In the early 2000s, a reality TV show forced contestants to stay awake for several days, similar to the eerie premise of the Russian Sleep Experiment creepypasta.
Channel 4’s 2004 reality TV series Shattered featured 10 contestants, aged 19 to 33, who were challenged to stay awake for seven days to win a huge cash prize of £100,000.
However, there was a catch: the contestants had to keep each other awake to prevent deductions from the prize fund. Every time someone fell asleep, money was subtracted from the total prize.
To ensure their safety, they were allowed to sleep for just one hour per day. But, they had no access to medicines, alcohol, drugs, electronic equipment, mobile phones or musical instruments.
The British sleep deprivation show, which bears similarities to the Russian Sleep Experiment, ran for seven episodes and was filmed in a “laboratory” located in an abandoned shopping center. It was hosted by Dermot O’Leary.
Participants lived in a Big Brother-style environment, where they were monitored around the clock and required to complete daily performance tests and various challenges.
Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest updates on Esports, Gaming and more.
Each day, one person was chosen to take part in a challenge called ‘You Snooze You Lose.’ It aimed to put contestants to sleep by making them cuddle soft toys, sit in a warm room, and even watch paint dry while reclining in a chair.
The final challenge was an intense sleep-off, where the last person to fall asleep would win the cash prize. 19-year-old Clare Southern won after staying awake for 178 hours in total, and she walked away with £97,000.
There were some unusual health effects reported, as one contestant experienced severe hallucinations and believed he was the Prime Minister of Australia, while another left the show after consulting with the show’s psychologists.
Ofcom, the regulator and competition authority for the UK communications industries, received 34 complaints from the public about Shattered.
However, after considering “the intention behind the programme” and “expert medical opinions,” they determined that Channel 4 did not breach its programming guidelines.
