S28.E14: Survivor Cagayan Reunion Show

[ProfCrash]

I listened to Rob's interview with Tyson at the final five yesterday. Rob brought up a comment that Tyson made a while back that the camera people tip you off to when something big is happening or the location of the idol that type of thing. Tyson clarified. He said that there are always camera people around and what can tip you off is the camera pesons body language. If the camera person straightens up a bit or looks a bit more energetic it is a sign that the conversation they are recording is related to game play and not fantasizing about food. On the idol, Tyson said that the camera people might focus on a specific area, like the tree that the idol was hidden at with Tony, but that Tony knew the idol was at that tree because of the clue. So Tyson's take on the cameras is that if you are astute and can read body language the camera people inadvertently tip you off.

 

Given that there are players who are clearly not good at reading people, not everyone can use this to their benefit.

 

I would not be surprised that there is a clause to allow the rules to be changed at any time but Survivor has full time lawyers who are out on location during filming. I would imagine that any change has to go through them and that they are not easily swayed. We can think that way because we see how the story has been put together after all is said and done. We have no idea what is left on the cutting room floor. Perhaps there was more going on strategy wise with different people then we saw but it was cut to tell the story. The Producers know who won, who made it to final Tribal and all of that, so they do their best to tell the story so no one gets blindsided by the eventual outcome. The final take then is going to focus on the people who make it the farthest and how they got there. We get Tony and the spy shack/idols/hyper play. We get Spenser and Tasha the spunky underdogs who turn out to be pretty damn good at challenges and manipulating Tony. We get Kass who is an instigator. Pretty much everyone else is left out.

 

Trish played a good social game but those bore the Producers. Unless it is a showmance (and they tried to make that seem like a possibility for one episode), social games are boring because who wants to see someone who talks nicely, gets along, works around camp, and doesn't annoy the crap out of people? There is not drama so Trish is pretty much ignored and her social game is sold as Tony's lap dog.

 

Woo is pretty much ignored because he had no social game, didn't do anything strategic, wasn't great at survival type stuff and was kind of just there.

 

LJ, Jefra, and Jeremiah seemed like nice people and did things to help their alliance but they were not really all that active in anything. LJ admits in his exit interviews that he was boring. He claims it was intentional, because of how Tony was playing, but I think it is more a personality thing. Jefra tried to claim that she was as essential as Trish in bringing Kass over by instegating fights with Sarah and Kass but that is about the biggest strategic move she has talked about in her interviews. Jeremiah has said that he knows he was on the bottom in the beauty tribe and after Kass's flip so he really wan't working to make anything happen. Why would the Producers focus on them?

 

As for everyone else voted out before the merge, who cares? We got the Cliff/Lindsey/Trish drama and a bit of Morgan/rest of her tribe drama but that all peetered out pretty fast. What moves those folks made that might have been interesting stopped being interesting when they were ousted.

 

I don't buy for a second that Tony's win was influenced by decisions that Production made or where the cameras pointed. I think Tony would have lost to Spenser if Spenser had made it to the end, which is why Spenser went home in fourth. I think we got a pretty honest portrayal of Spenser, Kass, Woo, and Tony's game. I think that Trish and Tasha's games were undersold because they were more social in nature. I think Jefra, LJ, and Jeremiah were probably accuretly portrayed. I am not so sure about Sara but in the long run, that didn't matter because she was the first juror and she got there because she, and the rest of her alliance, failed to read Kass properly.

[kikaha]

Survivor can make sure the camera people don't tip off idol locations, by not letting them know those locations. 

 

I share a pretty similar overall view with the Professor.  To paraphrase: what we see is what happened.  With the same limits crash brought out, of knowing the outcome and telling the stories. 

 

I don't think  TPTB rigged last season to favor Tony.  Actually, if you believe in producer interference, you might say they rigged it to hurt him.  Just about every challenge after merge involved puzzles.  Tony was terrible at puzzles.  They made it next to impossible for him to win immunity.

[henripootel]

I'm gonna have to disagree some with you, Prof.  I will say that right from the beginning, I felt sure that Tony's shenanigans (saying how he intended to lie lie lie, his ridiculous 'surveillance' and eavesdropping) were geared to make him an asset to the producers, who of course love that shit.  And good on Tony for realizing that the producers are (I think) the great unsung force in the show.  I think we can agree that they have favorites (Jeffy certainly seems to) and the producers are highly motivated to make their show interesting and their narratives compelling.  As to what the producers will and won't do to make that happen ...

He said that there are always camera people around and what can tip you off is the camera pesons body language.

This strikes me as 'opportunity' for production.  I'm not saying that it's proof that they tip folks off intentionally, but I will say that if they absolutely didn't want such (ostensibly inadvertent) tip-offs to happen, they could, I'll bet, act to prevent them.  It would cause problems for the camera guys but they could, for instance, not tell them where the HIIs were, and they can't give away what they don't know.  Alternatively, they could exploit this situation to 'accidentally' tip players if they wanted, and I'm sure it'd be neigh on impossible to prove that it was intentional.  I'm a bit on the fence about this - there have been a long line of folks who found HIIs in a way the reeked of fish to me, Tony's SHII included.  But the fact that the producers have both motive and (arguably) opportunity makes me lean towards 'yea'.  

I would not be surprised that there is a clause to allow the rules to be changed at any time but Survivor has full time lawyers who are out on location during filming.  I would imagine that any change has to go through them and that they are not easily swayed.

 

Alternatively, I would argue that these lawyers are in no way out there to protect the 'integrity of the game' but are there solely to protect the producers.  And not, I might add, to protect them from violating the old 'quiz show' rules.  Linda Holmes (Miss Alli from old MBTv) wrote a nice piece about Survivor and the Law, the long and short of which (if I recall correctly) was that it isn't clear that these rules even apply to reality shows at all, and nobody is keen to wade in and find out.  Certain aspects of this show are, however, presented to us as fair competitions, meaning the challenges. I'd bet anything that they are fair, just as we see them.  Other things (like HIIs) they never say aren't rigged, which doesn't mean they are rigged but even if they are, this need not amount to 'fraud' (since they made no specific claims about them).  I'm no lawyer but Holmes is, and she seems to think that the producers are actually not constrained by what the viewers (or a non-lawyer) might call 'fairness', up to and including some aspects of the show being pre-determined by the producers.  It's far from clear that the producers are forbidden from doing such things, as to whether or not they actually would, well ...

I don't buy for a second that Tony's win was influenced by decisions that Production made or where the cameras pointed.

To the contrary, I think this season provided us with the absolute clearest example yet the production did aid a player (in this case, Tony); Probst's decision to forgo the pro forma admonition about HIIs (including Tony's SHII) being useless after F5 (allowing Tony to bluff that it was still in play).  I've banged on enough about that in previous posts, but the dynamic we saw later seemed clearly to indicate that if Probst had not decided to leave this out, Tony would likely have gone to the jury then and there.  Probst's BS aside, the 'fair' thing to do would have been to follow protocol.  But he felt free to alter this (and even claim that this was actually the 'fair' thing to do) because, as you say, I'm sure there's a clause in the contract that says 'the rules are whatever the fuck we say they are'. 

Edited June 7, 2014 by henripootel

[TexanGal]

Tony's bluff about the idol ended up NOT mattering to the vote at all. That was the tribal council when they voted out Spencer. Even without an idol bluff from Tony, no one would have voted out Tony over Spencer.

[henripootel]

Even without an idol bluff from Tony, no one would have voted out Tony over Spencer.

Do we actually know that for sure?  The comments we got from Kass and Woo indicated thusly, but they were predicated on the (mistaken) notion that Tony remained unassailable.  Given that their options seemed (mistakenly) limited to voting out Spencer or voting against each other, they chose Spencer.  Remember that both Kass and Woo agreed that going up against Tony at F2 was a terrible option for either of them, and Woo even said that he'd have to be the stupidest player ever to pick Tony voluntarily (which he did, so he is).  Spencer might have been a better choice than Tony to keep around, but voting out Tony seemed impossible.  This is pretty much the opposite of Tony's bluff 'not mattering'.

[ProfCrash]

Woo took Tony to the finals over Kass, he wasn't voting out Tony. Kass thought Tony was a goat. They would not have kept Spenser who had a minimum of four votes on the jury, ie his alliance.

[TexanGal]

Do we actually know that for sure?  The comments we got from Kass and Woo indicated thusly, but they were predicated on the (mistaken) notion that Tony remained unassailable.  Given that their options seemed (mistakenly) limited to voting out Spencer or voting against each other, they chose Spencer.  Remember that both Kass and Woo agreed that going up against Tony at F2 was a terrible option for either of them, and Woo even said that he'd have to be the stupidest player ever to pick Tony voluntarily (which he did, so he is).  Spencer might have been a better choice than Tony to keep around, but voting out Tony seemed impossible.  This is pretty much the opposite of Tony's bluff 'not mattering'.

Yes, if there's one thing we know for an absolute fact, it's that NO one wanted to sit next to either Spencer or Tasha at the end. Those two needed to be eliminated ASAP. It's just stupid to even entertain the thought that either Kass or Woo would have kept Spencer over Tony. Come on, you're smarter than that.

[henripootel]

It's just stupid to even entertain the thought that either Kass or Woo would have kept Spencer over Tony. Come on, you're smarter than that.

Oh, I'm way more stupid than that - I'll consider most anything.  For instance, I would have thought that the thing neither Kass nor Woo would never, ever do was to take Tony if neither had to.  Even they said as much.  And yet that happened.  Now I know we got Woo's 'noble warrior' speech to 'explain' his turn of heart, but when unlikely things happen I consider unlikely things.  Like perhaps the producers really, really wanted Tony to be in the final so they spent a bit of time bending Woo's ear along the lines of 'Don't you think Tony deserves to be in the final?  Don't you want to set a good example for all noble budo guys everywhere (leaving aside the pilfering from Spencer earlier on)?"  And before you say the producers would never do this, I'd remind you that reports of them doing this very thing date all the way back to season 1.

 

A lot of these question turn on what you're willing to consider.  If you're of a mind that this 'game' exists solely to sell a reality show, you'll consider all kinds of stuff. 

[fishcakes]

And before you say the producers would never do this, I'd remind you that reports of them doing this very thing date all the way back to season 1.

 

Stacey Stillman made that claim in her lawsuit against Burnett (she alleged Dirk and Sean had been encouraged to vote her out instead of Rudy) but Dirk flat out denied it, and Sean said that he had talked to Burnett about his vote but that Burnett not only didn't try to influence him but told him to vote his conscience. Burnett countersued Stacey and the whole thing was settled out of court. So while it's been reported, it's never been substantiated.

 

I don't believe the game is rigged or that producers try to favor certain players over others. If that were the case, we would have seen Russell, Rupert, Cirie, Yau Man, Phil, Coach, James, Amanda, and Ozzy as winners of one of their seasons. Some because the fans love them and some because the producers love them. And we wouldn't have seen Fabio, Amber, Natalie White, Bob, Jenna, Ethan probably, or Vecepia as winners. If I thought it was rigged or the outcome orchestrated by the producers, I wouldn't watch it, but I don't think that; I think that the winner is chosen by the players for reasons that are sometimes rational and mature and sometimes stupid and emotional. Sometimes the person I want to win will win, but the majority of the time, the winner is someone I don't necessarily like all that much. But just because the winner is someone I personally wasn't rooting for, that doesn't mean the game is fixed.

[henripootel]

Sometimes the person I want to win will win, but the majority of the time, the winner is someone I don't necessarily like all that much.

Yeah, but Fishcakes, just because some aspect of Survivor are probably not rigged (I agree the actual voting is not scripted) in no way implies that none of it is rigged.  Heck, I think that some of the HII recoveries look fishy, but that doesn't imply that every single one of them is.  Just because OJ Simpson didn't kill every single person he ever met doesn't mean he didn't kill his wife.

 

Do we have a link on the whole thing with Sean?  My recollection (from a million years ago) was that he reacted to the producers saying that 'they'd never influence a vote' by saying essentially 'uh, what about you guys asking me over and over 'don't you think Rich deserves to win?''  I had no idea that he talked to Burnett personally but I think you buried the lede here; 'why the hell is the executive producer chatting with contestants while the game is still going on?  At that most important juncture in the game?'  Not proof of anything, obviously, but ... interesting.  

Edited June 10, 2014 by henripootel

[FormerMod-a1]

Let's keep this thread/topic for the reunion show.  Anything else should be discussed in other, appropriate topics - for example, the Past Seasons Talk.  If you don't see a topic that quite fits, you can create one.  Thanks, and carry on!