SurvivorFanGP wrote:
^ That's a great point, and New Yaxha went on a losing streak, and I don't think there was focus on them being "weak" either, and the winner coming from that tribe helps further support it.
In regards to people saying Parvati hasn't been changing her game like she said she would, I think it was meant to be more of a long-term statement. And considering how Amanda/Parvati/Alexis/Natalie/Cirie are the F5, it looks like Parvati DOES definitely change her game.
I don't doubt Parvati is strategizing far more than in Cook Islands. However if she *wins* because of her strategic prowess why isn't her team the strategic team? Why are they cutting out the strategy scenes that we can see in Insider?
All this leads to the point. When Ulong and Raro went on their losing streak the winner was on the winning tribe. Hence the focus was on how strong Koror or Aitu were and how weak Ulong and Raro were. If the winner is on the winning tribe again why are the editors treating the losing team as the strong team and not playing up how brilliant the winning team is? This is not just supposition - in the past in the exact situation they *have* gone on and on about the strength of the winning team and the weakness of the losing team. It would make the most sense if the winner was on Malakal and they win by being strong, either physically or in strategy. Sure you can't get around the fact that Malakal is losing all the time but you can try to ignore it as much as possible and just try to present them as strong anyway. This is extremely heavy manipulation on the parts of the editors. They are trying to rewrite events to fit their narrative.
