On January 24th, Alex Honnold climbed unsecured one of the tallest buildings in the world. This is what the expert says about it.Image: Netflix / ZVG
On the night of January 24th, the extreme athlete climbs Taipei 101 without a rope – and humanity can watch live. An expert classifies.
January 23, 2026, 5:24 p.mJanuary 23, 2026, 5:24 p.m
For centuries, people have been drawn to events in which they can watch other people put their lives in danger. The Romans already had gladiators fighting in arenas to entertain people, often to the death. And even in our time, many circus performances perform breakneck tricks that could end in death with just one misstep.
On the night of January 23rd to 24th (Swiss time), extreme athlete Alex Honnold will climb the 508 meter high skyscraper Taipei 101 – without a rope. The 40-year-old’s rise will be streamed live on Netflix and the whole world can watch. Opinions on this are divided.
That’s why we worked with the communications scientist Dr. Janine Blessing talked about Alex Honnold’s campaign and asked why people were watching.
Tonight Alex Honnold climbs Taipei 101 unsecured. Why would you do something like that?
Dr. Janine Blessing: Ultimately only he can answer that himself. But from a communication science perspective, it can be said that such actions combine personal borderline experiences with public visibility. But a certain financial incentive probably also plays a role.
Why would anyone want to expose themselves to the media in such a life-threatening situation?
It’s probably less about the experience itself, but also about telling and sharing that experience. We also know this from everyday life: people post their food on Instagram or share short videos of their commute to work on TikTok. Even at concerts, many people prefer to film rather than actually experience the moment. This need to capture, share and exchange experiences has become an integral part of our media culture, even in extreme situations.
Where does such an “adrenaline addiction” go too far?
Ultimately, this is a question that we as a society need to discuss: Where do we draw the line? What else counts as entertainment for us? The fascination with danger and risk seems to be an ancient human need. Think of the gladiator fights in ancient Rome. There is obviously something attractive about the possibility of failure or even death. Today, however, a media dimension is added: such events are not only experienced on site, but also staged, disseminated and marketed through the media. This shifts the boundary between individual challenges, public entertainment and commercial exploitation and it is precisely this boundary that needs to be negotiated socially.
To person:
Dr. Janine N. Blessing is a communication scientist at the University of Zurich at the Institute for Communication Science and Media Research. Her research focuses on media use and media effects in the areas of health, science and the environment. The focus is on risk perception, follow-up behavior (e.g. information search and follow-up communication) and the influence of emotions.
Dr. Janine Blessing researches at the University of Zurich.Image: ZVG
Alex Honnold is a father, what can this action do to the family? Especially when the whole world is watching?
With the whole world watching, it can be emotionally stressful for the family. We don’t know exactly how Alex Honnold handles this, but in extreme sports, consultation with relatives is common. One can hope that he also discussed this action with his family in advance to clarify the possible consequences.
In your opinion, is Netflix playing with death in this case?
As already mentioned, there is a certain fascination in the possibility of failure or even death. Whether and to what extent this is ethically justifiable must be discussed in society. From a company perspective, however, media attention and commercial viability are likely to be the primary focus for Netflix.
Is streaming this campaign acceptable from a media ethical point of view?
This depends heavily on the respective culture. The boundaries a society draws, how it deals with the topic of death and what is considered entertaining or acceptable varies greatly.
Can you give an example of this?
Bullfights are a clear example: in some countries they have long been banned, be it for animal welfare reasons or because of the danger to those involved, while in other places they are considered a cultural asset. There are also differences when it comes to films: A film that is not released for children in Germany can be shown in the USA without any problems. Such examples show that media decisions must always be viewed in a cultural context and that providers should be aware of their responsibility in how they present risky or sensitive content.
Is the fascination behind such a climbing activity the same as listening to a true crime podcast?
The fascination is similar, but not identical. In both cases, tension and thrill play a role: we experience danger from a safe distance. In true crime, however, there are often additional individual motives, such as guesswork, interest in police work or the need to deal with possible dangers, a concept that psychologists refer to as “defensive vigilance” and which is also discussed in communication science.
Alex Honnold is known for his free solo ascents.Image: Imago
What is Defensive Vigilance?
Defensive vigilance refers to a psychological coping strategy in which attention is specifically focused on potentially threatening stimuli in order to reduce uncertainty. This phenomenon could, among other things, explain why true crime is particularly popular among women.
What is different about climbing than true crime?
When Alex Honnold climbs without safety, the focus is primarily on the classic search for excitement: the immediate experience of risk and thrill, possibly combined with admiration or fascination for his achievement. Overall, fascination is a very strong emotion. As part of my dissertation, I was able to show that it can motivate people to engage more intensively with a topic and to exchange ideas about it. This similarly explains why viewers attend the TV event: They want to share the fascinating experience and talk about it.
What do you recommend to people who plan to watch the live stream?
Despite all the fascination, the moral dimension must not be forgotten: entertainment and admiration come at the expense of real risks for those involved. Anyone who wants to watch the live stream should be aware that a real person is risking their life here. It is important to consider the associated risks and to reflect on whether viewing is in line with your own ethical ideas – after all, such content is only produced because enough people consume it.