As there has been a fair amount of love for Gogglebox, I wonder if anyone watches the programme that often follows on from it - First Dates. Me and Mrs Bored love it. If you don't know the premise, there is a restaurant (and, for specials, a hotel) where the producers have set up people for blind dates and then they film them. After this, they ask them into their studio to review the date and to see if they are going to go on another date. Then, over the end credits, they follow up what happened to them. As I write it down, it seems much more like exploitative reality TV than it actually is. It is actually really heartwarming, somewhat life-affirming and romantic. Yes, I am saying that with no irony, sarcasm nor cynicism.
You find yourself rooting for (and, only occasionally, against) couples to work and cheering when they both agree to a second date (and have worked out later) and feeling deflated when they don't. Not only that but it is, by far, the most inclusive programme of this sort that I have seen. Straight, gay, lesbian, multiracial couples are featured as well as disabled individuals (as well as one woman who had quite advanced cancer) and also much older couples - in its way, the most progressive aspect. I am not sure whether there have been any trans couples or individuals but I wouldn't be surprised. I remember when Nadia Almada won Big Brother being somewhat pleased and a little surprised that the British public (or a section thereof, at least) were accepting of a trans person. In some ways, First Dates does the same. Not only does it present all manner of individuals and relationships on the programme but, as there is none of the voting, the the views of the public are shown on the programme via the participants and the acceptance of people's sexuality, cultures, disabilities etc is almost always positive even if they don't fancy that person. Of course, the research and the editing are, I am sure, expertly done but it still comes across as genuinely accepting.
The other good aspect about is that even after 9 series, they haven't ramped up the shock value of the participants a la Big Brother. Many of them still seem like very normal people with normal stories. Yes, there are people who are over-the-top, arseholes, borderline sociopaths or with X-factor-style sad back stories but, mostly, no more than you are likely to meet in real life. Yes, there has been celebrities in one but, even then, the format of the programme seemed to drain the celebrity out of them and bring them to the level of every other participant that has been on there. There was a couple of episodes set in a hotel but this didn't mean that it became "Love Island" just a bit more time to explore the stories after the date.
Having said all these positive things about it, the one thing that it does say to me and Mrs Bored is that we wouldn't want to be back 'out there' again. We just wouldn't know what to do or say. Having said that, that is why the introduction of many of the older people - many widows or widowers - is interesting as this is what many of them are doing. One thing I haven't touched upon that I think shows the brilliant way the show treats the participants is the way they show the, I am being brutal here, the plain, the ugly, the socially awkward and the inexperienced. There is no editorialising about them, no "freakshow" element and, most importantly, no mismatching of them. People are invariably matched to people that there is a good chance they will hit off with. No-one is purposefully set up to fail.
You find yourself rooting for (and, only occasionally, against) couples to work and cheering when they both agree to a second date (and have worked out later) and feeling deflated when they don't. Not only that but it is, by far, the most inclusive programme of this sort that I have seen. Straight, gay, lesbian, multiracial couples are featured as well as disabled individuals (as well as one woman who had quite advanced cancer) and also much older couples - in its way, the most progressive aspect. I am not sure whether there have been any trans couples or individuals but I wouldn't be surprised. I remember when Nadia Almada won Big Brother being somewhat pleased and a little surprised that the British public (or a section thereof, at least) were accepting of a trans person. In some ways, First Dates does the same. Not only does it present all manner of individuals and relationships on the programme but, as there is none of the voting, the the views of the public are shown on the programme via the participants and the acceptance of people's sexuality, cultures, disabilities etc is almost always positive even if they don't fancy that person. Of course, the research and the editing are, I am sure, expertly done but it still comes across as genuinely accepting.
The other good aspect about is that even after 9 series, they haven't ramped up the shock value of the participants a la Big Brother. Many of them still seem like very normal people with normal stories. Yes, there are people who are over-the-top, arseholes, borderline sociopaths or with X-factor-style sad back stories but, mostly, no more than you are likely to meet in real life. Yes, there has been celebrities in one but, even then, the format of the programme seemed to drain the celebrity out of them and bring them to the level of every other participant that has been on there. There was a couple of episodes set in a hotel but this didn't mean that it became "Love Island" just a bit more time to explore the stories after the date.
Having said all these positive things about it, the one thing that it does say to me and Mrs Bored is that we wouldn't want to be back 'out there' again. We just wouldn't know what to do or say. Having said that, that is why the introduction of many of the older people - many widows or widowers - is interesting as this is what many of them are doing. One thing I haven't touched upon that I think shows the brilliant way the show treats the participants is the way they show the, I am being brutal here, the plain, the ugly, the socially awkward and the inexperienced. There is no editorialising about them, no "freakshow" element and, most importantly, no mismatching of them. People are invariably matched to people that there is a good chance they will hit off with. No-one is purposefully set up to fail.
Comment