Well that was fascinating, distressing and I guess not all that surprising. It's really interesting to see how much overt psychological manipulation goes into making the show. Being interviewed by psychiatrists before and after the show and being asked if the contestant harbors murderous feelings towards the judges (or themselves) after losing is pretty intense.
On a meta-note it was interesting to read such dark subject matter about exploitation in the name of advertising while salon.com did their best to exploit me as a reader. I've never had such a bizarre experience on what I thought was a mainstream site. I was hijacked mid-article to go to a punch the monkey type ad, chunks of text would load only after I viewed mid article ads, my browser never stopped loading as I read. The tone of the article and the reading experience combined to really create a nefarious vibe.
If anyone would like to skip the existential crisis, I put the article text on pastebin to make it actually readable:
I knew that reality TV was fabricated (at least the US shows) but to read such detail about psychologists, 'wranglers' and legal shenanigans was really shocking.
15% of all earnings? Giving up all rights, background and medical checks? Scary stuff. But again, not surprising seeing how big and lucrative this segment of industry is.
> “... send me those final forms, it seems we don’t have your signed contract.”
> “I'm really not at all wild about that idea,” I wrote back.
> More forcefully she wrote back: “I’m having legal call you to straighten this out.”
“Feel free to email.”
> They never contacted me again
A hidden lesson in asking for demands in writing. If she had said, “feel free to call”, they would have tried to intimidated her over the phone, with near-violent threats that likely would not stand up in a court of law. But her saying “email” showed to these vultures that she knew the power of the paper trail. So they disappeared, rather than risk exposure.
It is worth noting that I think Survivor treats their cast very differently. It is hard to know exactly, as I have never seen directly, but I have spent time with the crew from Survivor, and spent some time on location while they were shooting. They treated me with amazing grace and I am forever grateful for their time and hospitality. I imagine that their record may not be perfect, but I think their approach to this is more like a sport with athlete, than a prison guard in the Stanford Prison Experiment.
I don't know if it's a factor, but it might be worth noting that Survivor originated from Sweden. (Where it was called Expedition Robinson, after Robinson Crusoe.)
I believe one of the first contestant to be voted home - ever - committed suicide shortly after [1].
It was a big deal in Scandinavia 20 years ago, and I'm surprised that shows to this day apparently don't ask contestant to take therapy to prevent such outcomes.
In the grand scheme of things, that is pretty cheap, and even a penny pinching, greedy, neo capitalist, TV-produce would presumably see the benefit in avoiding these kind of things.
Yep, completely true. And if memory serves me right, I read in the newspapers that he had a history of mental issues. Not entirely sure about it though. What I do know for sure was that it turned into a MAJOR thing in media in Sweden. The show was called "bullying tv", and the producers instantly declared they would re-cut all the episodes before showing them. They did, people hated it for the first few episodes, but by the end of season one pretty much everybody was hooked. The success was a fact.
17 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 37.5 ms ] threadOn a meta-note it was interesting to read such dark subject matter about exploitation in the name of advertising while salon.com did their best to exploit me as a reader. I've never had such a bizarre experience on what I thought was a mainstream site. I was hijacked mid-article to go to a punch the monkey type ad, chunks of text would load only after I viewed mid article ads, my browser never stopped loading as I read. The tone of the article and the reading experience combined to really create a nefarious vibe.
If anyone would like to skip the existential crisis, I put the article text on pastebin to make it actually readable:
https://pastebin.com/dPVUnKS8
Which is kind gesture, but this has already been automated. It's called an ad-blocker.
https://f-droid.org/en/packages/org.jak_linux.dns66/
15% of all earnings? Giving up all rights, background and medical checks? Scary stuff. But again, not surprising seeing how big and lucrative this segment of industry is.
> “I'm really not at all wild about that idea,” I wrote back.
> More forcefully she wrote back: “I’m having legal call you to straighten this out.” “Feel free to email.”
> They never contacted me again
A hidden lesson in asking for demands in writing. If she had said, “feel free to call”, they would have tried to intimidated her over the phone, with near-violent threats that likely would not stand up in a court of law. But her saying “email” showed to these vultures that she knew the power of the paper trail. So they disappeared, rather than risk exposure.
It was a big deal in Scandinavia 20 years ago, and I'm surprised that shows to this day apparently don't ask contestant to take therapy to prevent such outcomes.
In the grand scheme of things, that is pretty cheap, and even a penny pinching, greedy, neo capitalist, TV-produce would presumably see the benefit in avoiding these kind of things.
[1] https://www.vg.no/rampelys/tv/begikk-selvmord-etter-deltakel...