• by Adam Buckman , Featured Columnist, October 10, 2023

If a new Hulu reality-competition series is to be considered a “social experiment,” then so should a couple dozen other shows that have come and gone over the past 20 years.

Few reality shows (actually, I can think of only one, and that one wasn’t a competition series) were ever positioned as “social experiments,” although they did test contestants’ loyalties, and the lengths they would go to undermine each other in order to win six- and seven-digit payoffs.

While watching these human behaviors has often been entertaining, few of the shows that came after the sensational, game-changing premiere of “Survivor” on CBS in May 2000, have ever attracted serious attention from sociologists. 

The new Hulu show, now in development, is called “Got to Get Out” (a working title, according to Hulu). Hulu announced September 28 that it had ordered the show, which will consist of 10, one-hour episodes.

A news release positions the show as “a new, original social experiment and competition series.” It is to be produced by Wheelhouse (UK).

The phrase “social experiment” sure sounds important, like something you would see on “Nova.”

But the description of the show makes it sound like many other shows, including the aforementioned “Survivor” and “Big Brother” (both on CBS).

“Big Brother” is pictured above because no promotional photos of “Got to Get Out” seem to be available yet.

But it is “Big Brother” that comes to mind first when reading how “Got to Get Out” is described.

“The new series will feature participants living together in a mansion for 10 days, competing for a cash prize that increases by $1 every second [italics theirs] that they’re there,” Hulu said.

“Physical and mental challenges completed throughout will add money to the pot, with a total of $1 million at stake. 

“Participants can stick together and take an equal share of the prize money at the end of their stay -- OR [caps theirs] they can choose to go rogue and attempt to steal the full pot of money for themselves.”

The description goes on to detail how contestants who steal the money might make their escape, and how they might be caught -- and hence eliminated -- in the process.

Living in a house, living on an island or competing in a fake boardroom (“The Apprentice”) can all serve as “social experiments” in their way, except for one thing: The TV Blog believes that TV shows, by their nature, should never be mistaken for “experiments” of any kind, social or otherwise.

To call a TV show a “social experiment” is an effort to make the show sound more “serious” than the others, as if we will all learn valuable lessons in human behavior if we watch it.

There is nothing wrong with having another one of these strangers-living-together shows, but you don’t have to watch a TV show to be aware that human beings can be greedy when a life-changing amount of money is stake.

On “Survivor,” the prize is also $1 million. On “Big Brother,” it is $750,000. On the old “Apprentice” starring you-know-who, the prize was a one-year, $250,000 contract with a company.

If memory serves, when “Survivor” first pioneered this kind of competition reality show, it drew so much attention that psychologists, sociologists, political scientists and other non-television commentators were called on to dissect the behavior of the show’s contestants, especially eventual winner Richard Hatch, on TV’s newscasts and talk shows.

To my knowledge, this has not happened since then -- not even when Discovery decided to put on “Naked and Afraid,” a reality show in which naked people tramp around forests and jungles looking for things to eat. Shouldn’t someone be studying this?

The only unscripted show I can remember that may have been billed as a “social experiment” was an FX show from 2006 called “Black. White.” 

This was the show in which a white and a black family each became black and white, respectively, through the magic of makeup.

Then they went out in the world to see how they would be treated.

This was indeed a social experiment -- but its findings, if any, are lost to memory.