• contact@blosguns.com
  • 680 E 47th St, California(CA), 90011

Survivor Host Jeff Probst Explains Why They Don’t Sequester The Jury Ahead Of Final Vote

Survivor 44 officially hit the merge this past episode, which means every contestant voted out from this point forward will still get to attend tribal councils and have their say in who wins the game at the end. They’ll also get to talk and share stories with the other voted out castaways, much to the chagrin of some fans who think that process leads to a biased jury. Host Jeff Probst has heard those arguments before, and this week, he decided to address why Survivor chooses to do things that way.

Appearing on his podcast, Probst was asked why the show doesn’t separate the contestants after they’re voted out so they don’t affect each other’s votes. He acknowledged that the talking does happen, and the players do have biases in those conversations. He even said it would be “great” if they were able to sequester the entire jury, but he said that’s “impossible” for financial and logistical reasons. Here’s a look at his quote from On Fire With Jeff Probst (opens in new tab)

Here’s the thing. When you’re voted out, you go to Ponderosa and you’re the first person. Then the second person is voted out and they go to Ponderosa. And thus begins, really, the beginning of the jury. This… I’m talking about the jury section. And to (the question’s point), it would be great if you could sequester everybody so they’re experience was completely pure, but it’s logistically and financially impossible. So, instead, yes, they can talk, and the way it goes is the new player arrives and they share their version of events. Sometimes they’re trying to settle a score or sometimes they might have bad information, and the players who have been at Ponderosa, they’re looking to clear up any confusion. ‘Did they talk about me? Who really voted for me? How did that all go down?’