Traitors - why black and white thinking is unhelpful (wrong)

I didn't watch and don't intend to watch Traitors...

It may seem heresy to say that I have no wish to watch celebs lie, cheat and backstab but I'm just not that convinced that encouraging people to think in terms of good/bad, traitor/faithful, pro/anti, remain/leave, red/blue has ever been helpful.

Yes I appreciate it is a show for entertainment but when the world is in quite the mess it is from thinking only in binary terms which seemingly increasingly thrives on polarization that steering even entertainment into dichotomy is a good idea (yes I see the hypocrisy in event that comment).

As Marshall Rosenberg says it is disappointing that so many TV/film stories end with the winning of one side over another (more often than not with a blue sky beam and someone getting killed - that wasn't Prof Rosenberg that was me) rather than a considered thoughtful talking solution where all sides find a way forward (there were plenty of Infinity Stones to go round and with all that power was destroying all the "bad" guys the best solution?).

Mediation offers a refreshing, and often challenging, alternative. At its heart, mediation is not about picking sides or declaring winners. It’s about navigating the vast grey space between opposing perspectives, recognizing that most human conflict doesn’t live in absolutes.

Mediation Is Not a Dichotomy

Many people approach conflict resolution as if it’s a courtroom drama: two sides, one truth, and a final verdict. But mediation rejects that binary. It’s not a game of “who’s right?”—it’s an exploration of “what happened, why it matters, and how we move forward.”

Mediation invites nuance. It acknowledges that two people can experience the same event in completely different ways and still both hold valid truths. It thrives on empathy, context, and the willingness to hold contradictory ideas at once. The mediator’s role isn’t to force a choice between black and white—it’s to help people see the full color spectrum of the situation.

The Spectrum of Decisions and Actions

Mediation is full of choices, but rarely simple ones. Every word, pause, and question is part of a continuum:

• How much do you speak, and when do you hold silence?

• How do you validate without taking sides?

• When do you move toward agreement, and when do you stay with discomfort?

These are not on/off switches; they’re sliding scales that shift moment to moment. A skilled mediator reads these subtle cues and adjusts, knowing that real understanding often emerges in the in-between spaces—between emotion and logic, between talking and listening, between conflict and connection.

So then why The Traitors Is Nothing Like Mediation

TV shows like The Traitors thrive on deception, manipulation, and the illusion of certainty. Each episode builds toward a climactic reveal: who’s loyal, who’s lying, who’s “the traitor.” It’s supposed to be entertaining, so they tell me — but it’s the antithesis of mediation and what I want for my kids in the world. It's easy to "other" people by sticking them in a red box when you're in the blue one (or vice versa if you are this side of the pond).

The Traitors is a reflection of our current cultural appetite for binary drama. It pushes us toward partisan thinking, where every decision must place someone squarely in the “us” or “them” camp. This fuels a zero-sum mindset—the very opposite of what mediation seeks to cultivate.

Mediation doesn’t deal in traitors and faithfuls. It deals in people: flawed, conflicted, well-intentioned, misunderstood. Where The Traitors turns suspicion into spectacle, mediation turns it into inquiry. Where the show rewards deceit, mediation rewards transparency. And while the show thrives on tension, mediation seeks to transform it into understanding.

Moving Beyond Partisanship

The danger of shows like The Traitors isn’t just in their alleged entertainment value—it’s in how they normalize binary judgment. They mirror, and perhaps amplify, a cultural trend: the idea that every disagreement must have a villain, and every conversation a winner.

Mediation offers an antidote. It reminds us that human relationships, like human beings, resist simplification. It encourages curiosity over certainty, listening over labeling, and collaboration over competition.

In that sense, mediation isn’t just a process for resolving disputes. It’s a practice for living in a complex, interdependent world—one that asks us to look beyond the false comfort of black and white, and to find meaning in the countless shades of grey between.