In a statement, Kim said, “While Dan’s dismissal has validated the concerns I raised from the beginning of the season, I wish that no one had been subjected to this type of behavior.” The show itself has so far reacted with vague blather about “privacy” and “confidentiality.” (The Times was unable to reach Spilo for comment; he has denied any misconduct.)

You always have to be conscious, reality-TV fans know, of the difference between what you see on the screen and what the producers aren’t showing you. One also has to keep in mind that the producers have had months since the show taped to construct this story, knowing that they had a giant public-relations stink bomb ready to explode on them (compounded by who-knows-what legal agreements or threats).

But we’ve seen enough to know that the show screwed up.

Watching “Survivor” bungle Kim’s complaints, well into the #MeToo era, was like watching a recurring nightmare: A woman is touched inappropriately, she speaks up about it, her concerns are minimized or paid lip service.

Oh, but she’d have been treated better if only there were proof, right? Ha ha, guess again! Even when there is video documentation — even on a show whose premise is constant surveillance — the behavior still continues and the business that she complains to still does next to nothing. What’s more, she’s the one who suffers for speaking up.

It felt like an old, appalling rerun. The initial lack of consequences for Spilo recalled another reality-TV personality, Donald J. Trump, elected after he bragged about grabbing women by the genitals on the “Access Hollywood” tape, an appearance that was a product of his stardom on “The Apprentice” (produced by Burnett for NBC).

Almost as infuriating as what “Survivor” did, or didn’t do, have been its rationalizations. In interviews, the host, Jeff Probst, congratulated the show for using the incident as a teaching moment: “This is a precise microcosm of what happens in the workplace,” he told Entertainment Weekly.