I have conflicted feelings about it if we’re discussing the same show. On one hand, many of the contestants are survival experts who relish the challenge, and get regular medical checkups etc. OTOH, they routinely discuss their financial motivations. It feels different from the (morally reprehensible) bum fights of the early internet but I could see the argument for rough equivalence.
Despicable group of humans who went on to do such quality things as stealing body parts of dead babies to try smuggle them into the US.
(Spoilers)
* The skill gap between best/worst contestants is portrayed as minimal. In reality, some contestants came in with years of lived experience thriving in the exact environment of the show (like the victor, who had spent years living in Siberia with people native to the region), or are literally paid professionals (like the army survival instructor, who tapped out because he was so successfully surviving he was bored, and didn't need the money), while others come from difficult backgrounds and have picked up wilderness skills only as a hobby or by necessity. When you find out just how large the skill gap was, and how some of these contestants basically never had a chance, it feels completely exploitive and effectively rigged.
* Contestants give "camera confessions" in classic reality TV style, but these take a very dark turn as the show progresses. Going from "Excited to overcome the mental challenge of isolation", to starving, choking through tears "If I can hang on just a few more days I might be able to win the prize money for my family and give them the life I never had" in just a few episodes. If people are out there doing this for pride or because they enjoy the experience, so be it, but it's another thing entirely to dangle a large monetary prize in front of them. It just feels really sick to be watching people who are incredibly vulnerable and literally dying open up about their traumas and making it very clear they are only sticking it out for the cash. Begging to be allowed to stay when they are clearly underweight and at risk for cardiac issues.
* The final episode makes it seem like the 2 remaining contestants are both just hanging by a thread, a literal starvation contest, which would be sad enough. But if you do some research afterward, you find out that while the 2nd place contestant had lost a dangerous amount of weight and was eating rabbit entrails, the winner had 100s of lbs of food stored (including moose and plenty of fish) and had not lost any weight. Hell, the last (gigantic) fish he caught they apparently brought back and used to feed the production camp.
* All this said, the winner of Season 6, Jordan Jonas, is a very interesting (and apparently humble, good natured) guy, and I have enjoyed reading his commentary on the show on reddit and his blog. The show portrays him as lucky in some respects, probably to make him seem more like the other contestants, but he was in fact using a great deal of very specific techniques and knowledge, like how to build an structurally sound/ideal shelter, track/bait/hunt large game, ice fish, or build structures to keep stored food away from other predators. He himself admits the show obviously created a false narrative around his chances to win.
I think the ideal situation would just be to use a tiered prize structure. Where the longer you last the more money you get, but not so much that you're incentivized to stay after it becomes hopeless/dangerous. A 500K 1st prize could easily be split into 150/100/75/50/50/25/25/25 for places 1-8. That way you're always competing for about 25K more, but you're not desperate to hang out or get sent home with nothing.
I would expect the opposite. Nobody wants to see a pro baseball team crush a high school team, they want to see an evenly matched slugfest. The notion of a "fair fight" is deeply ingrained in people.
It sounds remarkably exploitative and horrible.
These are adults and are free to decide for themselves regarding whether to participate, but I am happy to have your summary, so that I don't have to support the production with viewership.
(or rather the UN’s 1957 treaty, since the 1930 one excluded men aged 18-49).
How is voluntary, compensated participation in a TV game show comparable to slavery?
In fact, it is exactly this, with a higher prize, and on TV. The family father who is hiding his frostbites on his feet from the doctor, accepting to be voluntarily handicapped for life (or dead right there) in hope his children will survive, he’s not free to work. Plus you don’t organize hobos to fight just for the show. You can get hurt in military or in oil, but at least you are being useful to something. Being a gladiator to willing die on the TV arena, 1500 years after the Romans quit doing it, we can’t let that happen.
I don't remember the numbers, but even the non winners are paid fairly well.
The critical assumption...
And reading about how most of these outdoor reality shows are "really" made, it's mostly forced drama long enough for the shot, then surrounded by medics and outdoors experts the minute they need help.
The best of those shows don't even have a crew on the island - there are statically positioned cameras and the players operate others themselves.