I've always had this understanding that for the shows where people are in "real survival" there is always an element of theatricality. It loses a bit of it's instructional value, but becomes more entertaining. The original RM shows, and I'm sure many others besides, retain that sense of explanation as opposed to solely entertainment. Yet, even if you look at some of the more truthful shows out there, such as Survivorman, there is extensive assessment before filming. Behind the scenes footage shows the locals introducing Les Stroud to local flora and fauna. Nevermind that I want to see those experts explaining about the land, Les is the star, and he's the one who will give us only a very limited range of knowledge provided to him by those locals.
At the end of the day, the only thing that can be extracted from shows like that seems to be knowledge of the state of mind to be in. Transferable skills (knife use, firelighting etc) are sort of a given, and the processes for gathering, building and hunting seems mostly the same in differing terrains. This doesn't seem to be the hook for these programs. I feel like we look to the less instructional shows as examples of perseverance, even when you have done something idiotic. About keeping going whatever. Maybe some TV bigwig has already realised that such perseverance sucks people in, and maybe they haven't, but at the end of the day, it isn't advertised as such. It's only advertised as being the most dangerous thing to do when someone is the out in the **** end of nowhere. I find myself marvelling at the adversity of the person in that situation, and it may be that is what people are taking away and getting themselves hurt over: the thought that if you really want to survive, you just have to persevere. Very few of these celebrities and instructors actually push for learning important skill sets.
Not sure where I'm going with this. Just my two cents.
