system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
What would a utilitarian make of the Truman show?

The show brought joy to the millions who watched it. At the same time, it's kinda a horrifying concept that manipulates a man into what amounts to totalitarian control of his life. would a utilitarian oppose the show if it were real? How would they respond?
gpt
This is quite similar to a common ethical thought experiment known as the Sadist's Convention. It involves spectators in an arena deriving pleasure from watching a single unwilling participant be tortured. This is presented as an objection to utilitarianism; our gut instinct is that this is morally wrong, even if the pleasure generated by a stadium of sadists is greater than the pain endured by a single unlucky person. Here are the most common responses to the thought experiment from a utilitarian standpoint, which could also apply to your example:

1. Bite the bullet! Agree that as strange as it might seem, a stadium full of sadist pleasure really does outweigh the pain of an individual, and that the Sadist's Convention isn't morally wrong.

2. Argue that the pleasure of the sadists does not actually outweigh the pain of the individual. Perhaps pain should be weighted more heavily than pleasure, or some other solution that "fixes" the utility math.

3. Argue that the pleasure of the sadists is incomparable to the pain of the individual. This generally involves implicating things like personal freedom, inalienable rights, dignity, etc. In utility calculations. While this is the most common response, it also typically commits one to consequentialism, rather than pure utilitarianism. Realistically speaking, this is likely how most modern consequentialist philosophers would respond; very few, if any, philosophers continue to defend pure utilitarianism.