Skip to main content

‘You are killing your kids’: framing and impoliteness in a health makeover reality TV show

  • Chapter
Book cover Real Talk: Reality Television and Discourse Analysis in Action

Abstract

Honey We’re Killing the Kids is a reality television programme that addresses the childhood obesity epidemic in two ways: by providing expert health education to individual families, and by packaging these families’ experiences as ‘makeovers’ for public consumption. Honey We’re Killing the Kids (hereafter: Honey) aired in the United States in 2006 and 2007 on TLC (The Learning Channel) and in Canada on The Food Network; the show was developed and originally aired in the UK; Australia and New Zealand also produced versions. Honey has become perhaps best known for a focal scene that occurs in every episode: Parents of children with bad health habits — and the at-home viewing audience — are presented with larger-than-life, morphing computer-generated images that predict how the children will look as they mature to age 40, given a nutrition expert’s analysis of their current physical health and everyday habits. In speaking with the parents in this scene, the nutrition expert directly, and very negatively, evaluates the children’s health habits and tells parents ‘you are killing your kids’. Following an understanding of impoliteness as tied to identity (e.g., Garcés-Conejos Blitvich 2009), the expert’s discourse is readily interpretable as ‘impolite’: It questions and undermines the parents’ positions (in this case, as ‘good parents’).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Anton, Corey & Valerie Peterson (2003) Who said what: Subject positions, rhetorical strategies and good faith. Communication Studies, 54: 403–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bateson, Gregory (1972[1954]) A theory of play and fantasy. In Steps to an Ecology of Mind (Chicago: University of Chicago Press), pp. 177–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buttny, Richard (1993) Social Accountability in Communication (London: Sage).

    Google Scholar 

  • Collett, Jessica L. (2005) What kind of mother am I? Impression management and the social construction of motherhood. Symbolic Interaction, 28: 327–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Culpeper, Jonathan (2005) Impoliteness and entertainment in the television quiz show: The Weakest Link. Journal of Politeness Research, 1: 35–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, Bronwyn & Rom Harré (1990) Positioning: The discursive production of selves. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 20: 43–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeVault, Marjorie L. (1991) Feeding the Family (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, Galit (2010) The family on reality television: Who’s shaming whom? Television & New Media, 11: 87–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frow, John (2005) Genre (Abingdon: Routledge).

    Google Scholar 

  • Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar (2009) Impoliteness and identity in the American news media: The ‘Culture Wars’. Journal of Politeness Research, 5: 273–303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar (2010) A genre approach to the study of impoliteness. International Review of Pragmatics, 2: 46–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar (2013) Looking backward, moving forward: From Goffman to practice theory. Journal of Politeness Research, 9: 1–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar, Nuria Lorenzo-Dus & Patricia Bou-Franch (2010) A genre approach to impoliteness in a Spanish television talk show: Evidence from corpus-based analysis, questionnaires and focus groups. Intercultural Pragmatics, 7: 689–723.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, Erving (1963) Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity (New York: Simon & Schuster Inc.).

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, Erving (1974) Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience (Boston: Northeastern University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, Erving (1981[1979]) Footing. In Forms of Talk (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press), pp. 124–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, Cynthia (2002) ‘I’m Mommy and you’re Natalie’: Role-reversal and embedded frames in mother-child discourse. Language in Society, 31: 679–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, Cynthia (2008) A(p)parent play: Blending frames and reframing in family talk. Language in Society, 37: 319–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, Cynthia (2009) Making Meanings, Creating Family: Intertextuality and Framing in Family Interaction (New York: Oxford University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, Cynthia (2011) Impression management on reality TV: Emotion in parental accounts. Journal of Pragmatics, 43: 3551–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, Cynthia (under review) ‘We were introduced to foods I never even heard of’: Parents as consumers on reality TV. In Anne T. Demo, Jennifer L. Borda & Charlotte H. Krolrøkke (eds.) The Motherhood Business: Consumption, Communication and Privilege. (Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gumperz, John J. (1982) Discourse Strategies (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, Cathy & Carol Gray (2005) The dog’s too fat — and so is the client: How to handle delicate consultations. In Practice, 27: 219–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karhila, Päivi, Tarja Kettunen, Marita Poskiparta & Leena Liimatainen (2003) Negotiation in type 2 diabetes counseling: From problem recognition to mutual acceptance during lifestyle counseling. Qualitative Health Research, 13: 1205–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendrick, Rachel (2008) ‘We can change the face of this future’: Television transforming the fat child. Australian Feminist Studies, 23: 389–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kosovski, Jason R. & Douglas C. Smith (2011) Everybody hurts: Addiction, drama, and the family in the reality television show Intervention. Substance Use & Misuse, 46: 852–8).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, Tania (2008) Changing rooms, biggest losers, and backyard blitzes: A history of makeover television in the United Kingdom, United States and Australia. Continuum: Journal of Media and Cultural Studies, 22: 447–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linell, Per & Margaret Bredmar (1996) Reconstructing topical sensitivity: Aspects of face-work in talks between midwives and expectant mothers. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 29: 347–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locher, Miriam A. & Richard J. Watts (2005) Politeness theory and relational work. Journal of Politeness Research, 1: 9–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lunt, Peter (2008) Little Angels: The mediation of parenting. Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, 22: 537–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lutfey, Karen & Douglas W. Maynard (1998) Bad news in oncology: How physician and patient talk about death and dying without using those words. Social Psychology Quarterly, 61: 321–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Owen, Rob (2006) Tuned in: Families on TLC diet makeover show report bitter aftertaste. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06100/680907-114.stm (last accessed 28 May 2012).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schank, Roger & Robert Abelson (1977) Scripts, Plans, Goals, and Understanding: An Inquiry into Human Knowledge Structures (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum).

    Google Scholar 

  • Scollon, Ron & Suzanne Wong Scollon (2001) Intercultural Communication: A Discourse approach, 2nd edn. (Malden, MA: Blackwell).

    Google Scholar 

  • Skeggs, Beverly & Helen Wood (2011) Introduction: Real class. In Helen Wood & Beverly Skeggs (eds.), Reality Television and Class (Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan), pp. 1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephens, Mark B. (2009) Clinical commentary: Take a direct approach to excess weight. The Journal of Family Practice, 58: 431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stivers, Tanya (1998) Prediagnostic commentary in veterinarian-client interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 31: 241–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swales, John (1990) Genre Analysis. English in Academic and Research Settings (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Tannen, Deborah & Cynthia Wallat (1993) Interactive frames and knowledge schemas in interaction: Examples from a medical examination/interview. In Deborah Tannen (ed.), Framing in Discourse (New York: Oxford University Press), pp. 57–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terkourafi, Marina (2002) Politeness and formulaicity: Evidence from Cypriot Greek. Journal of Greek Linguistics, 3: 179–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terkourafi, Marina (2005) Beyond the micro-level in linguistic politeness research. Journal of Politeness Research, 1: 237–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • TLC (The Learning Channel) press release, http://www.lisahark.com/presstic.pdf (last accessed May 29 2012). van Over, Brion (2009) The ‘self’ as a culturally constituted discursive resources in interventions. Paper presented at the 59th Annual Conference of the International Communication Association, May, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watts, Richard J. (1989) Relevance and relational work: Linguistic politeness as politic behavior. Multilingua, 8: 131–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Brenda R. (2009) Makeover TV: Selfhood, Citizenship, and Celebrity (Durham, NC: Duke University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2013 Cynthia Gordon

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gordon, C. (2013). ‘You are killing your kids’: framing and impoliteness in a health makeover reality TV show. In: Lorenzo-Dus, N., Blitvich, P.GC. (eds) Real Talk: Reality Television and Discourse Analysis in Action. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137313461_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics