See what I did there? I hold my hands up to using a sneaky attention-grabbing title but don’t worry, it isn’t actually misleading. Much. While this post doesn’t make my separate influences webpage as it hasn’t impacted my own writing specifically, my thoughts today are actually about diversity on the Quiz show Pointless, and how wonderful I think their approach is. As you’ll know, this series of musings covers all things which have inspired or influenced me, which they do and did on one specific recent occasion, which I’ll come to shortly. I love things which challenge me and make me think, which is why this blogpost exists.
As background, the quiz show Pointless clearly has a policy of actively encouraging diversity in its contestants, and watching regularly, you notice there is clearly a deliberate choice to pick a very broad range of participants, much more varied than most other quiz shows I watch. This selection of quizzers also regularly includes contestants with (what I assume may be) hidden disabilities or mobility restrictions which can mean, for example, that contestants take part sat on a stool, but never once have I heard this referred to in the show, or personal characteristics or circumstances being discussed or asked about. Those taking part are all just accepted and introduced without the need for explanation or background which is so refreshing. Again, this seems to be quite unlike many other shows, which frequently make an unnecessary point of asking participants about their personal circumstances to ‘inform the viewer.’
The prompt for this post though, is related to the questions themselves. A week or so ago there was one particular example which prompted this musing, a question about comedians appearing at the RSC. Four of the five answers happened to be the names of women. The question wasn’t about ‘female comedians’ or ‘comediennes’, just comics, and nowhere in the answers or banter was there any reference at all to 4/5ths of the names being female. Along with other viewers I’m sure, this did a far better job of making me aware of my own prejudices and expectations than mentioning the gender imbalance would have. I found myself realising that if four of the five names had been male, I wouldn’t even have noticed, and just because there are still a larger number of male comedians on the circuit overall, there is no reason whatsoever why the answers to one question should reflect that. It made me think and question my own expectations and perceptions, and I love it when that happens organically.
Don’t get my wrong, there are still huge challenges to our society of course, I wouldn’t pretend otherwise, and times when these issues need to be highlighted explicitly, but I think we need to recognise other forms of great practice when we see them too. As far as I’m aware, the approach to equality and diversity on Pointless is never particularly championed, and it just quietly goes on redressing balances and presenting a more equal and varied view of the World without blowing its own trumpet. It must (or should) be the aspiration for us all, that diversity doesn’t always have to be tackled as an ‘issue’, but can also just occur in the natural order of things, sometimes unremarked on because it doesn’t have to be, and giving us hope that this style of choosing participants and content can become the ‘norm’ for TV shows in the future. Following this path, the more visible equality is, the better for extending it in society in the future.
Thank you Pointless and Mr Osman (I’m assuming you’re the one behind this approach).
Oooh it was a bit serious for me, that one wasn’t it. Worth saying though.
Stay safe,
Kit