Celebrity Traitors Winners Face Backlash After Donating Prize to Refugee Charities

A reality TV win usually ends with confetti, applause and a neat final interview. The Celebrity Traitors finale has done something rather different: it has sparked a public argument about refugees, charity and who gets to be seen as deserving help.

Actor Sebastian Croft and comedian Romesh Ranganathan were crowned joint winners of the BBC series on Friday, 30 October. Together, they secured an £83,000 prize fund, split as £41,500 each for charities of their choice.

Croft chose Choose Love, a humanitarian organisation that supports refugees and displaced people, including LGBTQ+ people fleeing persecution. Ranganathan chose the Refugee Council, which helps people seeking safety and rebuilding their lives in the UK.

The decision drew criticism from some right-wing figures online. TALK presenter Julia Hartley-Brewer wrote on X: “The end of #CelebrityTraitors was the most BBC thing EVER.”

The reaction did not stop there. Many viewers pushed back, praising both winners for using the platform and prize money to support people in crisis.

The prize money will support charities working with refugees and displaced people.

Why the donation became such a flashpoint

On paper, the story is simple. Two celebrities won a charity prize and donated it to organisations they care about.

The backlash shows how charged the subject of refugees has become in British public life. Charities that support people seeking asylum, fleeing war or escaping persecution often find themselves pulled into broader political arguments about borders, migration and national identity.

That can make even a straightforward act of giving feel like a statement. In this case, Croft’s choice of Choose Love added another layer because the charity highlights support for LGBTQ+ refugees and displaced people. For some viewers, that made the donation feel even more meaningful. For critics, it became part of a familiar argument about the BBC, celebrity activism and political values.

Yet charity donations on celebrity shows are meant to reflect the winners’ choices. The format depends on contestants selecting causes close to them, or causes they want to bring attention to. Croft and Ranganathan did exactly that.

What Choose Love and the Refugee Council do

Choose Love works with displaced people across different stages of crisis. Its work has included support such as emergency aid, legal help, housing support and assistance for people facing particular danger because of who they are.

That includes LGBTQ+ people forced to leave home because of violence, discrimination or state persecution. For those people, displacement can carry added risks. They may face hostility in their country of origin, during a journey to safety and even within refugee systems that are not always equipped to protect them.

The Refugee Council is one of the UK’s best-known refugee charities. It supports people who have fled conflict, persecution and danger, helping them navigate life in the UK and rebuild stability.

Ranganathan’s choice put the focus on people seeking safety here, not as a political talking point, but as individuals trying to start again after trauma and upheaval.

Together, the donations point to a clear theme: the winners chose charities centred on safety, dignity and practical support.

The backlash was loud, but support was louder

Social media rewards sharp reactions. A post criticising a TV finale can travel quickly, especially when it taps into long-running culture-war arguments.

The comment from Hartley-Brewer framed the ending as typical of the BBC, a line that many critics of the broadcaster use when accusing it of leaning towards liberal causes. That framing turned a charity choice into a debate about public service broadcasting.

But the criticism also prompted a strong counter-reaction. Many viewers praised Croft and Ranganathan for refusing to choose safer, less politically charged causes. Others pointed out that supporting refugees is a basic humanitarian act, not a scandal.

That divide is telling. One side treated the donations as evidence of a political agenda. The other saw them as a compassionate use of prize money.

Both winners could have picked charities likely to attract less scrutiny. Instead, they chose organisations doing work that is often misunderstood, misrepresented or attacked.

A charity finale can continue far beyond the closing credits.

Celebrity charity choices always carry meaning

Celebrity TV competitions often present charity donations as a feel-good ending. Yet the choice of charity is never neutral. It tells audiences what a winner values and which causes they want to raise up.

That does not mean every donation should be treated as a manifesto. Croft and Ranganathan did not need to deliver a speech for the donations to matter. The money itself will help organisations doing frontline work.

A sum of £83,000 is not symbolic to the charities receiving it. It can contribute to support services, emergency supplies, casework or other practical help. The exact use will depend on each charity’s own needs and programmes, but the impact is real.

The public argument also gives these organisations attention. That can be uncomfortable, especially when backlash is involved, but it can also remind people that refugee charities rely on visibility and donations to keep going.

For Choose Love, the spotlight may help more people understand that LGBTQ+ refugees face a specific set of dangers. For the Refugee Council, it reinforces that people seeking safety in the UK need support long after headlines move on.

The bigger story is about who gets empathy

The reaction to the Celebrity Traitors result says less about the mechanics of a TV show and more about the limits some people place on compassion.

Refugees are often discussed as numbers, pressures or policy problems. Croft and Ranganathan’s donations pushed the focus back towards people: those fleeing persecution, those rebuilding lives and those who need support when systems fail them.

Critics are free to dislike the choices. Viewers are free to praise them. That is part of public debate. But the core fact remains clear: two winners used their prize fund to support people in vulnerable situations.

For many fans, that made the finale more memorable, not less. The game ended with a win, but the lasting moment was the decision to turn celebrity prize money into help for people seeking safety.