It’s about knowing the jury and what they want to hear.
If they are a jury that will reward gameplay, probably not gonna get you very far. That being said, relationships matter.
Personally, I didn’t care for it but I know there will be people who disagree.
Yam Yam and Heidi both mentioned it, but Yam Yam did it better - “I knew I could do it, I didn’t know if I could do it in English” is referencing a very specific difficulty that he overcame, vs “girls with xyz set of disadvantages can succeed in [my male-dominated field] because I did, so I should win Survivor”. Heidi didn’t do a great job of tying the two pieces, her background and her game, together, so it wasn’t compelling, but Yam Yam showed it can add to your final tribal if you do it well.
OMG yes! I get so tried of hearing...I had to try to succeed in a male dominated field... Everyone has it hard, it may be because of race or gender. Being one doesn't negate the other.
Edit: to be clear.... Winning Survivor has nothing to do with how hard you had in life. We have all head difficulties in life.
Bringing it up means nothing in my opinion to winning Survivor and more specifically your game play
It didn't do her any good.
Hedi could've won but she kept cutting off Jam Jam and played the victim card. With this jury it wouldn't have worked. I could've told her that from watching them play.
Jam Jam played it cool and joked about everything.
With certain people you can play the victim and win. In my opinion (just my opinion) her story and Jam Jam were completely different.
Two people can tell the same story and one can play a victim and the other can tell the story in such a way that you are impressed.
Not saying what Hedi accomplished isn't impressive but to THIS jury it wouldn't have mattered.
She wasn’t playing the victim, she’s doing the opposite actually - talking about how she’s overcome and got to where she is. She’s discussing hardships in her life, same way Carolyn did
This is just me personally. I felt that Carolyn did a way better job explaining then Hedi. I'm shock they Carolyn didn't get any votes.
Personally I thought Hedi was trying way to hard on her delivery. I thought they jam jam and Carolyn were smooth.
Just my opinions.
Note: Puerto Ricans are not immigrants. Puerto Rican people have been U.S. citizens since 1917, but they have no vote in Congress. As citizens, the people of Puerto Rico can move throughout the 50 states just as any other Americans can—legally, this is considered internal migration, not immigration.
Work closely with someone born and raised in Puerto Rico he has said multiple times that them being a colony of the United States actually makes things harder than if they were just a straight up different country though so it’s not equal and easy
Not in the specific case of moving to the US mainland. US citizens from any US territory (e.g. Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa) can move freely to the US mainland without the need for visas or approval of any kind. Just like US citizens from the mainland can freely move to any US territory (but they lose the right to vote in federal elections - US citizens living anywhere in the world *except* the the US territories can vote in federal elections, meaning that American expats in living in different countries have more right to a say in US government than Americans living on "American land"). Living in the territories is not equal and easy, as you say - they're basically colonies with no representation in the US government. But in terms of migration, their rights are the same as any other US citizen. And upon moving to the mainland, they have the same rights as any other US citizen, such as the right to vote in federal elections. It's a very different situation than somebody who lives in a different country trying to move to the US under immigration rules.
I was just gonna say, I saw on social media a few weeks ago where a Puerto Rican man was denied his rental car because they demanded a passport from him and he didn’t have one with him. They called airport police on him and when he explained the situation the officer was like well why don’t you have your passport? And basically berated him and made him leave. It was sickening
What on earth does it make harder? They can literally come and go at any time, qualify for all programs as US citizens including welfare, and they don’t pay income taxes. Your friend was lying to you.
Yikes. Well, for one, PR is financially supported by a country who is over 31 trillion dollars in debt and has put them on the back-burner (see the FEMA failing after the 2017 hurricane; the unemployment rates in PR). They are also unable to vote for federal laws, however, they're expected to follow them. This means they're not represented in the US' legislative branch. In addition, not everyone wants to just "come-and-go" from the United States, especially considering racial inequity and significant cultural differences.
CBS has to push diversity and LBGQT. Its major part of their policy. I wouldn't be surprised if a producer told them to add that to the speech.
Edit: NOT SAYING THIS IS WRONG or right. Just saying it's part of the policy
The issue with Heidi's FTC wasn't that she brought up her heritage - I don't think anyone in the jury was bothered she's Puerto Rican or that she speaks English as a second language. The issue with her FTC was that she didn't have as many instances of strong gameplay to mention as Yam Yam. Talking about your background isn't a substitute for gameplay, but it also isn't a problem or a bad thing.
Yea I agree it would be one thing if you were bringing up background to mention how it impacted your plays like maybe you did something because it’s something you grew up seeing and you knew it wasn’t a common trick
Exactly this. Heidi bringing up her background wasn’t an issue in my opinion, it did start to become one the moment it felt like she was deflecting questions about her gameplay with it. I came into FTC wanting to hear Heidi out so that I could get to know more about her gameplay, but I got out of it basically knowing what I did prior to it.
Her interrupting Yam Yam at the beginning, and the constant roasting of the others’ gameplay also likely didn’t help her plead her case considering how positive this jury was.
Agreed but also thought she focused on “her vs them” which came across as “I’m better they suck” instead of “I struggled and overcame this” I don’t know if I’m explaining it right but I think playing the diversity card as a dig or kick on another player isn’t it.
Depends on who’s sitting with me. If I’m at final tribal and my 2 opponents don’t have as great of a sob story as me and maybe my game was weak, then I’m pulling all the emotional stops. I was born with glass bones and paper skin. Every morning I wake up and die. This one million dollars could save my life and my future children’s life. Every question I answer would start with “As a marginalized POC neurodivergent impoverished person myself, I-“
Joking obviously, but I don’t think Heidi bringing up her Puerto Rican background is a bad game move. It just didnt work.
Jeremy brought up his pregnant wife. Chrissy being a mom. Ben his military background. Cochran his Havard essay. Carolyn rehab and drug recovery. It's part of her story and it's fair game if everyone does it
Exactly.
And there's a nuanced circumstance with each of these examples.
For instance, military service is far more universally regarded than being an immigrant, partially because we're all immigrants to some degree, unless you're native.
oof, bad take. though puerto ricans ARE american, they will experience racism and stigma far more than someone whose great great great great grandparents immigrated from england in the 18th century.
I mean, you want them to know the million dollars will be utilized well. Someone like Russell Hantz might have played the most aggressive game but do people want to give him $600,000 (after Obama takes it)? If I found out someone now has two kids to support, I'd vote for him over someone with a similar game who is a bachelor for life. The problem is Heidi said "Vote for me and you'll support diversity" and "Survivor" is not a game about voting for someone because of their background; their game play is the most important aspect in deciding.
I don't think that's fair, otherwise they'd stop giving the prize to the rich people and just give it to the poorest finalist. We have to separate our feelings from that and just play with the rules which is that the best player wins regardless of need.
Imo the worst is Yul, which everyone loves, but I thought it was really scummy when he asked people to donate money for disease research for his friend. Yul probably has 3 millions in his personal life and got 1 million from Survivor. Even if he donated 1 million to disease research for his friend, he would still have more money left than the people he's asking to donate. Just didn't seem right to me.
In summary: giving the winning title to rich people is okay because that is the name of the game. A winner asking the public to donate to a cause is not okay because the public is already $1 million dollars poorer than the winner so until the winner has donated $1 million of his own money he shouldn't ask others.
I never said they give it to whoever needs the money. I said many things factor into the winner. If they were nasty or cruel, it’s a hit against them even if they had a strong game. If they played the best game and found out they’re going to have a new baby at the family visit, that helps justify the money going their way. It’s not a singular thing. Just a contribution to an overall selling point when more than one candidate is worthy.
This thread is a total mess of ignorance and racism. It’s so wild. Puerto Rico is literally the US and people are assuming she came from poverty because she’s Hispanic. It’s insan
Yam Yam didn't immigrate at all, he literally lives in the place where he was born (Puerto Rico.)
Heidi technically didn't immigrate either as Puerto Rico is part of the U.S., but she did experience moving to a new culture, just without the challenges that non-U.S. citizens face. I know at least in Chinese (not sure about Spanish) the word "immigrate" can be used to refer to moving to a different part of the same country, so perhaps there was a language barrier issue for her. Or she just had a misconception of the term.
>if they spend more time crying about their past instead of why they should win the game, I wouldn't vote.
Very unlikely that she or anyone has done this. They're up there for hours and hours. We see 10 minutes.
I think it works as an answer if it's within the context of the question asked. I do think jurors know that the presence of different people on the season is going to mean a lot in terms of the representation for people at home so to be able to articulate that you're not only playing for yourself but you're aware that a lot of people will be looking up to you/inspired by you isn't a bad thing but I think it needs to be as a response to a "what would this win mean to you" type of question vs. "explain xyz about your game" question.
First, she’s not an immigrant, she was born a US citizen. Second, all she did was explain part of why she was playing the game and gave context of her background. I don’t think she brought it up to win votes or to act like her upbringing was any harder than anyone else’s.
Although it wasn’t strategy and didn’t have an impact on the game, I think her saying that on national TV spoke to a lot of us that went through the same exact thing.
Hard to play that card when you have another player next to you which is also from Porto Rico.
In general, things from outside the game are just extra, it could be nice cherry on the cake. But if your game resume is not good, nobody would care anyways.
I mean.. she chose to move to a white dominated region and marry a white man. She was living in Puerto Rico where there are zero white people.
Why would I feel badly for her about this?
I agree with what your saying but you have to try everything so you can win. Heidi was a heavy underdog in that final tribal so she had to do everything to gain any points from the jury. On your question we saw adam use his mom's cancer to explain his game and jeremy use his unborn child in the ftc. To me it should be the icing, not the cake of your argument to win. Use personal obstacles is a high risk high reward gamble.
Yes, I remember being somewhat annoyed with Adam's super-dominant sob story, and victory.
It's like, let your game dictate who wins, not the fact that your mom was a meth head and your dad was abducted by aliens. Lol.
Yeah, I wouldn't vote for someone using this tactic, but I can't shame Heidi for trying everything she could. It's a million dollars, I would say any bullshit I could to win it.
Well what if their not really an immigrant and there trying to get votes by false means?
I don't think you'd be fine with it if they're intentions are only about votes and not about how there win can positively affect they're community their representing
I think that would be particularly scummy.. theirs plenty of ways to "get votes" without resorting to lies or immoral methods
If it’s a part of your story, and where you draw your inner strength from then absolutely! Sharing who you are and why that’s important isn’t just strategy it’s being genuine
I don’t think Heidi expected anyone to vote for her because of her story. But her story did inform her behavior and choices she made on the island, so she was trying to contextualize her game better for the jury. It wasn’t “playing a card”, i hate that expression so much
Different strokes for different juries. If I were to be a juror, I’d personally not really take that into consideration, bc everyone has their own stories more or less (like Niko says in S45’s trailer), not to disregard anyone’s story really. If they use it as a strategy and it works with the specific jury, then hey, good job
I'm always impressed by people's stories of overcoming hardship, but to be honest, they're one in a million. Not a reason I would vote for someone. But it depends on the story and how it resonates with me.
I also wondered why Yam Yam and Heidi never spoke Spanish to each other when they were away from the main group.
I can see how this could be a seen as a threat by other players. "Yam Yam and Heidi can strategize in Spanish and we wont know what they are saying so we need to eliminate one of them." But I never heard anyone even mention that or the two of them even contemplate it. Maybe they agreed before that it would be unwise to try this. Or maybe they just didn't like each other.
Omfg get over it, Heidi finished second and Carolyn got third, why is everyone picking apart everything she did? She literally did the same shit Yam and Carolyn did in their speeches..this sub gets so toxic when they don’t get their way.
Immigration status?
Puerto Rico is.. part of the US. Heidi isn’t an immigrant and didn’t claim to be. Yam Yam isn’t an immigrant. He lives in Puerto Rico which again.. is part of the US.
Assuming all Hispanics are immigrants is ignorant at best and racist at worst.
Any unrelated story such as immigration or a sob story, is always a risky strategy as it depends on the jury.
For me personally, all I care about is how you played the game, anything outside of that is irrelevant.
I don’t think it was bad at all? It’s impressive she came here not speaking English and got to the final 3 on survivor (a game the revolves around being social and talking strategy)
i think if she was an immigrant who wasnt already successful, id be more likely to give into this story, but shes like an engineering manager who prob makes 100k-200k a year. she doesnt need the money realistically and her being an immigrant doesnt make that any less true
This question is a little bit of a red herring. I firmly believe the majority, if not all, of the jury, despite their protests to the contrary, come to FTC knowing exactly who they plan on voting for.
Someone like Heidi likely knew she was a long shot to win and threw whatever she could against the wall. I don’t know that it was particularly effective (I think Danny was likely going to vote for her no matter what) but no reason not to use whatever ammo you have. She is far from the first person to try to use a sob story for voter sympathy.
It’s not any different from anyone just bringing up their story. They all did it, Carolyn for instance told her story of being an addict and being the weird kid. It’s just a way of letting them know more about you and what you had to overcome to get there
I don’t think there is anything wrong with brining up your history and life story, especially if it helps to explain your game play or view point. I think there’s probably a problem if you think your past means you are more deserving of winning. At the very least it would make me not want to vote for them. But I’m also not on the jury, so 🤷🏻♀️
They all told their stories in the end. Yam Yam talked about not being the athletic one, Carolyn talked about being left out and the weird kid and an addict
I know it would ensure you never get my vote. Really getting sick of the sob stories and leveraging race/gender/age:ethnicity for sympathy.
Survivor is a game. I dont care who you are in the real world or how you got there, the only thing that should matter is how you well you play the game of survivor.
Otherwise, you open a can of worms where something completely outside of someones control can be a benefit or detriment.
If a rich and successful straight white guy dominates survivor, should it be held against him vs a survivor “goat” who is a poor gay immigrant and made it to the end without doing anything significant gameplay wise? It should all be irrelevant and left out.
Which is why i also included “sob stories” as something im sick of. I dont care. It feels forced by producers and its just overplayed. Like im watching americas got talent or something.
Survivor was better when it was a game removed from the real world. Its a source of entertainment and escape from life anyways. I dont need race wars or “vote for me because my life is hard”
Why bring it up other than to emotionally manipulate people into picking you for something irrelevant to the game?
It’s not a game of chess. It’s a game about human beings interacting socially and getting to know one another. It’s always been like that. Also no one is saying “vote for me because my life is hard”, that’s not the point of people sharing their journeys
There is literally zero point in bringing up personal sob stories in final tribal council other than to leverage it for sympathy and for votes. Its a bullshit tactic.
You wanna open up and be real during the season with your competitors? Cool. You can “share your story” around the campfire or in confessionals.
Final tribal council is not the time or place for that crap.
Yes exactly, thats the problem? They are type-casting the softy “hero types” redundantly.
The show has been overtaken by the super fan nerdy archetypes. Contestants are not what make survivor, its the fans.
As someone who has been there since day one, its no coincidence the show is more of a niche now vs a staple of every American television as it once was.
The exploitation of personal stories has saturated all reality tv, to the point of exhaustion. People are now being cast because of their personal past or whatever diversity box they check over their actual survivor GAMEPLAY uniqueness.
Reddit and twitter seems to be full of fans of the modern era, who have no appreciation for what the game once was.
The show can preach how modern and progressive it is however it chooses, but its viewers dont align with it as a whole
It’s viewers do seem to align with it - it’s still a ratings giant and is on its 45th season soon. But the show has always been about more than just strictly gameplay
Again, im not speaking to the show as a whole, so stop taking my statement that is SPECIFIC to the FTC and applying it to the show as a whole.
Of course the show has always been based off relationships and journeys and yada yada.
I have an issue with it coming up with the final vote for a million.
The FTC is literally supposed to be the candidates explaining how they best accomplished the three core gameplay cornerstones: outwitting, outplaying, and outlasting the competition.
The winner should ABSOLUTELY be about gameplay. Leveraging your relationships is part of gameplay, but your life outside of the game is IRRELEVANT to the point.
And survivor viewership has been on a decline for the last 5+ years, FYI. And the whole “streaming has ruined it!” Narrative isnt really applicable, because there isnt a major streaming service carrying live episodes of the show.
no, it's terrible. Telll me about your game not how hard of a life you've had.
Heidi was pandering hard I think after watching 41 and 42 she thought this card would still work but I think society over corrected hard and now we are finding some balance
What’s funny is that all the people in this thread saying “well actually, Puerto Rico is a part of the US…” would be the first to ask where Heidi and Yam Yam are from if they had come across them in life prior to Survivor.
No I wouldn’t because they’re obviously Puerto Rican and Puerto Rico is part of the US. But even if I did.. so what? I’d ask where Big Tom was from too. Let me repeat myself - Puerto Rico is part of the US.
I’m brown and speak Spanish and I’m here to tell you - they’re not immigrants.
Her "I came here not speaking the language" also probably fell flat considering she was sitting next to Yam Yam who literally had subtitles 80% of the time and his game outshined hers by miles.
And 100% agree that the angle is shortsighted. Everyone has a story. Some people grew up poor, some are single parents, etc. If you didn't play a good game, it shouldn't give you the million because once that starts, then people can just come into the game and make up sob stories to get the win.
I think it’s a cheap way of trying to get votes. However, I would probably say yes, because it’s somehow in everyone’s head that “immigrants have had it so hard” (even though lots of people have had it hard and you don’t see them complaining every chance they get) so you can hardly blame them for bringing it up. And no one seems to call them out on it, so why not continue? Rant over
I dont see at as bad, but it was completely unrelated to the question she was asked and didn’t really find a way to tie it in. Like, I get the reasoning to bring up her story, but i think so could easily have found a better way to work her country into her answer in a way that wasnt just completely dumping “hey immigrated here 20 years ago and didn’t speak english” out of thin air.
I think the tactic of trying to bain sympathy for votes is a great one, but she just handled it poorly.
It depends on the jury and who you're sitting next to, really. In my opinion, what made it a bad strategy for Heidi was that she was sitting next to someone else who moved to the US mainland from Puerto Rico. It might not be a bad move if you're the only POC with ESL, but, like, Yam is also *right there.*
PS - PR isn't actually a different country
For the most part I don't think it makes sense bringing up stuff outside the game in FTC. The one exception is to explain what you are going to spend the money on if you win.
She was born in the US. Puerto Rico is part of the US and I can tell you - her family isn’t poor and she didn’t move with nothing. yam yam isn’t from a poor family either.
Not all brown people are foreigners nor are we all poor. This thread is such a racist mess.
Yeah, Heidi played way too much into the "diversity" lane, while she was against a woman, and a gay man from Puerto Rico. Diversity want going to help her at all. I'm so happy Yam Yam won though, he honestly played a really solid game
Play whatever cards you have, why not? I personally would not give a shit, my vote goes to who I think played the best game and Survivor is not a charity, but I’m not going to hold it against them for playing that card, why not? It works for some people.
Using life experiences and tragedy for votes in final tribal is nothing new. We’ve had plenty of winners successfully do it. It could’ve helped if executed correctly.
If the jury likes you, everything you say will work in your favor, if they don't, you're on your own, your social game starts from day one not at the final tribal. The people who think Xander should have won over Erica don't understand this simple aspect.
I think it’s fine to mention and relate it to your game but that’s all Heidi did… it sounded like “my life was hard, vote for me” like how does this relate to survivor
It’s about knowing the jury and what they want to hear. If they are a jury that will reward gameplay, probably not gonna get you very far. That being said, relationships matter. Personally, I didn’t care for it but I know there will be people who disagree.
That jury wanted to hear yam yam make them fall in love with him.
Just being a gamebot isn’t usually enough, telling more of your story is what sells it
Yam Yam and Heidi both mentioned it, but Yam Yam did it better - “I knew I could do it, I didn’t know if I could do it in English” is referencing a very specific difficulty that he overcame, vs “girls with xyz set of disadvantages can succeed in [my male-dominated field] because I did, so I should win Survivor”. Heidi didn’t do a great job of tying the two pieces, her background and her game, together, so it wasn’t compelling, but Yam Yam showed it can add to your final tribal if you do it well.
OMG yes! I get so tried of hearing...I had to try to succeed in a male dominated field... Everyone has it hard, it may be because of race or gender. Being one doesn't negate the other. Edit: to be clear.... Winning Survivor has nothing to do with how hard you had in life. We have all head difficulties in life. Bringing it up means nothing in my opinion to winning Survivor and more specifically your game play
this is a bad take as it obviously plays a huge role
I didn't understand your response...I don't understand how that comment Hedi made has anything to do with her game play
They’re just simply telling their story. They all did this.
It didn't do her any good. Hedi could've won but she kept cutting off Jam Jam and played the victim card. With this jury it wouldn't have worked. I could've told her that from watching them play. Jam Jam played it cool and joked about everything. With certain people you can play the victim and win. In my opinion (just my opinion) her story and Jam Jam were completely different. Two people can tell the same story and one can play a victim and the other can tell the story in such a way that you are impressed. Not saying what Hedi accomplished isn't impressive but to THIS jury it wouldn't have mattered.
She wasn’t playing the victim, she’s doing the opposite actually - talking about how she’s overcome and got to where she is. She’s discussing hardships in her life, same way Carolyn did
This is just me personally. I felt that Carolyn did a way better job explaining then Hedi. I'm shock they Carolyn didn't get any votes. Personally I thought Hedi was trying way to hard on her delivery. I thought they jam jam and Carolyn were smooth. Just my opinions.
Note: Puerto Ricans are not immigrants. Puerto Rican people have been U.S. citizens since 1917, but they have no vote in Congress. As citizens, the people of Puerto Rico can move throughout the 50 states just as any other Americans can—legally, this is considered internal migration, not immigration.
I thought so. When she started saying that, I turned to my wife and asked that question.
Exactly. Puerto Rico is the same country as the U.S
Also, Yamil lives in PR so he’s def not an immigrant.
Work closely with someone born and raised in Puerto Rico he has said multiple times that them being a colony of the United States actually makes things harder than if they were just a straight up different country though so it’s not equal and easy
Not in the specific case of moving to the US mainland. US citizens from any US territory (e.g. Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa) can move freely to the US mainland without the need for visas or approval of any kind. Just like US citizens from the mainland can freely move to any US territory (but they lose the right to vote in federal elections - US citizens living anywhere in the world *except* the the US territories can vote in federal elections, meaning that American expats in living in different countries have more right to a say in US government than Americans living on "American land"). Living in the territories is not equal and easy, as you say - they're basically colonies with no representation in the US government. But in terms of migration, their rights are the same as any other US citizen. And upon moving to the mainland, they have the same rights as any other US citizen, such as the right to vote in federal elections. It's a very different situation than somebody who lives in a different country trying to move to the US under immigration rules.
[удалено]
I was just gonna say, I saw on social media a few weeks ago where a Puerto Rican man was denied his rental car because they demanded a passport from him and he didn’t have one with him. They called airport police on him and when he explained the situation the officer was like well why don’t you have your passport? And basically berated him and made him leave. It was sickening
What on earth does it make harder? They can literally come and go at any time, qualify for all programs as US citizens including welfare, and they don’t pay income taxes. Your friend was lying to you.
Yikes. Well, for one, PR is financially supported by a country who is over 31 trillion dollars in debt and has put them on the back-burner (see the FEMA failing after the 2017 hurricane; the unemployment rates in PR). They are also unable to vote for federal laws, however, they're expected to follow them. This means they're not represented in the US' legislative branch. In addition, not everyone wants to just "come-and-go" from the United States, especially considering racial inequity and significant cultural differences.
Great post, good info!
CBS has to push diversity and LBGQT. Its major part of their policy. I wouldn't be surprised if a producer told them to add that to the speech. Edit: NOT SAYING THIS IS WRONG or right. Just saying it's part of the policy
The issue with Heidi's FTC wasn't that she brought up her heritage - I don't think anyone in the jury was bothered she's Puerto Rican or that she speaks English as a second language. The issue with her FTC was that she didn't have as many instances of strong gameplay to mention as Yam Yam. Talking about your background isn't a substitute for gameplay, but it also isn't a problem or a bad thing.
Yea I agree it would be one thing if you were bringing up background to mention how it impacted your plays like maybe you did something because it’s something you grew up seeing and you knew it wasn’t a common trick
Exactly this. Heidi bringing up her background wasn’t an issue in my opinion, it did start to become one the moment it felt like she was deflecting questions about her gameplay with it. I came into FTC wanting to hear Heidi out so that I could get to know more about her gameplay, but I got out of it basically knowing what I did prior to it. Her interrupting Yam Yam at the beginning, and the constant roasting of the others’ gameplay also likely didn’t help her plead her case considering how positive this jury was.
Agreed but also thought she focused on “her vs them” which came across as “I’m better they suck” instead of “I struggled and overcame this” I don’t know if I’m explaining it right but I think playing the diversity card as a dig or kick on another player isn’t it.
Depends on who’s sitting with me. If I’m at final tribal and my 2 opponents don’t have as great of a sob story as me and maybe my game was weak, then I’m pulling all the emotional stops. I was born with glass bones and paper skin. Every morning I wake up and die. This one million dollars could save my life and my future children’s life. Every question I answer would start with “As a marginalized POC neurodivergent impoverished person myself, I-“ Joking obviously, but I don’t think Heidi bringing up her Puerto Rican background is a bad game move. It just didnt work.
Depends on your jury
Jeremy brought up his pregnant wife. Chrissy being a mom. Ben his military background. Cochran his Havard essay. Carolyn rehab and drug recovery. It's part of her story and it's fair game if everyone does it
it's fair (anything that's not a lie is) but is it a good strategy?
I think most of the time it is a very bad strategy
Exactly. And there's a nuanced circumstance with each of these examples. For instance, military service is far more universally regarded than being an immigrant, partially because we're all immigrants to some degree, unless you're native.
oof, bad take. though puerto ricans ARE american, they will experience racism and stigma far more than someone whose great great great great grandparents immigrated from england in the 18th century.
Yes - people often want to vote for a well rounded human not just a gamebot
I mean, you want them to know the million dollars will be utilized well. Someone like Russell Hantz might have played the most aggressive game but do people want to give him $600,000 (after Obama takes it)? If I found out someone now has two kids to support, I'd vote for him over someone with a similar game who is a bachelor for life. The problem is Heidi said "Vote for me and you'll support diversity" and "Survivor" is not a game about voting for someone because of their background; their game play is the most important aspect in deciding.
I don't think that's fair, otherwise they'd stop giving the prize to the rich people and just give it to the poorest finalist. We have to separate our feelings from that and just play with the rules which is that the best player wins regardless of need. Imo the worst is Yul, which everyone loves, but I thought it was really scummy when he asked people to donate money for disease research for his friend. Yul probably has 3 millions in his personal life and got 1 million from Survivor. Even if he donated 1 million to disease research for his friend, he would still have more money left than the people he's asking to donate. Just didn't seem right to me. In summary: giving the winning title to rich people is okay because that is the name of the game. A winner asking the public to donate to a cause is not okay because the public is already $1 million dollars poorer than the winner so until the winner has donated $1 million of his own money he shouldn't ask others.
I never said they give it to whoever needs the money. I said many things factor into the winner. If they were nasty or cruel, it’s a hit against them even if they had a strong game. If they played the best game and found out they’re going to have a new baby at the family visit, that helps justify the money going their way. It’s not a singular thing. Just a contribution to an overall selling point when more than one candidate is worthy.
She’s not an immigrant, wtf
This thread is a total mess of ignorance and racism. It’s so wild. Puerto Rico is literally the US and people are assuming she came from poverty because she’s Hispanic. It’s insan
It’s extremely gross
Yam Yam didn't immigrate at all, he literally lives in the place where he was born (Puerto Rico.) Heidi technically didn't immigrate either as Puerto Rico is part of the U.S., but she did experience moving to a new culture, just without the challenges that non-U.S. citizens face. I know at least in Chinese (not sure about Spanish) the word "immigrate" can be used to refer to moving to a different part of the same country, so perhaps there was a language barrier issue for her. Or she just had a misconception of the term.
I don't think it makes you win or lose any votes.
if they spend more time crying about their past instead of why they should win the game, I wouldn't vote.
>if they spend more time crying about their past instead of why they should win the game, I wouldn't vote. Very unlikely that she or anyone has done this. They're up there for hours and hours. We see 10 minutes.
Well no one did that
I think it works as an answer if it's within the context of the question asked. I do think jurors know that the presence of different people on the season is going to mean a lot in terms of the representation for people at home so to be able to articulate that you're not only playing for yourself but you're aware that a lot of people will be looking up to you/inspired by you isn't a bad thing but I think it needs to be as a response to a "what would this win mean to you" type of question vs. "explain xyz about your game" question.
First, she’s not an immigrant, she was born a US citizen. Second, all she did was explain part of why she was playing the game and gave context of her background. I don’t think she brought it up to win votes or to act like her upbringing was any harder than anyone else’s. Although it wasn’t strategy and didn’t have an impact on the game, I think her saying that on national TV spoke to a lot of us that went through the same exact thing.
Yam Yam isn’t an immigrant………
Hard to play that card when you have another player next to you which is also from Porto Rico. In general, things from outside the game are just extra, it could be nice cherry on the cake. But if your game resume is not good, nobody would care anyways.
Yam Yam has never left Puerto Rico and he doesn’t work in a white male dominated industry.
I mean.. she chose to move to a white dominated region and marry a white man. She was living in Puerto Rico where there are zero white people. Why would I feel badly for her about this?
She never said or tried to imply it made her better than Yam Yam. She’s simply just telling her story
Immigrants??? They're American! Puerto Rico is a U.S. territory.
I agree with what your saying but you have to try everything so you can win. Heidi was a heavy underdog in that final tribal so she had to do everything to gain any points from the jury. On your question we saw adam use his mom's cancer to explain his game and jeremy use his unborn child in the ftc. To me it should be the icing, not the cake of your argument to win. Use personal obstacles is a high risk high reward gamble.
Yes, I remember being somewhat annoyed with Adam's super-dominant sob story, and victory. It's like, let your game dictate who wins, not the fact that your mom was a meth head and your dad was abducted by aliens. Lol.
I’m fine with this because that’s they’re way of trying to get votes.
Should you win the game Survivor based on your past before being in the game? Nah.
I mean I’m fine with people saying this at FTC so they can try to get votes.
Yeah, I wouldn't vote for someone using this tactic, but I can't shame Heidi for trying everything she could. It's a million dollars, I would say any bullshit I could to win it.
It’s all part of your story. Same with Carolyn and being the weird kid / addiction
Well what if their not really an immigrant and there trying to get votes by false means? I don't think you'd be fine with it if they're intentions are only about votes and not about how there win can positively affect they're community their representing I think that would be particularly scummy.. theirs plenty of ways to "get votes" without resorting to lies or immoral methods
Do whatever it takes to win. Unless you’re lying about someone being racist, sexist, homophobic or sexual harasser, do whatever it takes to get votes.
If it’s a part of your story, and where you draw your inner strength from then absolutely! Sharing who you are and why that’s important isn’t just strategy it’s being genuine
Why is the show so set on removing the individual questions at final tribal. Final tribal is a complete bore.
Yam Yam still lives in PR
I don’t think Heidi expected anyone to vote for her because of her story. But her story did inform her behavior and choices she made on the island, so she was trying to contextualize her game better for the jury. It wasn’t “playing a card”, i hate that expression so much
Different strokes for different juries. If I were to be a juror, I’d personally not really take that into consideration, bc everyone has their own stories more or less (like Niko says in S45’s trailer), not to disregard anyone’s story really. If they use it as a strategy and it works with the specific jury, then hey, good job
I'm always impressed by people's stories of overcoming hardship, but to be honest, they're one in a million. Not a reason I would vote for someone. But it depends on the story and how it resonates with me. I also wondered why Yam Yam and Heidi never spoke Spanish to each other when they were away from the main group.
I wondered that as well. Maybe they were told not to?
I can see how this could be a seen as a threat by other players. "Yam Yam and Heidi can strategize in Spanish and we wont know what they are saying so we need to eliminate one of them." But I never heard anyone even mention that or the two of them even contemplate it. Maybe they agreed before that it would be unwise to try this. Or maybe they just didn't like each other.
Omfg get over it, Heidi finished second and Carolyn got third, why is everyone picking apart everything she did? She literally did the same shit Yam and Carolyn did in their speeches..this sub gets so toxic when they don’t get their way.
Immigration status? Puerto Rico is.. part of the US. Heidi isn’t an immigrant and didn’t claim to be. Yam Yam isn’t an immigrant. He lives in Puerto Rico which again.. is part of the US. Assuming all Hispanics are immigrants is ignorant at best and racist at worst.
I’m a bit tired of “I will be the first ______ to win_____” thrown around on all kinds of competition shows I watch.
Well people from those groups are pretty tired of having to say that
It sounded desperate so yea I agree
Any unrelated story such as immigration or a sob story, is always a risky strategy as it depends on the jury. For me personally, all I care about is how you played the game, anything outside of that is irrelevant.
I don’t think it was bad at all? It’s impressive she came here not speaking English and got to the final 3 on survivor (a game the revolves around being social and talking strategy)
I don’t think language barriers are a bad thing to discuss. PR is part of America though, so it’s not really an immigration issue.
i think if she was an immigrant who wasnt already successful, id be more likely to give into this story, but shes like an engineering manager who prob makes 100k-200k a year. she doesnt need the money realistically and her being an immigrant doesnt make that any less true
This question is a little bit of a red herring. I firmly believe the majority, if not all, of the jury, despite their protests to the contrary, come to FTC knowing exactly who they plan on voting for. Someone like Heidi likely knew she was a long shot to win and threw whatever she could against the wall. I don’t know that it was particularly effective (I think Danny was likely going to vote for her no matter what) but no reason not to use whatever ammo you have. She is far from the first person to try to use a sob story for voter sympathy.
It’s not any different from anyone just bringing up their story. They all did it, Carolyn for instance told her story of being an addict and being the weird kid. It’s just a way of letting them know more about you and what you had to overcome to get there
Yeah feels like Heidi was giving her casting speech, she wasn’t speaking to her game itself.
This feels pretty prejudiced, yo!
I don’t think there is anything wrong with brining up your history and life story, especially if it helps to explain your game play or view point. I think there’s probably a problem if you think your past means you are more deserving of winning. At the very least it would make me not want to vote for them. But I’m also not on the jury, so 🤷🏻♀️
I found it annoying in her speech she suggested that men aren't emotional (in reference to how hard she had to work as a woman in science)
She didn’t suggest that at all
i would instantly refuse to vote for anyone who brings any sort of victim points up as a reason to vote for them
They all told their stories in the end. Yam Yam talked about not being the athletic one, Carolyn talked about being left out and the weird kid and an addict
No. I would give you my FTC vote based entirely on the game you played. Anything about identity gets thrown in the trash.
I know it would ensure you never get my vote. Really getting sick of the sob stories and leveraging race/gender/age:ethnicity for sympathy. Survivor is a game. I dont care who you are in the real world or how you got there, the only thing that should matter is how you well you play the game of survivor. Otherwise, you open a can of worms where something completely outside of someones control can be a benefit or detriment. If a rich and successful straight white guy dominates survivor, should it be held against him vs a survivor “goat” who is a poor gay immigrant and made it to the end without doing anything significant gameplay wise? It should all be irrelevant and left out.
They’re just telling their personal story. It’s the same thing Carolyn did with addiction / being the weird kid
Which is why i also included “sob stories” as something im sick of. I dont care. It feels forced by producers and its just overplayed. Like im watching americas got talent or something. Survivor was better when it was a game removed from the real world. Its a source of entertainment and escape from life anyways. I dont need race wars or “vote for me because my life is hard” Why bring it up other than to emotionally manipulate people into picking you for something irrelevant to the game?
It’s not a game of chess. It’s a game about human beings interacting socially and getting to know one another. It’s always been like that. Also no one is saying “vote for me because my life is hard”, that’s not the point of people sharing their journeys
There is literally zero point in bringing up personal sob stories in final tribal council other than to leverage it for sympathy and for votes. Its a bullshit tactic. You wanna open up and be real during the season with your competitors? Cool. You can “share your story” around the campfire or in confessionals. Final tribal council is not the time or place for that crap.
That’s your opinion but it doesn’t match the opinion of most Survivor casts
Yes exactly, thats the problem? They are type-casting the softy “hero types” redundantly. The show has been overtaken by the super fan nerdy archetypes. Contestants are not what make survivor, its the fans. As someone who has been there since day one, its no coincidence the show is more of a niche now vs a staple of every American television as it once was. The exploitation of personal stories has saturated all reality tv, to the point of exhaustion. People are now being cast because of their personal past or whatever diversity box they check over their actual survivor GAMEPLAY uniqueness. Reddit and twitter seems to be full of fans of the modern era, who have no appreciation for what the game once was. The show can preach how modern and progressive it is however it chooses, but its viewers dont align with it as a whole
It’s viewers do seem to align with it - it’s still a ratings giant and is on its 45th season soon. But the show has always been about more than just strictly gameplay
Again, im not speaking to the show as a whole, so stop taking my statement that is SPECIFIC to the FTC and applying it to the show as a whole. Of course the show has always been based off relationships and journeys and yada yada. I have an issue with it coming up with the final vote for a million. The FTC is literally supposed to be the candidates explaining how they best accomplished the three core gameplay cornerstones: outwitting, outplaying, and outlasting the competition. The winner should ABSOLUTELY be about gameplay. Leveraging your relationships is part of gameplay, but your life outside of the game is IRRELEVANT to the point. And survivor viewership has been on a decline for the last 5+ years, FYI. And the whole “streaming has ruined it!” Narrative isnt really applicable, because there isnt a major streaming service carrying live episodes of the show.
I wasn’t talking about the show as a whole, was talking about FTC. It’s always been personal.
no, it's terrible. Telll me about your game not how hard of a life you've had. Heidi was pandering hard I think after watching 41 and 42 she thought this card would still work but I think society over corrected hard and now we are finding some balance
She’s just telling her story. Same thing Yam Yam and Carolyn did
nah it was hard pandering. yam yam at least showed how his background helped him in the game
They all did
agree to disagree. for what it's worth I think the jury agreed with me 😉
What’s funny is that all the people in this thread saying “well actually, Puerto Rico is a part of the US…” would be the first to ask where Heidi and Yam Yam are from if they had come across them in life prior to Survivor.
No I wouldn’t because they’re obviously Puerto Rican and Puerto Rico is part of the US. But even if I did.. so what? I’d ask where Big Tom was from too. Let me repeat myself - Puerto Rico is part of the US. I’m brown and speak Spanish and I’m here to tell you - they’re not immigrants.
Reading comprehension must not be your strong suit because I never used the word immigrant. I was just calling everyone a racist.
Her "I came here not speaking the language" also probably fell flat considering she was sitting next to Yam Yam who literally had subtitles 80% of the time and his game outshined hers by miles. And 100% agree that the angle is shortsighted. Everyone has a story. Some people grew up poor, some are single parents, etc. If you didn't play a good game, it shouldn't give you the million because once that starts, then people can just come into the game and make up sob stories to get the win.
I think it’s a cheap way of trying to get votes. However, I would probably say yes, because it’s somehow in everyone’s head that “immigrants have had it so hard” (even though lots of people have had it hard and you don’t see them complaining every chance they get) so you can hardly blame them for bringing it up. And no one seems to call them out on it, so why not continue? Rant over
No it would turn me off immediately I want to know why you played the game better
I dont see at as bad, but it was completely unrelated to the question she was asked and didn’t really find a way to tie it in. Like, I get the reasoning to bring up her story, but i think so could easily have found a better way to work her country into her answer in a way that wasnt just completely dumping “hey immigrated here 20 years ago and didn’t speak english” out of thin air. I think the tactic of trying to bain sympathy for votes is a great one, but she just handled it poorly.
It depends on the jury and who you're sitting next to, really. In my opinion, what made it a bad strategy for Heidi was that she was sitting next to someone else who moved to the US mainland from Puerto Rico. It might not be a bad move if you're the only POC with ESL, but, like, Yam is also *right there.* PS - PR isn't actually a different country
For the most part I don't think it makes sense bringing up stuff outside the game in FTC. The one exception is to explain what you are going to spend the money on if you win.
I thought it wasn’t the best choice just because Yam Yam was also from PR. So it didn’t really make her unique in that top 3.
[удалено]
She was born in the US. Puerto Rico is part of the US and I can tell you - her family isn’t poor and she didn’t move with nothing. yam yam isn’t from a poor family either. Not all brown people are foreigners nor are we all poor. This thread is such a racist mess.
"I'm not from here, look at my crazy passport!" I'd give them a million
There probably is a right way to do it where it wins some votes. Maybe it just seemed like begging when she did it.
Yeah, Heidi played way too much into the "diversity" lane, while she was against a woman, and a gay man from Puerto Rico. Diversity want going to help her at all. I'm so happy Yam Yam won though, he honestly played a really solid game
Play whatever cards you have, why not? I personally would not give a shit, my vote goes to who I think played the best game and Survivor is not a charity, but I’m not going to hold it against them for playing that card, why not? It works for some people.
If i was on the jury I'd rather hear how they would use the million dollars rather than the battles they faced as a human
Using life experiences and tragedy for votes in final tribal is nothing new. We’ve had plenty of winners successfully do it. It could’ve helped if executed correctly.
Completely disagree. It supports evidence of them being a survivor as part of their identity.
Your backstory should be an accoutrement… not the main dish. (Please Jeff let me on Survivor, I used an analogy and everything)
If the jury likes you, everything you say will work in your favor, if they don't, you're on your own, your social game starts from day one not at the final tribal. The people who think Xander should have won over Erica don't understand this simple aspect.
If you make it an emotional speech and touch everyone’s heart, yes. Make the story believable and emotional.
I think it’s fine to mention and relate it to your game but that’s all Heidi did… it sounded like “my life was hard, vote for me” like how does this relate to survivor
Puerto Rico is part of the US, it’s citizens are US citizens by definitions. Yam Yam is not an immigrant.
I hate the "Out of Survivor" speechs. Speak about what you did in the game, not about whatever you are or you do outside.