‘Survivor’ Tsunami | Newsweek.com

This article, written in the Summer of 2000, is about the very first season of Survivor. It seems like part of all of our lives now, but 8 years ago, it blasted into the minds of Americans and changed the way we think about TV. This is the first page of a nostalgic, captivating look at what that first Survivor season was like. Remember Colleen?

Click the link to read the whole thing.

‘Survivor’ Tsunami | Newsweek Entertainment | Newsweek.com
By Marc Peyser | NEWSWEEK
Aug 28, 2000 Issue

Talk About Addictive. We Kept Watching ‘Survivor’ Even After They Kicked Colleen Off The Island. This Week 40 Million Americans Will Tune In To Find Out Which One Of The Final Four Will Escape Cutthroat Island Without A Knife In The Back And With A Million Dollars In The Bank. An Exclusive Look Inside The Last Days Of A Tv Juggernaut.

It’s been four months since Rich returned from Pulau Tiga, the South Pacific island he ruled like a beached Rasputin. Can he live with himself yet? Along with 25 million or so other Americans, Rich has watched every minute of “Survivor”–with his mother at his side. Surely seeing himself whack stalwart Gretchen, belittle easygoing Sean and manipulate shaky Kelly must give him some pause. Yeah, right. As Edith Piaf almost sang, Rich regrets nothing. “I’m not sorry for trying to build an alliance. I’m not sorry for blatantly lying to Jeff at the tribal councils,” he says. “I’m happy with the way I played.” He’s not even sorry for the most naked offense of all: parading around nude for all the country to see.

“I’m often nude, and I was in the middle of the South China Sea in 110-degree weather. Why would I have clothes on?” he says. “The night before Colleen was complaining about my nudity, she and Gervase and Greg were sitting right next to me buck naked around the fire. I don’t know if the cameras caught that.”

A naked alliance–now there’s a team America can root for. Before “Survivor” debuted 13 weeks ago, the pundits whined that “reality” shows were the beginning of the end of television–or worse. They’d kill the sitcom, because they don’t require writers and are cheaper to produce. They’d obliterate what’s left of Americans’ sense of privacy and dignity, too. Nobody’s complaining now. “Survivor” is the most addictive show of the year, even without nude shots of Colleen. For those of you who haven’t been following along: it all started when 16 contestants in search of adventure and a $1 million grand prize were dumped on a beach near Borneo. They compete in twisted survival games–jungle obstacles, swimming relays, larvae eating. Even more harrowing, they gather for a “tribal council” at the end of every episode and vote to boot somebody from the island. The last person to survive the physical challenges and the Darwinian selection takes home the cash. This isn’t just survival–it’s office politics played by people who haven’t showered for weeks.

“Survivor” is completely over the top–host Jeff Probst snuffs out the loser’s tiki lamp before kicking him or her off the stage. But as the players have expired, the audience has exploded. For the last several Wednesdays, the folks on Cutthroat Island have pulled in more viewers than the five other networks combined. They’ve also performed the biggest TV miracle of the year: people are actually watching Bryant Gumbel’s “Early Show,” at least on the days when “Survivor” contestants appear. “Survivor” is already the No. 1 show in America, and as many as 40 million viewers may tune in to this week’s two-hour finale. The other networks are panting to keep up, though shows like NBC’s upcoming “Chains of Love”–where four men are chained to a single woman–seem pretty desperate. “Survivor” has changed what we’ll see on the tube for the foreseeable future. “The genie has finally been let out of the bottle,” says Robert Thompson, director of the Center for the Study of Popular Television at Syracuse University. “After the summer of 2000, there will never be another day in any of our lives where there won’t be some of this kind of programming on television.”

The most amazing aspect of “Survivor” mania isn’t what it’s done to television, though. It’s what it’s done to America. Bars across the country will be hosting “Survivor” parties this week, many offering prizes to people dressed as their favorite contestant. (Better find a pink bikini, fast.) The Web is filled with fan sites devoted to even the goofiest contestants. Budweiser, Reebok and a host of other companies have created “Survivor”-theme ads, though the funniest one is the TVLand spot featuring the “Charlie’s Angels” women in mock conversation about how to eat rats. The fact that “The tribe has spoken” has eclipsed “Is that your final answer?” as the cheesy catchphrase of the moment is one cheap but deeply satisfying reward. Even better: who would have thought that in the age of the Internet, where mere rumors can become international news at the click of a mouse, no one has leaked the winner’s name?

CBS worked hard to keep the secret. The 16 contestants and 140-person crew all had to sign contracts that would make them liable for $4 million if they revealed the winner. Even the families of the contestants had to sign, saying they wouldn’t write tell-all books. But it wasn’t just the legal threats that kept people quiet. “CBS would have had a hard time getting $4 million out of me,” says Gretchen, a part-time preschool teacher and mother of two. “It’s a loyalty to the show. People worked really hard on it.” It may not sound like much, but it was apparently enough to buy the players’ silence despite some tough appeals. “My grandparents are, like, ‘We might die this summer. You need to tell us’,” says Dirk. “But we’ve all got something to gain. Everybody’s making money. And everyone wants to be part of TV history.”

Read the entire article at ‘Survivor’ Tsunami | Newsweek Entertainment | Newsweek.com.