Survivor host Jeff Probst, producer Jeff Wolfe, and Survivor 46 runner-up Charlie Davis meet on the On Fire podcast to discuss the fifth episode of Survivor 47. They converse about why the Sanctuary was created, the return of the chickens as a first in Survivor history, Probst’s commentary on the challenges, and more. Also, Probst reveals whether it bothers him when some people believe they’re too smart to watch Survivor.
Firstly, Probst hinted that the social hour twist might come back with some tweaks. He also said the reward challenge wasn’t an A for production as they recognised they could do better, so if it comes back, it will also require some adjustments. Then, Probst explains that the Sanctuary, where good things happen, was created as a way for production to spare resources due to the shortened time of the seasons; this way, all rewards would be set in the same place as opposed to different settings which is how it was before the New Era began.
The returned chickens were later brought up, which was a first in Survivor history. Probst says he is open to negotiations if the exchange or proposal is fair to everyone and if they’re not setting a precedent that might haunt production and the show in the future. Charlie then mentions that he did the math and states that the chickens would have produced more calories in the long run for the players and that Probst might have swindled them without even noticing it. However, Probst interjects that he warned the players before he accepted the deal about how they would get an instant reward rather than a bigger one in the future.
Probst also mentions that he’s aware his challenge commentary is annoying before the haters come after him. He reminisces that it started back in Survivor: The Australian Outback and the colour commentary came into full swing during Survivor: Thailand when he got into it with some players. Due to the positive audience reaction to Probst’s increased engagement with the players, the commentary stayed in the episode and never left the show.
Lastly, Probst is asked what his response is to the people who are dismissive of the show, mainly due to its reality TV genre. He admits it used to bother him when people argued they were too intellectual to watch Survivor, as it was probably fake. Still, he smartly quips many intelligent people do watch the show, for instance, Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who has also written about the show and the critical lessons we all can learn from it.
“I’ve had many chips on my shoulder over the years. Fortunately, that is not one anymore,” Probst added.
Written by