Everybody's Equal

Everybody's Equal was a game show that ran on ITV from June 7, 1989, to July 22, 1991, with Chris Tarrant as host. A revival, retitled *Whittle*, aired on Channel 5 from March 31 to December 30, 1997, hosted by Tim Vine. International versions were produced in several European countries, Canada, France, and Japan. The show’s format shares features with Tarrant’s later hit *Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?*—especially its "Fastest Finger First" round—and with the American mobile game *HQ Trivia*.

The main game began with 200 contestants answering a multiple-choice question. Those who answered correctly moved on to the next question, and this continued until fewer than ten players remained. If more than ten survived after the sixth question, the ten fastest correct responders advanced. These finalists then faced four questions worth £50 each. The contestant who answered the last question fastest won the chance to play the final round, where they had to place four items in the correct order to win £1,000. If they got it wrong, the prize money was split equally among all other contestants.

On the original ITV run, Tarrant would often "name and shame" contestants who picked the most outlandish answers—most memorably in the very first game, when all but one contestant chose the correct answer. At the start of each episode, the host introduced the "Four to Follow," contestants the computer had selected as most likely to win, and he would check on their progress throughout the game. In the *Whittle* revival, likely due to a smaller budget, the top prize was either £250 or £500, depending on whether the contestant accepted an offer. If one of the ten remaining contestants was eliminated, they had to wear a "Whittle Mask"—a yellow disc with a purple "W" from the show’s logo and eye holes.

Reception was generally positive. In the *Daily Mirror*, Hilary Kingsley praised the show as "good fun," noting the questions were not too hard, the contestants seemed normal, and Tarrant’s self-deprecating style was a plus. Columnist Norman Harper, in a 1989 review, called it "a novel idea which works rather well," though he noted the risk of ridicule for wrong answers.