First, in "The Truman Show" the protagonist was not participating with his own volition. He did not wanted to restrain himself inside. These people had a lot of contact with the outside world and still want to be left alone. The parallel is not quite valid. Second, this is natural. The island is natural, the people with their ancestry and isolationist policy are as natural as possible. Even if we'd put cameras, we'd record (just) reality, as we do in a lot of other instances among ourselves.

<<These people had a lot of contact with the outside world and still want to be left alone>>

I'd argue that their attitude to the outside world can only be based on very little information most of which is probably no longer relevant

Actually, I would argue that their information is VERY relevant. Humans make the same mistakes / crimes / ... over and over and over again. I am quite sure that Columbus approached the natives with gifts, and look where it ended.

Really? You think they know what happened in the Americas post 1492?

And suppose that the people of that island began showing signs that they wished to make contact. What then?

Commerce with all nations, alliance with none.

What can they trade ? Knowledge about their way of living, genomic studies, dieting habits, linguistic analysis, anthropological studies of they way they represent the world. Last both are really dangerous to them because those interactions will alter their culture in significant ways. The first one are highly valuable.*

What can we trade ? A lot. What can we trade that wouldn't annihilate their core identity ? I can't think of anything yet.

* but not yet as valuable as oil, diamonds or uranium otherwise the Indian authorities would have adopted a very different set of directives.

The first paragraph reads disturbingly like the reason we should make contact with them is because the people themselves are resources to be harvested.

Phrased like this, it's a really good reason why we should not make contact, because ultimately the primary thing we would gain from such contact is exploiting the people themselves.

I didn't say we have to gut them. We can talk to them and then nicely ask to pick up some stool and blood samples.

Frankly, I am more concerned about this argument I read in this thread : "We should do it for their children because they aren't given a choice by their parents get in touch with us and it isn't fair." That, is supremacy and way more dangerous than curiosity as an ideology.

> What can they trade ? [...] genomic studies

and interesting genes will be stolen from them and patented.