"There were scandals in quiz shows in the ‘50’s. Stacey Stillman sued CBS after S1 in Borneo about Burnett manipulating Dirk & Sean to vote her out rather than Rudy. With today’s social media & whistleblower laws, I doubt they would risk trying to fix the game. Burnett has too much to lose now."Don't worry for Burnett, he won't lose anything. The Survivor contracts shield him from any lawsuit and blowing whistles would only get more ratings. Anyway, sometimes it isn't the outcome that is changed but just the way getting there.
Tyson was never really able to explain his own actions. Why? Because it wasn't his own actions.
If Woo is so dumb that he didn't know he'd have a better chance of beating Kass than Tony then the guy needs to be institutionalized. While he only hurt himself in Cagayan, he may very well inadvertantly hurt others in the real world. Dumb like that he could decide to keep warm by making a fire in his appartment or something like that.
Before winning Micronesia, Parvati was mostly a joke amongst Survivor fans. She was called Pervati or Poverty more often than her real name. It's winning that made her a star and opened up the possibilities for SeeBS to give her those shows.
How can I do character analysis when the show gives us nothing to analyze. Did you see how the last episode was presented? Two minutes post TC discussions, a challenge, scrambling before the vote and then TC and repeat. BORING. I'm done and I've been done for a few weeks now. It's only doing Basher type summaries that kept me going. Where you here during the best years of this board when we'd have to reserve our place to have the honor of doing a summary? There was a strict rule: To be allowed to recap one of the two top shows (Survivor and Amazing Race) you had to have written a summary for a lesser show. I remember writing one for Treasure Hunters just to get a chance of doing one for Survivor! Times have changed and now no one does summaries anymore. Well, I went back to them because that's really what I like doing.