5 ms·
I just finished watching season 6 of Alone and at first found it to be an interesting watch, but as I saw more episodes (and the contestants had been out there
by extr 6y ago
I just finished watching season 6 of Alone and at first found it to be an interesting watch, but as I saw more episodes (and the contestants had been out there longer), I saw more and more of what you're talking about here. And after I finished the show and looked it up online, I was surprised to see just how much of the narrative I had just watched was completely fabricated and morally repugnant. For those who aren't familiar, the premise is 10 people are shipped to a remote destination with the basics (sleeping bag, axe, cord, etc...) and whoever lasts the longest gets $500K ($0 if you lose, I presume). They are also given camera equipment and are responsible for filming themselves. They don't see anyone else while they're out there except a medical team for occasional check-ups. Season 6 took place in northern Canada in near arctic conditions, starting in late fall and continuing through winter.
(Spoilers)
* The skill gap between best/worst contestants is portrayed as minimal. In reality, some contestants came in with years of lived experience thriving in the exact environment of the show (like the victor, who had spent years living in Siberia with people native to the region), or are literally paid professionals (like the army survival instructor, who tapped out because he was so successfully surviving he was bored, and didn't need the money), while others come from difficult backgrounds and have picked up wilderness skills only as a hobby or by necessity. When you find out just how large the skill gap was, and how some of these contestants basically never had a chance, it feels completely exploitive and effectively rigged.
* Contestants give "camera confessions" in classic reality TV style, but these take a very dark turn as the show progresses. Going from "Excited to overcome the mental challenge of isolation", to starving, choking through tears "If I can hang on just a few more days I might be able to win the prize money for my family and give them the life I never had" in just a few episodes. If people are out there doing this for pride or because they enjoy the experience, so be it, but it's another thing entirely to dangle a large monetary prize in front of them. It just feels really sick to be watching people who are incredibly vulnerable and literally dying open up about their traumas and making it very clear they are only sticking it out for the cash. Begging to be allowed to stay when they are clearly underweight and at risk for cardiac issues.
* The final episode makes it seem like the 2 remaining contestants are both just hanging by a thread, a literal starvation contest, which would be sad enough. But if you do some research afterward, you find out that while the 2nd place contestant had lost a dangerous amount of weight and was eating rabbit entrails, the winner had 100s of lbs of food stored (including moose and plenty of fish) and had not lost any weight. Hell, the last (gigantic) fish he caught they apparently brought back and used to feed the production camp.
* All this said, the winner of Season 6, Jordan Jonas, is a very interesting (and apparently humble, good natured) guy, and I have enjoyed reading his commentary on the show on reddit and his blog. The show portrays him as lucky in some respects, probably to make him seem more like the other contestants, but he was in fact using a great deal of very specific techniques and knowledge, like how to build an structurally sound/ideal shelter, track/bait/hunt large game, ice fish, or build structures to keep stored food away from other predators. He himself admits the show obviously created a false narrative around his chances to win.
- jonny_eh 6y agoIf the prizes went to charity it could remove the "sad" factor.
- extr 6y agoBut most of the people with these skills are not independently wealthy, and would be hard pressed to give up wages for a few months just to participate. I think the ideal situation would just be to use a tiered prize structure. Where the longer you last the more money you get, but not so much that you're incentivized to stay after it becomes hopeless/dangerous. A 500K 1st prize could easily be split into 150/100/75/50/50/25/25/25 for places 1-8. That way you're always competing for about 25K more, but you're not desperate to hang out or get sent home with nothing.
- hutzlibu 6y agoYes, but that reduces drama/colosseum fights. I think the original colosseum fights were mostly not fair either, but the audience just wants blood.
- WalterBright 6y ago> I think the original Colosseum fights were mostly not fair either I would expect the opposite. Nobody wants to see a pro baseball team crush a high school team, they want to see an evenly matched slugfest. The notion of a "fair fight" is deeply ingrained in people.
- hutzlibu 6y agoYeah, but the mob also likes winners. After a "fair" fight. Like in the reality survival show. It seems like a good fight, but when you have trained professionals vs. desperate people - you can have a spectactular fight, just not a fair one.
- WalterBright 6y ago