There are literally hundreds of opportunities for production to affect the outcome every season. Nearly any challenge can be rigged if so desired.

I could see the challenges in Cook Islands and the infamous double boot being to the advantage of the underdog Aitu4, but there was no need for Jonathan to be coaxed into anything. He was separated by age and not treated very well by the Raro4. Yul was shown to be willing to jettison Ozzy if he got a chance. So, with the Aitu4, Jonathan at least had a shot at the F4. If Jonathan stays with the Raro4, they likely vote him out F6 ahead of Sundra. And even if he didn't have a strategical reason to flip, Jonathan wouldn't have been the first or the last person to make a voting decision based off who they preferred to see win the game versus what was best for them.

A pretty powerful piece of evidence in Survivor's favor is that no one has taken a serious case of fraud into court against them. (Forget Stacy, I mean, a SERIOUS case.) It would get plenty of press if anyone did. I don't care how you word a contract. There isn't a contract out there that couldn't be challenged in court if someone thought they weren't given an equal chance to win. That would be fraud.

My girl Laura talked a big game on the radio about RussHell being helped in Samoa, but she never did anything about it, so I believe it was probably more post-game bitterness than anything.

>