Gameplay Strategies in Social

Strategy Reality  Television

Against all odds, ice cream scooper and comic artist, Erik Reichenbach, guaranteed his spot in the final four of “Survivor: Micronesia” after winning individual immunity. The Black Widow Brigade was crushed. The four women; Parvati Shallow, Cirie Fields, Amanda Kimball and Natalie Bolton; were all part of the now-iconic alliance that carried them all the way from the merge to the final five of “Survivor: Micronesia.” Erik Reichenbach winning immunity meant that, for the first time, the women would be sending home one of their own. With darkness looming and tribal council approaching, the women got to work on a plan. They knew they could manipulate Reichenbach to save Bolton with promises of safety and redemption in front of the jury who were sour on him. That night at tribal council, the Black Widow Brigade’s hard work paid off and Reichenbach gave his immunity necklace to Bolton. It was hard to tell who was more shocked; Jeff, that Reichenbach could make such a bone-headed move, or the women of the Brigade who couldn’t believe their plan worked. Reichenbach was immediately voted out by the four women. Shallow would go on to win the season against Kimball. The immunity necklace moment, which legendary reality TV reporter Dalton Ross calls the show’s “greatest moment ever,” would solidify Shallow and Fields as “Survivor” legends and be a determining factor in granting Shallow the win. CBS considers Shallow one of the greatest players of all time, awarding her fourth-place on their “10 All-Time Greatest Survivor Castaways” list. She is considered one of the greatest because of her ability to effortlessly navigate the social game and win competitions in the popular reality competition television series.

​

The Primetime Emmys use the following definition for its “Outstanding Reality Competition” category: “Programs that include a competitive element for a prize… with produced contestant story elements and other reality-style competitive elements.” Many times, reality competition shows involving social strategy have simple rules that lead to complex mechanics requiring strong social skills and the ability to navigate alliances. Consider “Survivor,” in which the premise is to leave upwards of 20 “castaways” on a deserted island for up to 39 days with no access to the creature comforts of human society, including food and shelter. Castaways must compete in grueling physical and mental competitions for immunity, and once immunity is determined, the tribe attends “Tribal Council,” a ceremony where everyone votes for who they want to send home. The votes are read, and the player with the most votes is eliminated.  When only two to three players remain, a group of recently eliminated players called “the Jury” vote for who they believe played the best game. Seems simple enough, but with such loose rules, strategies must be established to ensure successful gameplay. These strategies break into two categories: competitive and social strategies. If a player wants to maximize their win potential, establishing and executing their ideal game strategy is paramount.

​

In her book The Lie About the Truck: Survivor, Reality TV, and the Endless Gaze, Sallie Tisdale discusses the evolution of reality competition programs since “Survivor” premiered on CBS in 2000. “Even though earlier seasons focused more on physical survival… The focus now is on relationships, alliance-building, deceit, and secrets.” Many strategies have been deployed and defunct by castaways, houseguests, and the like since reality competition’s inception. For example, in “Survivor: Borneo,” Doctor Sean Kenniff utilized what he called the alphabet strategy; he would vote for people in alphabetical order so he would not come across as a bad guy. His strategy was squashed by eventual “Borneo” champion Richard Hatch when he and his Tagi alliance discovered Kenniff’s strategy. At the following tribal council, Tagi put all their votes on Kenniff’s ally, Jenna Lewis. Knowing where Kenniff’s vote would land because of his nice-guy strategy, Tagi ultimately used Kenniff as a swing vote to send home his own ally. This strategy changes the game, giving Tagi a game majority and allowing them to steamroll their way to the end.

Competitive strategies are defined by Fandom: Big Brother as strategies players use in competitions. Competitions are usually for prizes or immunity, which players can keep or give to an ally. There are several different strategies, but the site claims the three most popular strategies are aggressive, passive, and selective competition. Competitive strategies can be paired with social strategies to maximize win potential.

​

When a strong, athletic player is seen as a game threat to make it to the end, often they have no choice but to try and win as many competitions as they can. A great strategy these players can utilize is an aggressive competition strategy. Often, this helps build a player’s “resume;” a term players use to describe the significant moments a specific player dictated gameplay. In “Survivor: Cook Islands,” Mexican-American castaway, Ozzy Lusth, would begin his reign as one of the strongest competitive threats in “Survivor” history. He won a total of five individual and five additional tribal immunities, making Lusth safe in 10 of the 15 eliminations that season. Lusth also secured first-place in seven reward challenges on the Cook Islands and played a total of four times over 44 seasons. According to True Dork Times, a website dedicated to “Survivor” statistics, Lusth has won 58 percent of team and 55 percent of individual competitions he has competed in, and he holds the records for most immunity wins in a single season and tribe challenge wins, as well as the honor of being the player with the most vote-outs in a single season with three.

​

Players are sometimes able to hide their challenge prowess, and only win when it is necessary to ensure their safety. These players are using the selective competition strategy. On “Big Brother 8” houseguest “Evel Dick” Donato was a notorious villain known for his loudmouth antics and his ability to pull out a win when his back was against the wall. Donato established himself in the early game, winning the week one food competition and the week two food and Head of Household competitions. He laid low competition-wise until week eight when he was put on the block next to his ally and daughter, Danielle Donato. His antics had made him a fan favorite; America loved Donato, and that week it voted to remove him from the block before the week eight eviction. While on the block, Donato realized he was not as safe as he thought he was. From then on, he would win competitions to guarantee his and Danielle’s safety. He wins the pivotal week nine Head of Household and Danielle wins the week nine Power of Veto then Head of Household in week 10, ushering the two into the final three. Donato ultimately wins the final Head of Household, and the jury crowns him the winner and Danielle is the runner-up. Donato’s abilities to win when it mattered and lay low when necessary were essential to his success.

​

Not all players are “competition beasts,” a term coined by Big Brother fans that describes players who repeatedly win competitions. Some players either can’t or don’t want to win competitions, usually to keep their social threat minimized. The ideal strategy for these players is a passive one. Passive competition involves actively losing and “throwing” competitions, which Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English defines as “to deliberately lose a fight or sports game that you could have won.” This is a good strategy for intimidating players, whether they are physically, mentally, or socially threatening. Will Kirby, a dermatologist competing on season 2 of Big Brother is probably the most referenced passive player on “Big Brother.” Despite being incredibly smart, witty and in great physical shape, Kirby lost every power competition such as Power of Veto and Head of Household competition but won “Big Brother 2” and placed fourth on “Big Brother: All Stars.” Kirby was able to navigate the game from a social and strategic standpoint so effectively that he did not need to win competitions; it would have just brought more attention to his strength as a player. This makes passive competition strategy great for strong social players.

​

Social strategies are commonly used in reality-competition programs such as: The gamer strategy implemented by Terry; the snake strategy employed by Gheesling; the floater strategy executed by “Survivor: Samoa’s” Natalie White; and the meat shield strategy, created by Jeremy Collins in “Survivor: Cambodia.” In an analysis of voting patterns during the first XX seasons titled “Do You Know Who Your Friends Are? An Analysis of Voting Patterns and Alliances on the Reality Television Show ‘Survivor,’” Erich Hayes and Norah Dunbar state “clearly, players must establish their social capital to create power over their opponents and establish alliances to help them ward off threats in the game.” Put simply, a player’s social game is vital to their success.

​

After entering the “Big Brother” house at the start of season 14, college student Ian Terry made it well known he was a “Big Brother” superfan. The strategy Terry would implement is referred to as the gamer strategy. Gamers use their knowledge of past seasons and game mechanics to propel themselves through the game. Terry’s biggest schtick as a gamer was to take every punishment throughout the game (he volunteered to wear a dog costume and sleep in a kennel for 24 hours, for example) to experience every aspect of the game he loves so much. His hope was that this would encourage other players to keep him around, so they did not have to endure any humiliating punishments. Terry’s knowledge of the game also helped him align with “Big Brother” legend Dan Gheesling, giving him protection since Gheesling was such a big target. This strategy worked perfectly for Terry; he was the winner of season 14, receiving $500,000 and was invited back to play “Big Brother: All Stars” in 2020.

​

“Survivor: Samoa” brought on one of the game’s most villainous characters to date, Russell Hantz. Hantz claimed he was a victim of the Hurricane Katrina floods, repeatedly treated women poorly through abusive language, and even was destructive of others’ property after throwing another contestant’s socks into the fire. To say he is a villain is an understatement, but future “Samoa” winner Natalie White saw a golden opportunity in aligning with him. While Hantz was an atrocious social player, he was a strategic mastermind. The Purple Rock Podcast reports Hantz was the first person in show history to find a hidden immunity idol without a clue to its location, and Hantz could identify and navigate secret alliances with ease. White knew she would not make it far into the individual portion of the game without someone protecting her as she was weak physically and strategically, making Hantz her golden ticket. The two would make a well-rounded team, and eventually sit next to each other in the finale. Hantz was floored that White pulled out the win over him and at the “Samoa” reunion show offered White $100,000 for the title of “Sole Survivor.” White won no individual immunities and only won two tribal challenges across the season. What got her the win was her execution of the floater strategy, which Fandom: Big Brother says means “to stay out of the way and to be seen as a non-threat while… the gamers take themselves out of the game.” White’s ability to lay low and let Hantz, as a gamer, be at the forefront of the strategy allowed her to sit next to someone who was cruel to every castaway; and no one wants to give $1 million to someone that has been mean to them. It also helped that White was a charming, friendly, and empathetic person; Hantz’s polar opposite.

​

Cambridge firefighter Jeremy Collins earned his Sole Survivor title during “Survivor: Cambodia” with a social strategy he coined “the meat shield” strategy. To hide his threat level, Collins aligned himself with two other athletic castaways, Andrew Savage, and Joe Anglim. Aligning with similar players allowed Collins to navigate the social game from the less threatening perspective as the weakest-of-the-strong. Through the evolution of social strategy, this method has come to include the “brain shield,” a strategy implemented by Sophie Clarke during “Survivor: Winners at War.” Following the structure of the meat shield strategy, an individual who is perceived as smart aligns themselves with other smart individuals to gain the same protection from a meat shield would for an athletic castaway. Clarke aligned herself with “Survivor: Cook Islands” winner Yul Kwon since both are known to be strategic threats.

​

Knowing their best strategy helps players gain power in their games and hopefully the win; but a win isn’t always guaranteed. Sometimes players try a strategy and it doesn’t get them the win, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t great players. In season 10, Gheesling played what CBS calls a perfect game in their article “16 Fact You Didn’t Know About “Big Brother;’” he received every jury vote in the finale and never had a vote against him in an eviction. Gheesling, a Catholic school teacher and football coach, played a snake-style game in which he let his ally, Memphis Garrett, publicly make all the moves while Gheesling pulled the strings behind the scenes. He used a strategy that fit his image and worked well for his personality; a likable, trustful schoolteacher whose closest ally is the real reason the jury is where they are. Gheesling was able to perfectly execute this social strategy by making friends with other houseguests, staying true to his word, and allowing Garrett to take the blame for his mastermind moves. However, when Dan returned as a coach in season 14, he played a completely different strategy. He openly backstabbed players and even orchestrated what is considered by reality TV reporter Ross and as the “greatest moment” in the show’s history, Dan’s Funeral. At his funeral, he sacrificed his ally, Britney Haynes, to save himself and ally Danielle Murphree. Despite being the mastermind behind most of the game moves and making it to the final two, Gheesling would lose to Terry.

​

The most successful reality competition contestants know who they are and can adapt their game strategies to work best with their personalities. With so many established competitive and social strategies available from the aggressive competition strategy to the floater strategy, finding the ideal combination of strategies that works for a player is the best recipe for success.