The Dictatorship
Netflix’s new docuseries reveals a cruel truth about ‘The Biggest Loser’
When it debuted in 2003, “The Biggest Loser” might have seemed like a great idea for a TV show. By then, America had become increasingly obese. The contrast between a media obsessed with thinness and the reality of what American adults weighed was incredibly stark. The premise of the hit show was simple: Contestants with obesity, divided into teams and assisted by full-time coaches and a medical doctor, competed to lose the highest percentage of body weight within 30 weeks. Again, it might have seemed like a good idea — but it was not.
It might have seemed like a good idea — but it was not.
Yet for 17 seasons and well over a decade, “The Biggest Loser,” which originally aired on NBC, was a cultural phenomenon and a smash hit. At its peak, one premiere episode drew some 11.7 million viewers. The winner of any given season would leave Hollywood with their new body and their $250,000 cash prize and begin a media tour. And it wasn’t just a normal media tour; the winner didn’t simply perch on morning show couches sipping coffee or speak with entertainment reporters for a write-up. No, they would be asked to do things like stand inside of their old “fat jeans” and wave their hands in astonishment at the size, as the live studio audience gasped.
I do recall watching, although we didn’t tune in as a family like we did for, say, “American Idol” or “Survivor” or one of the other reality television shows that dominated the airwaves at the time. But “The Biggest Loser” was such a behemoth of a franchise that seemingly everyone knew about it.
That success, though, did not bequeath a legacy. Although cultural attitudes toward thinness and body positivity are changing every day — currently for the worse, I might add — the general sentiment toward “The Biggest Loser” is that it was exploitative at best and incredibly dangerous at worst.
That is what a three-part docuseries from Netflix that debuted this week explores. Called “Fit for TV: The Reality of the Biggest Loser,” the series examines the show from the perspective of former contestants, former winners, former producers and one of the notorious coaches, Bob Harper. Harper’s counterpart, an always screaming Jillian Michaels, did not participate in the documentary.
It should go almost without saying that the weight loss methods used on “The Biggest Loser” — extreme exercise, calorie restriction and, controversially, caffeine pills — did not work. Many of the contestants and even some of the winners gained all or much of the weight back after departing the show. Ultimately, though, the conversation around “The Biggest Loser” is not a conversation about health and wellness, but one about the way we treat people with obesity or who are overweight in this country.
The premise of writer and social commentator Roxane Gay’s 2017 book “Hunger: A Memoir of (My) Body” kept playing like a loop in my mind while I watched “Fit for TV.” In it, Gay writes, “When you’re overweight, your body becomes a matter of public record in many respects. Your body is constantly and prominently on display. People project assumed narratives onto your body and are not at all interested in the truth of your body, whatever that truth might be.”
There is a moment in the middle of “Fit for TV” where a season seven contestant named Joelle Gwynn recalled being berated on a treadmill by Harper.
There is a moment in the middle of “Fit for TV” where a season seven contestant named Joelle Gwynn recalled being berated on a treadmill by Harper. From footage that aired in 2009, we watch Gwynn, in her large “Biggest Loser” gray T-shirt, her hair slicked back from sweat, struggle to finish a 30-second run on the treadmill. She slows down at 20 seconds and Harper, standing in front of her, screams a torrent of profanities. Gwynn, reflecting on the incident in the documentary, said, “When Bob starts berating me, I go out of body, that’s the only way — I literally kid you not, I went out of body. … I’ve never seen someone get abused like that. It was very, very, very, very embarrassing. … It brought me back to home. I’m there because I would get s— like that at home and eat. So, you cursing me out doesn’t help me.”
But heightened emotional situations, manipulation and abuse were part of the show’s DNA — and a large part of what drove its success. Aside from verbal blow-ups between coach and contestant, something that Michaels in particular was known for, each episode would include what was called a “temptation.” Temptations would generally involve food, high-calorie fattening food, and a timed challenge. Whichever contestant ate the most hotdogs, for example, within a five-minute period would have the opportunity to win immunity from elimination or a cash prize. One particularly controversial temptation allowed the winning contestant to speak with a family member over the phone. Counterintuitive as it might seem for a weight loss show, temptations illuminate what “The Biggest Loser” is really about: spectacle and humiliation, not healthy and sustainable habits.
There is a well-documented connection between trauma, particularly childhood traumaand obesity in adults. One study found that of patients undergoing bariatric surgery, which could include gastric bypass or a gastric sleeve, some 69% “reported some form of childhood abuse or neglect.” There are many studies that have found the same conclusion. As the documentary notes, “The Biggest Loser” prided itself in finding contestants with what they called “good stories.” That is, they selected contestants whose painful life experiences would make their weight loss success even more inspiring and poignant for viewers — and more emotionally taxing on the contestant.
The documentary asks the questions: Was there adequate emotional support on the set of “The Biggest Loser”? Of course not. Harper and Michaels functioned as both coaches and pseudo-psychologists, a sort of dystopian good cop/bad cop. Were either of them trained or licensed to perform as anything more than a fitness instructor? Again, of course not.
It’s hard not to consider the show’s title as an empathetic viewer in 2025. “The Biggest Loser” is a cruel double entendre, reinforcing the unshakable cultural perception that to have obesity is to be lazy and weak. Who ultimately loses, though, when we sit around at night watching a show based on others’ pain and humiliation? I know this much: It is not the contestants.
Hannah Holland is a producer for BLN’s “Velshi” and editor for the “Velshi Banned Book Club.” She writes for BLN Daily.
The Dictatorship
Monday’s Campaign Round-Up, 6.22.26: Why Trump backed both Republicans in a key S.C. race
Today’s installment of campaign-related news items from across the country.
* In South Carolina’s gubernatorial raceDonald Trump endorsed Lt. Gov. Pam Evette last month. Last week, however, ahead of this week’s primary runoff election in the race, the president published an online item telling voters that “you can’t go wrong” with either Evette or state Attorney General Alan Wilson.
If this sounds at all familiar, it’s because Trump has done this before. Around this time two years ago, for example, he endorsed both Republicans running in a congressional primary in Arizona. And two years before that, he endorsed two leading contenders in a Senate primary in Missouri.
Only the president can say for sure why he ended up endorsing Evette and Wilson in the South Carolina race, though it’s worth emphasizing for context that GOP primary voters have already ignored his direction into two gubernatorial primaries this month, and it stands to reason that he hoped to avoid a third.
* We’re one day away from a variety of notable racesincluding but not limited to South Carolina’s gubernatorial race. There are also some congressional primaries in a handful of statesincluding Maryland, New York and Utah.
* In took a while, but the ballots have been tallied under Maine’s ranked-choice systemand we now know that Democrat Hannah Pingree, the former state House speaker, will face off against Republican Bobby Charles, who worked at the State Department during the Bush-Cheney era.
* As for Maine’s closely watched congressional racestate Auditor Matt Dunlap won the Democratic nomination in the battleground 2nd District, defeating state Sen. Joe Baldacci, who enjoyed the backing of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Dunlap will run in the fall against a familiar figure: former Republican Gov. Paul LePage, who had moved to Florida a few years ago, but who returned to run for Congress.
* In California’s congressional special electiontwo Democratic candidates — state Sen. Aisha Wahab and Melissa Hernandez, a Bay Area Rapid Transit director — have advanced to an Aug. 18 special general election. The winner will fill the vacancy left by disgraced former Rep. Eric Swalwell, who resigned in April.
* In a new commercial shared first with MS NOWDemocrat James Talarico has launched his campaign’s first multimillion-dollar ad buy in Texas’ gubernatorial race. In the 30-second spot, Talarico focuses on affordability and the cost of living. The state lawmaker will face scandal-plagued state Attorney General Ken Paxton in the fall.
* And in New Jersey, Republican Rep. Tom Kean Jr.who has been missing from Capitol Hill since early March, will reportedly return to work on June 30according to a statement from his spokesperson. Neither Kean nor his office have offered any public information about why he has been away.
Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”
The Dictatorship
Trump tries dual endorsement in South Carolina as his pick for governor flounders in polls
After President Donald Trump’s pick for governor in Iowa lost in the Republican primary earlier this month, the president argued that he “would have endorsed the other person” if he had “the proper information.”
Trump is taking no chances in the South Carolina gubernatorial primary. Over the weekend he rescinded his exclusive endorsement of Pamela Evette, the lieutenant governor, announcing instead that he would support both Evette and her runoff opponent, Alan Wilson, the state’s attorney general.
The move put Evette’s political future in jeopardy: Even before Trump’s dual endorsement, she trailed in limited public polling and was seen by political observers in South Carolina as a weak candidate with little to show besides the president’s coveted endorsement.
“Her chief distinction from Alan Wilson was that Trump endorsed her,” said Dr. Dubose Kapeluck, a professor of political science at the Citadel Military College of South Carolina.
Trump’s dual endorsement “was a kiss of death,” he told MS NOW.
Evette, who moved to South Carolina from Ohio to found a successful payroll and HR company in 2000, has been lieutenant governor since 2019, serving under Gov. Henry McMaster, who is term-limited.
In office, she has pursued meaningful but little-celebrated policies, like a key tort reform bill, according to Gil Gatch, a Republican member of the South Carolina state House and an Evette supporter.
But voters could be forgiven for knowing little about Evette besides the fact that Trump endorsed her, which he did just days before the June 9 primary. Visitors to her campaign website are greeted with a full-screen message labeling Evette as “Trump-endorsed.” The first line in her X bio states the same. Pro-Evette television ads are quick to tout the endorsement.
An accomplishment like tort reform, while noted on Evette’s website, “maybe could have been something that was highlighted more heavily,” Gatch told MS NOW.
The political makeup of South Carolina nearly guarantees the next governor will be whoever emerges on Tuesday between Evette and Wilson. They survived a crowded primary field on June 9, and nearly every challenger who fell short of the runoff publicly endorsed the attorney general.
“She’s just not a good candidate,” Josh Kimbrell, a state senator who failed to make the runoff and has since said he’d back Wilson, said of Evette.
“She kind of assumed this was a coronation, and that was never going to go over that well,” he added.
Even some pro-Trump voters were confused by the president’s initial endorsement of Evette, whom he called “a good friend, fighter, and WINNER” in a social media post in May.
“I have no clue why Trump would endorse Pamela Evette,” Leland Lemmons, a 30-year-old Trump supporter told MS NOW as he exited a polling site in the Greenville suburb of Easley on June 9.
“She’s served, you know, a decent time. I just haven’t seen much fruition of what she’s done in office,” he added.
In a post on Truth Social Friday announcing his dual endorsement, Trump wrote, “I can’t hurt one of them by only Endorsing the other, so, therefore, I am going to Endorse, for Governor of South Carolina, both Pam Evette and Alan Wilson!”
In a subsequent statement on X, Evette said, “I was proud to come in first as [Trump’s] endorsed candidate for Governor on June 9th. Looking forward to doing it again on June 23rd.”
After The Washington Post foreshadowed the dual endorsement last Tuesday, allies of Evette were quick to denounce the possibility.
“I would guess that’s fake news,” Suzanne Pucci, a member of Evette’s finance committee, told MS NOW of the chance Trump would also endorse Wilson. “She’s probably not real worried about it.”
Another close ally and supporter told MS NOW at the time the report was “a total, fabricated lie.”
“[Trump] is invested in Pamela Evette because she invested in him. He’s a loyal guy. That kind of stuff is important to him,” added the supporter, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
“With or without Trump, I think she is going to win,” they said.
On Thursday, a senior campaign aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity, brushed off the idea of a dual endorsement, telling MS NOW in a statement, “Pamela Evette has earned the complete and total endorsement of President Trump. She is the only Trump-endorsed candidate in this race and we look forward to delivering a big win for the president on Tuesday.”
Roughly 24 hours later, Trump retracted the exclusive endorsement.
Will McDuffie is a reporter for MS NOW.
As last week’s G7 summit in France got underway, a reporter asked Donald Trump whether his purported deal with Iran was final. “No, it’s not final,” the president replied. Later that day — during a visit to Versaillesof all places — he signed the framework anyway.
But moments after signing his name to the memorandum of understanding, Trump offered an unsubtle hint about what he was thinking at the time. Amid applause from those around him, the American president pointed down and then up while saying“Oil down, stocks up.”
In other words, Trump’s focus had nothing to do with natural security and everything to do with the economy. What’s more, the four-word phrase was part of a larger and underappreciated pattern. The Washington Post reported:
In the more than 100 days since President Donald Trump launched a war with Iran, he has offered a shifting list of reasons for why he started the conflict. But in explaining his push for peace, he named a priority much closer to home: protecting the stock market.
“I didn’t want to see economic catastrophe,” Trump told reporters gathered in the Alpine spa town of Évian-les-Bains, France, after the Group of Seven summit.
As the summit wrapped up, the Republican similarly said“I’ve studied presidents, some good, some bad, some great. Not too many are great and some really bad. … And the one president I did not want to be was the late, great Herbert Hoover. I didn’t want that and who knows what would have happened.”
He pushed the same point in an interview with Axios, which was released over the weekend.
“If I went further, the stock market would be much lower,” the president said. “Now think of this: I have one primary wish as president, in terms of people: I never want to be the late, great Herbert Hoover.”
The comments came days after Trump similarly argued“The alternative to this deal was a global recession. There are stupid people who want to see a global recession. They are just stupid people.”
Whether the president fully appreciates the implications of his own rhetoric, this string of comments doesn’t just shed light on his motivations for accepting a defeat, it also suggests he saw his failed policy in Iran as pushing the global economy toward a dangerous cliff.
In other words, based on Trump’s own comments, the war he started was poised to create an “economic catastrophe,” which he was desperate to avoid — and which led him to accept a framework that empowered Iran to get what it wanted in exchange for effectively no concessions at all.
Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”
- OMB nominee ‘can’t commit’ to forgoing ‘pocket rescissions’ funding gambit this year
- Turek leads Hinson in Iowa Senate poll of likely general election voters
- Capitol agenda: House GOP races to make Recon 3.0 real
- A rising populist tide is threatening New York’s powerful incumbents
- Senate Judiciary schedules confirmation hearing for Todd Blanche
- OMB nominee ‘can’t commit’ to forgoing ‘pocket rescissions’ funding gambit this year
- Senate Republicans say it’s time to give Trump a reality check
- Senate Republicans exclude Democrats’ food aid demand from farm bill
- Turek leads Hinson in Iowa Senate poll of likely general election voters
- Turek leads Hinson in Iowa Senate poll of likely general election voters
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship10 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words