by Lucy Warren, graduate in BA English Language 

A critical discourse analysis of the narration of The Undateables and accompanying tweets.

Channel4 TV Corp

After watching the popular television programme, The Undateables (Channel 4, 2012), questions arose regarding how ethical the show truly is, specifically how empowering the show is to the participants and how much “awareness” the show actually creates. Following individuals with disabilities on “their quest for love”, the show has come under scrutiny for misrepresentation of the “undateable” participants from members of the public, journalists and sociolinguists. The show claims to show an “unprecedented insight into the dating lives of extraordinary singletons” however, as found in my study, this was not always entirely obvious.

By applying Sunderland’s discourse analysis technique (2004), the investigation examined various discourses such as infantilization, mockery and romanticism in the narration in two series of the show and accompanying tweets from the public. The investigation into the discourses presented in the narration and tweets, critically argued whether The Undateables exploits the disabled participants or is creating awareness, as the show claims.

After transcribing the narration of six episodes and investigating them manually, there were three clear discourses (i.e. set of ideas). First, The Undateable participants were often infantilized, whereby the emphasis of the pain and efforts come from the parents rather than the participants themselves. The narration treats them as if they are children despite all of them being over the age of eighteen, for example “His mum, Liz, hopes this could be a turning point in both their lives”. This was further evident in the tweets as the “undateables” were often described as “cute” or “sweet”, despite them often being older than the Twitter users themselves. The adjectives used by the public could be used to describe a new-born baby or a puppy, however the tweets equate this to the participants on the show despite many being over the age of thirty, living alone and in full-time employment much like any non-disabled adults.

Second, the study of the narration also found that the disabled individuals are overlooked as people, almost acting as if the disabled person was not worth addressing. Noticeably, the users often mention the parents rather than the “undateables” themselves. Thus, shifting the responsibility, pain and efforts from the disabled individual onto the parents. This creates sympathy for the parents rather than the “undateables”. This was particularly evident in the narration and further evident in the tweets, as both often referred to the Undateable’s parents, rather than the disabled participant. When romanticizing the “undateables”, both the narration and tweets capitalize upon the negative connotations of being single. The narration revolves around the idea that the ideal life trajectory is getting married and finding “Mr/Mrs Right” and creates a societal pressure to find “the one”. Failing to do so puts even more pressure on the disabled individuals and makes them look desperate and needy to avoid loneliness. Despite disability and relationships being two separate entities, the narration assumes that the “undateables” are aiming to cure themselves through love in order to be truly happy. To have a “fairy-tale romance” ensures happiness and thus the individual will be cured, with the responsibility being put on the “undateables” to find love and to ‘cure’ themselves.

The last discourse I identified was that of the “I’m glad it’s not me”. Whilst the show aims to promote awareness of the various disabilities and struggles, the show arguably crosses a line of laughing “with them” and this confuses the audience laugh laughing “at them”. It is questionable as to whether the humour is directed at the situation or at the “undateable” individual out of pity and mockery. The show says it aims to promote awareness of disabilities and learning difficulties, however this seemed to get misconstrued throughout the tweets with people just feeling pity for the helpless victims. Whilst the show claims to empower and raise awareness, the tweets and narration facilitate the never-ending cycle of dis/empowerment aimed at those who are disabled. Due to the cycle of dis/empowerment and the exploitation that comes from this, the societal view that disabled individuals are less able to find love will probably continue.

Disability in the media is still massively underrepresented, the social issue lies inherently within this as it is unlikely to ever be equal. After critically analysing The Undateables, it has shown me my own previous negative judgements and highlighted how discreet the disempowerment is in the narration and how this is portrayed in the public’s opinions. As the study went on, I became more and more disappointed in my own thoughts as I would find myself agreeing with the narration. Thus proving how embedded negative societal views are in relation to disability. Arguably, the show itself is a leap in disability empowerment; a show that follows disabled individuals dating lives is a new phenomenon. This does show a shift in society, regardless of any criticisms.

Sunderland, J. (2004), Gendered discourses, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.