> The worrying observation I make from Traitors is how easily a group of about a dozen people can become so sure of guilt on so little evidence, and time after

> The worrying observation I make from Traitors is how easily a group of about a dozen people can become so sure of guilt on so little evidence, and time after time of being knowingly wrong. I agree, some of the theories they come up with are insane and I feel like this (UK) season in particular is characterised by a lot of tribalism and anti-intellectualism. Against that, we have to remember that the aim of the show is to be as entertaining as possible to as many people as possible. Interpersonal drama is more popular than explorations of game theory, so I suspect casting was based on who would be the most entertaining rather than the best at the game. I also think the editing plays a big role in presenting viewers with a particular narrative. They can probably quite easily cast people as being good or bad, smart or stupid. Personally I have always thought the game was inherently quite stacked in the traitors' favour. Ultimately information is absolutely crucial to the game, and the traitors have a lot more of it (at the start of the game, they are arguably the only ones who have any at all).