Despite The Reviews, The Assembly Does A Disservice to Autistic People
When I first saw the premise of the TV show The Assembly, I immediately thought to myself - to mis-quote the much snarky and memed line in The Devil Wears Prada - “Autistic, neurodivergent and learning-disabled people interviewing celebrities for the purpose of entertainment? Groundbreaking.” I’d seen the show described as ‘powerful’ and ‘the interview of a lifetime’ online, along with cloying reactions (just looking through the responses to a clip of the first episode with Michael Sheen on Reddit makes me want to claw my eyes out). You’ve probably guessed by now that the premise of The Assembly is where a group of autistic, neurodivergent and learning disabled people interview celebrities. I appreciate its heart is in the right place, and I don’t want to tear it apart completely. Except I do. It’s 2025 and it feels incredibly frustrating and disappointing to see disabled people treated like zoo animals.
In an interview with The Independent, executive producers Michelle Singer and Stu Richards say that the show is not about autism or learning disabilities. However since the whole premise is centred around autistic/learning disabled interviewers - which is really driven home - then it doesn’t make sense. Their production company, Rockerdale Studios, aims to create “mischievous content with disabled people”, and I don’t doubt that, but with The Assembly it feels like they’ve created something that still feels incredibly patronising. Disabled people interviewing celebrities and showing off their talents should not be groundbreaking in 2025, and The Assembly doesn’t actually feel like it’s doing any of its participants justice (and there are some incredibly talented individuals on this show). Instead of empowering each person, it feels as if the viewers at home are invited to marvel at the interviewers in a way that says “oooh aren’t they clever/funny/quirky”. The ‘mischief’ on this show feels slightly manufactured and tips into the realm of being played for laughs.
As an autistic person myself, this was one of the things that really put me off. Having an invisible disability and/or mental health condition means having your intelligence and general sense of self insulted and underestimated on a regular basis. From the well-meaning variations of “you don’t look autistic” to the downright weird - an ex-best friend of mine looked at me as if I’d grown horns when I told her about my diagnosis at 25. It’s really exhausting being looked down upon just because your brain works differently, and it’s no wonder that many of us are more likely to have a mental illness when the odds are stacked against us. There’s a brilliant poem in the book How To Be Autistic by Charlotte Amelia Poe called ‘under the flickering yellow light’ which perfectly sums up the rage of being severely underestimated and belittled. Which is why I feel so strongly about shows like The Assembly and the idea that autistic/learning disabled people are heartwarming and quirky - words I hate with a burning passion. It’s condescending to assume we are only one thing and are incapable of being anything else. As I mentioned before, the mischievous element of the participants does feel like it’s essentially just playing up these ‘quirks’ for a neurotypical audience.
In the same interview with the Independent, executive producer Stu Richards is quoted as saying that “the boring way of [addressing issues facing disabled people] is to sit and talk about stereotypes in the actual show and look it in the eye. We don’t do that. We make an entertaining show.” I take issue with statements like this. Although information about autism and neurodivergence are becoming more accessible, there is still a lot of stigma and harmful misconceptions. I think it’s pretty vital that we talk about stereotypes and just how harmful they can be, since autism representation in the media leaves a lot to be desired. Other shows such as Netflix’s Love On The Spectrum, perpetuate this idea that autistic and neurodivergent people are ‘wholesome’ which, honestly, makes me want to throw up. It might be well intentioned, but it does a disservice to the fact that autistic people have a broad range of personalities, just like anyone else. Although The Assembly isn’t quite that bad - bear in mind the bar is in hell - that avoiding talking about stereotypes and discrimination is not the best look for a disabled-led production company. I would love to see a show in which neurodivergent and learning disabled people have an honest and open conversation about what they face in their daily lives. Not to garner pity, but to show audiences that we’re complex human beings.
The audience reception is another area where The Assembly fails. Not because it’s unsuccessful - the complete opposite, in fact - but because of the response to the participants. I’ve read countless articles that focus on how ‘heartwarming’ the show is, or how people were surprised at how insightful the questions were. I won’t lie, there are some great questions, but why should that be surprising? It’s not like we’re animals that suddenly learnt to talk. We might find it difficult to communicate our thoughts in a neurotypical manner, but that doesn’t mean we’re stupid. Yet that’s what a lot of people assume when they hear the words ‘autistic’ or ‘learning disability’. It’s clear we still have such a long way to go. Maybe I’m being unfair in blaming the show itself, but disabled people being portrayed as heartwarming feels close to inspiration porn - the idea that disabled people are ‘inspiring’ or ‘brave’ for doing ordinary tasks. Let me put it this way, would you feel compelled to call a neurotypical/non-disabled journalist inspiring or brave for interviewing a celebrity? You probably wouldn't, so why say it to a disabled person?
As someone who is autistic and making a career out of journalism and interviewing people, it’s really disheartening to see this subtle infantilisation of people that have real talent. I don’t hold anything against the producers for wanting to put autistic people in the spotlight, but for me The Assembly just doesn’t work. I believe autistic people can and do make brilliant journalists given our ability to notice small details, our need to research thoroughly and our directness and honesty. But this won’t happen unless we’re given the right platforms and support, and with rampant cuts to disability and sickness benefits this feels like a big ask. However, one small change that neurotypical people can do is this: next time you want to call an autistic inspiring or brave, ask yourself why. Is it because they’re doing something despite their disability, or because what they are doing is genuinely inspiring. We’re humans, not aliens, and we deserve to be treated with the same dignity and respect as anyone else.
Written by Madeleine Atropa
Madeleine Atropa is a freelance artist and writer currently based in the North of England. When she’s not creating chaos in her studio, she can be found wandering around bookshops and art galleries, watching weird films, and playing (then abandoning) video games. You can find her on Instagram @madeleine.atrop.
Recipe
