the hope of winning. The only substantive issue here is the implied misrepresentation that all of those who phone in have a chance of winning. Sort that out and let the phone-ins continue. They entertain those who participate, especially those who win, and help keep the business afloat.

jim, Renfrew, Scotland

It has been a constant surprise to me that ANY premium rate (that is, any charge over the local call) should ever be allowed.
The only reason for charges being above the normal local rate is to make an undeserved profit.
The enforcement of regulations by ICSTIS and others is a national disgrace and the complaints of such maladministration are many and often.
A huge fine would do something to redress the balance but - who gets the income from the fine? At the same time why not levy a charge on the 'personalities' fronting these scams? e.g. Richard and Judy etc., might do something to prod their much paraded 'conciences' and 'concerns' for matters which, to me, have all the sincerity of a three-pound-note.

Norman Speight, London, UK

I don't think there is an issue here, and no one should be compensated. Probability is a way of describing uncertainty or a lack of information. If the viewers have no way of discerning a pattern in who is being chosen, then from their point of view they have a chance of winning. Suppose a winner was chosen by picking a random number x between 0 and 100 and then picking the person who called exactly x% of the way through the competition. Would that be fair? The people whining about this "scam" would say it is fair if x is chosen at the end of the competition but not if it is chosen (and kept totally secret) sometime earlier. Absurd!
In one particularly brilliant monologue in Absolutely Fabulous, Edina exclaims "Why not just have a Stupidity Tax?". Well this is what these games (and the lottery) are. Anyone bone-headed enough to watch these programs, let alone telephone them, clearly doesn't have a life and therefore doesn't need any money.

Alan, London,

A fool and his money are soon parted.

Frank Upton, Solihull,

Apart from this alleged scam the only other aspect of these phone in competitions that surprises me is the fact that people are dumb enough to enter them. A similar issue lies with the use of 0870 numbers. Callers don't realise these 'pay' the receiver for every call, yet many organisations - particularly the media - encourage their viewers to call in or make them the only way to contact them.

simon, Kent,

Wonder how many other broadcasters around the world used this software?

Simon, Amsterdam, Netherlands

Wonder how many other broadcasters around the world used that software?

Simon, Amsterdam, Netherlands