Realitytvhallofshame.com Half.com DVDs in-stock  
Home
Intro
Full Article Archive
People
Shows
Moments
Feedback / Nominations
Free E-mail Updates




All content on this site is copyrighted by the individual authors and may not be reproduced without permission.

Privacy Policy

Hall of Shame Moment: Ian’s Fateful and Faulty Final Decision on ‘Survivor: Palau’

by David Bloomberg -- 05/19/2005
Ian Rosenberger fought hard to get to the Final Three. He fought even harder on the longest challenge ever, hanging on to a buoy for almost 12 hours to try to win immunity and face the jury for a million dollars. Instead, he made a decision that might have seemed honorable, but was absolutely horrible from a game perspective, he took a dive (right). Despite everything else, the Reality TV Hall of Shame had no choice but to give him a Hall of Shame Moment.

View Printable version of this article

Ian Rosenberger had a great chance to go all the way to the Final Two of Survivor: Palau – and win. He had hooked up early with Tom and Katie, a threat and a sure second-place finisher, respectively. Their alliance took them to the Final Three, just as they planned.

But there were some bumps along the way. Both Katie and Ian had considered other options, and Ian became emotionally entangled with both Katie and Tom, neither of whom liked the fact that Ian even thought about the possibility of breaking up their alliance of three.

Unfortunately, Ian allowed those emotions to overcome him, and he made a move that simply must be recognized as a Hall of Shame Moment: He gave up after almost 12 hours in the final immunity challenge and instructed Tom to take Katie to the Final Two despite Tom’s offer to take Ian.

The decision to give Ian this Moment was not an easy one, and it caused some debate in halls of the Hall. Was what Ian did really “shameful”? After all, he did it because, in his eyes, it was the only way to restore the bond of friendship and respect he had built with Tom over the previous month. How can we call something like that shameful?

The answer is that unlike those who make it into the Hall for shameful behavior, Ian’s decision is being recognized for being shamefully bad strategy – and the Hall recognizes both.

Let’s look back to a similar instance, Colby’s decision to take Tina to the Final Two rather than go for the sure win over Keith. His move lost him the million dollars for which he’d played so hard over the course of the game, just like Ian. His move was made on the basis of friendship and honor, just like Ian. His move was a terrible one strategically, just like Ian. His move ended up with a Hall of Shame Moment… just like Ian.

As we noted at the time, sometimes the Reality TV Hall of Shame recognizes behavior that relates to shamefully poor play or bad decisions in terms of the game alone, other times the behavior is just plain nasty to watch regardless of the events in the game. Ian was by no means “nasty,” but when we wrote about Colby we said we couldn’t think of a worse game decision – but now we have one. Ian could likely have outlasted Tom on the buoy challenge, especially given that Tom said afterwards that he was about to fall off (he might have been joking, but it had been 12 hours, after all). If Ian had won, he could have taken Katie and easily won the million dollars. Even if Ian had taken Tom’s earlier deal to jump off and go to the Final Two with Tom, he at least would have had a chance at winning. Or he could have made an “honorable” counter-offer, by telling Tom that if Tom stepped down, he would bring him to the Final Two as payback. Then they could have put it all out there and let the jury decide. Ian still might not have won, but he at least would not have been completely giving up.

Those of us here at the Hall of Shame are always happy to see good people on reality TV – it makes our lives a bit easier. But good people can still play smart – just look at who Ian gave up for, Tom. He valued friendship and honor too, but we didn’t see him handing over a million bucks to somebody else!

What Ian did was essentially lay down his torch. It’s not quite the same as quitting the game, but as close to it as he could come without actually laying down his own torch. Quitters always get an extra measure of examination around the Hall of Shame. Indeed, over time we have recognized a number of people for poor strategy, including Colby (Outback), Leeann (Vanuatu), Bradford (Apprentice 2), Lex (All-Stars), Brandon (Africa), Alex (Amazon), Rotu 4 (Marquesas), and Marcellas (BB3). For quitting, we have also recognized: Verna (Apprentice 3), Osten (Pearl Islands), Sherry St. Germain (Canadian Idol), Jill (Tough Enough 3), and Wendell (Tough Enough 3).

Morality has its place in Survivor, but ultimately it is a game. If somebody were playing “Risk,” they might temporarily join up with others to defeat another player. But then you eventually have to turn on your allies. You may play that game with your friends, and perhaps on Survivor you will make new friends, but the point is still to win the game. Using the “Risk” example again, if you decide to leave your troops vulnerable because we’re friends but I fortify my armies and attack, that doesn’t make you a better person; it makes me a better “Risk” player. Maybe you won’t be happy when I take over the world, but if you’re really my friend, you’ll get over it. I believe in Ian’s situation, Tom would have also gotten over it.

Those of us covering Survivor often get upset with jurors who don’t realize in the end that it is a game and vote with their emotions instead of recognizing good game play. We want them to look beyond “getting screwed” and realize that they were outplayed. Thus, we must look at Ian the same way – he gave up because he stopped thinking of Survivor as a game and instead allowed his emotions to overcome his strategy.

Ian played a great game until the game’s end approached. But when it came down to the most important point in the game, the time that could literally win him a million dollars, he gave up.

Ian is the type of person who doesn’t belong next to the likes of Omarosa, Jerri, Justin Sebik, Puck, and Jonathan Baker. But there is only one Hall of Shame, and as we’ve said, it recognizes both bad strategy and bad behavior. Ian’s definitely falls into the former category. For that, Ian must be given a Hall of Shame Moment.

David Bloomberg is the Editor of the Reality TV Hall of Shame, and can be reached at RNO@pobox.com.


Be sure to sign up for the RealityNewsOnline/Reality TV Hall of Shame e-mail update so you can stay informed about new articles on these sites! And take a look at the rest of the site. You can find all of the shows in the Hall of Shame listed here, all of the people who have been inducted can be found here, and click here for the Hall of Shame Moments.

For more news about reality TV, be sure to check out RealityNewsOnline and SirLinksALot!

0305-icons - 468x60


View Printable version of this article

Be sure to sign up for our free e-mail updates! Enter your e-mail address below:
Powered by YourMailinglistProvider.com
Shame-less Plugs:
Click Here For Our Brand New Reality TV Store!


Watch Hall of Shamer Omarosa all over again: Order The Apprentice Season 1 DVD


See several Hall of Shame incidents: Order Survivor: All-Stars Full-Season DVD


Survivor 1 Full Season DVD!


The Simple Life, Full Season DVD
: All 7 episodes plus outtakes.


The Real World You Never Saw – Paris, DVD