Accents, Authority and the Illusion of Trust on The Traitors

Aneline Wood

Like everyone and their mother, I have been completely hooked on the latest season of The Traitors.  

I was completely obsessed – my whole week revolved around Wednesdays, Thursdays and Fridays. When we got back to uni, I organised Traitors watching parties because I simply couldn’t stand the idea of watching it on my own! So, it’s safe to say I’m a pretty big fan.  

But I am actually a relative newbie. This is the first season I have watched! I know, I know. What’s wrong with me, I get it.  

But, normally, everyone else watching a show and talking about it isn’t enough to get me to watch it. I’ve never really watched Love Island, didn’t particularly like I’m a Celeb, but in this particular case, the FOMO just got too great. And I am so glad I gave in!  

But it did start to occur to me while watching that so often people’s suspicions had no real factual basis or clear logic. Of course, it’s easy for us to criticise the faithfuls as viewers because it’s much easier to spot traitorous behaviour when you know who the traitors are! But, I think this season’s secret traitor really proves that we are not all as astute as we might like to think, because, at least for me personally, I had hardly any suspicion of Fiona.  

So often in the show, contestants’ suspicions and supposed evidence are based on gut feelings and the tiniest discrepancies in behaviour.  

They are often unintentionally shaped by unconscious bias and factors, such as: age, ethnicity, gender, accent, profession and likeability, that all expose who we instinctively trust and why.  

However, many have started to note that these ‘gut feelings’ have very traceable, and problematic, patterns. They are often unintentionally shaped by unconscious bias and factors, such as: age, ethnicity, gender, accent, profession and likeability, that all expose who we instinctively trust and why.  

I feel like I do need to caveat that my relative lack of knowledge about previous seasons, having not watched them, perhaps makes me slightly less qualified for writing this article, but I have had an invaluable source, my friend Evie, who has dutifully educated me about many players from previous seasons. So, while this article will mostly focus on the most recent season, I feel I am now, thanks to her, at least partially qualified to discuss previous seasons.  

Take Fiona, for example. Why did she fly so under the radar, at least until her fateful mistake to go against the faithful’s queen, Rachel? I believe it’s because she was so completely underestimated. She presented herself as this ditsy, sweet, older lady, always a little bit clueless, while actually cunning and ruthless behind the mask. Why did this work so effectively?  

Dr Mercedes Durham, a sociolinguistics professor at Cardiff University, led research into the likeability of the Welsh accent and found people associate the accent with being friendly – but not necessarily clever. 

An obvious answer is her Welsh accent. There is actually precedent within the game for the trustworthiness of the Welsh accent. Take Charlotte from season three, for example; she actually went so far as putting on a Welsh accent to maximise her chances of survival. Saying, “I’ve been putting on a Welsh accent because my mum’s from Wales, it’s one of the most trustworthy accents.” But how accurate is her theory? 

Dr Mercedes Durham, a sociolinguistics professor at Cardiff University, led research into the likeability of the Welsh accent and found people associate the accent with being friendly – but not necessarily clever. 

I think this is a particularly crucial point. Quite a few accents are associated with inspiring trust. For example, Irish, Scottish and Received Pronunciation are also popular. So why are Celtic accents, especially, so successful in The Traitors (Rachel and Steven as excellent examples)? I believe this is to do with unconscious bias surrounding intelligence. Received Pronunciation (RP) is statistically also liked but not generally as successful in The Traitors. I think this is because it is associated with social prestige and success. So, within Traitors, people are more wary of these contestants, whereas people with Celtic accents are underestimated.  

Mid-life women have been very successful in this season of The Traitors with other notable examples including Harriet and, obviously, Rachel.

I think another reason for Fiona’s success could be the fact that she is an older woman. This meant that she almost acted as a motherly figure towards other younger contestants, perhaps emulating the behaviour of Amanda in season 1 which saw her so far through the competition virtually unscathed.  

Mid-life women have been very successful in this season of The Traitors, with other notable examples including Harriet and, obviously, Rachel. Perhaps they have a kind of ‘cloak of invisibility’ meaning they get overlooked and underestimated, and their intelligence, patience and calm demeanour certainly help. They are often skilled at reading people and spotting lies.  

Sexism manifests itself in another arguably more sinister way through The Traitors.

However, sexism manifests itself in another arguably more sinister way through The Traitors. Host Claudia Winkleman herself called out the ‘problematic’ behaviour of the traitors in season 2. Male traitors created a kind of ‘boys’ club’, turning against the only female traitor selected early on and only recruiting other men from then on while also primarily murdering women.  

There was definitely a noticeable, largely unconscious gender bias present. Female contestants found themselves in a ‘double bind’. Vocal women were branded as pushy and abrasive, leading to suspicion of them as traitors or to be murdered, as the traitors feared their ability to influence the group. But even quiet women weren’t safe as they were seen as crafty, duplicitous and untrustworthy, seemingly held to much higher standards than men.  

This pattern is also reflected in the most recent season, for example, with Ellie, banished for absolutely no reason other than lack of participation, and the fact that Faraz and Jack sailed through to the final.  

Very important here is the idea of an in-group which frequently doesn’t include ethnic minorities

Perhaps the most obvious unconscious bias throughout all the seasons is ethnicity. Almost consistently, the first person to be banished is a person of colour. As Guardian columnist Zoe Williams points out, all early banishments are a throw of the dice as no one really has enough evidence, and yet this season, Child Liaison Officer Judy had apparently done enough to garner suspicion. So, too, had personal trainer Ross, who was in the crosshairs for just about everything he did.  

Very important here is the idea of an in-group, which frequently doesn’t include ethnic minorities. People feel safer with those who seem similar to them. Once an in-group exists, trust is extended generously within it, while outsiders are judged far more harshly.  

In the celebrity traitors season, Niko Omilana was first to be banished and cited being an outsider as a potential reason for this.

In the celebrity traitors season, Niko Omilana was first to be banished and cited being an outsider as a potential reason for this. Another example of being in an out-group working against contestants is the treatment of Alexander and Fozia in season 3, who entered the game at a later stage and therefore missed out on bonding and alliance forming.  

Sean Cadwallader writes for the Mancunion that he believes the dismissal of Anthony (a black man) in season 2 was due to unconscious racial bias. He was accused of aggression when there was suspicion of him, which plays into the stereotype of black men being portrayed as aggressive and violent. His Birmingham accent may have also contributed to this stereotyping, as statistics show that there is a higher conviction rate for defendants with Birmingham accents in courtrooms over non-regional accents.  

Another example is Jaz in season two, the only player to suspect traitor Harry (who went on to win), leading to the nickname ‘Jazatha Christie.’ He was repeatedly accused of being a traitor, while being implicitly dismissed in conversation, with his ideas and perspectives subconsciously treated as being less worthy or important. 

As Zoe Williams suggests, if the BBC revealed in 10 years’ time that it wasn’t a gameshow at all, it was actually a social-experiment documentary about unconscious bias, I’d think: yeah, well played, that really worked. 

All this is not to say that The Traitors need to be cancelled; however, it is important to recognise how unconscious bias shapes our opinions and decisions about people. Why do we think of someone as trustworthy or untrustworthy? These internalised prejudices are present throughout our society, and perhaps The Traitors provides an opportunity to recognise and confront them. As Zoe Williams suggests, if the BBC revealed in 10 years’ time that it wasn’t a gameshow at all, it was actually a social-experiment documentary about unconscious bias, I’d think: yeah, well played, that really worked. 

Aneline Wood