Jeff Probst explains why they let players cheat on Survivor challenges

Dalton Ross
·4 min read
17
Jeff Probst explains why they let players cheat on Survivor challenges
  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.
  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.

The latest episode of Survivor 44 featured something we've seen many, many times before: one tribe finishing a puzzle and then the two other teams still fighting for immunity blatantly looking over at the finished puzzle and copying the answer.

It's an event that often has viewers screaming "Hey, no fair!" at their television screens… even though in this particular instance it actually was kind of fair since both teams were able to copy to their heart's content in equal measure. But why are these certified copycats allowed to just steal someone else's answer instead of figuring it themselves? How come there aren't partitions or sight-line obstacles to keep the contestants honest?

'Survivor' host Jeff Probst
'Survivor' host Jeff Probst

Robert Voets/CBS 'Survivor' host Jeff Probst

It's a question Jeff Probst has been asked many times before — including by EW back in 2013. And he was asked it again on the latest episode of his On Fire With Jeff Probst podcast. During the episode, podcast producer Jay Wolff inquires of the host: "During this immunity challenge, there was a little bit of cheating, and a lot of people have asked: Why don't you put up puzzle dividers between the tribes?"

"Well, we do," responds the host. "We sometimes put up blinders. Sometimes we'll give you a cloth to cover your answer from the other tribe. And sometimes we don't. Lots of time it's logistical — it's just too big and you can't pull it off. But sometimes it's also creative, and as you saw last season early on, two tribes ganged up on one tribe and they were helping them — literally yelling 'Put that piece here, put that piece there.'"

Of course, another creative reason for not putting blinders up and allowing puzzle copying would seem to be that allowing copying vastly increases the chances of a dramatic comeback if a tribe or player just getting to a puzzle can look over and mimic the pieces that someone else has already spent time putting into place. At least, if I were a producer making a television show, that would be my reason for allowing it. However, Probst says there is a bigger picture reason for not enforcing a no-cheating rule when it comes to the puzzle, and it comes down to the overriding ideology of the game.

"The big guiding philosophy is we try to have as few rules as possible on Survivor," Probst explains on the podcast. "We try to let them create their own society. And I know that sounds heady, but that is how we look at it. So, in this world, if you're going to cheat, you might get away with it, there might be payback, somebody might notice and want to align with you because you cheated. It's your world, what do you want to do with it."

Survivor 44
Survivor 44

Robert Voets/CBS The cast of 'Survivor 44'

Unfortunately, for the Soka tribe, they are now down a member because their copying skills were simply not as good as Tika's. Speaking of challenges, Probst dropped a juicy tidbit on the podcast when he mentioned that he and other producers may look into modifying the rule that says a player cannot sit out back-to-back challenges in a one episode cycle that features both a reward and an immunity challenge — because two challenge episodes are so rare in the new era of Survivor.

"In the old days of Survivor, we used to have two challenges in most episodes," Probst explains. "That was designed to make the tribe figure out: Where do you want your weak player? Is the reward where you might get food, or immunity where you get protection? In this newer era, we sometimes only have one challenge, so that rule doesn't have the same bite, and therefore Claire was able to sit out of several challenges."

What does that mean moving forward? "I do think it's something that we do need to put on our whiteboard, and we need to examine if maybe we just change that," says Probst. "Because it does need to be updated."

Does that mean getting rid of the rule entirely or enforcing it in a new way so that players can no longer sit out back-to-back immunity challenges? We would assume the latter, but then again, if we've learned anything over 44 seasons, it is that no one should ever assume anything when it comes to Survivor.

To hear the host drop much more Survivor insight and intel (including on the entire casting process), check out On Fire With Jeff Probst.

Sign up for Entertainment Weekly's free daily newsletter to get breaking TV news, exclusive first looks, recaps, reviews, interviews with your favorite stars, and more.

Related content: