Media & Disability

• Home page
• Presentation
• Partners
• Guide on media & disability
  • Who Created this Guide?
  • Disabled People as Programme Participants
    • Portrayal
    • Casting Actors
    • Games Shows and Lifestyle Programme Participants
    • Advertising Commercials
    • Specialist Disability Programmes
    • Studios, Venues and other locations
    • Outside Locations
    • Interviews
  • Employing Disabled People
  • Access to Broadcast Services
  • Communicating with Disabled People
  • Adjustments and Aids for People Specific Disabilities
  • Glossary of Terms
• Project Development
• Legislation
• Resources
• Interesting Links
• News

Guide on media & disability

Portrayal

Stereotypes and Getting it Right

Do you remember the last time you saw or heard a disabled person on television or radio? If you can think of someone at all, the chances are they were on a programme about disability. It is difficult to calculate exactly how many disabled people feature in our mainstream programmes, particularly when the disability is invisible. However, many producers would acknowledge that they have never even considered casting a disabled actor, looking out for a disabled “expert” or contributor, filming an interview in the street with a disabled member of the public, or deliberately widening the composition of a studio audience. Broadcasters are now very conscious of the importance of ensuring a mix of gender and race on-air and on-screen. So why not ensure that your programme adequately reflects society as a whole?

It’s easy to pigeonhole people to save time and explanation in your programmes. But this puts you at risk of reinforcing existing stereotypes, so that disabled people, when they feature at all, continue to be all too often portrayed as either remarkable and heroic, or dependent victims. In the early 1990s, a researcher surveyed the portrayal of disabled people on television and found that they fell into one of 11 different categories, 10 of which were negative. These included the disabled person as “pitiable and pathetic”, as “incapable”, as “a burden”. Disabled men aged between 25 and 40 were much more likely to be represented than other disabled people, despite the fact that disabled women out number disabled men.

Some disabilities receive particularly poor representation. Mental illness has all too frequently (and disproportionately) been linked in programmes with violent crime, even though there is no evidence to support this mis-portrayal.

The Australian Broadcasting Corporation asks its producers to ask themselves four questions about the portrayal of disabled people on-screen:

• Does the portrayal patronise the disabled person?
• Does the portrayal victimise the disabled person?
• Does the portrayal demonise the disabled person?

Or, instead,

• Does the portrayal normalise the disabled person, that is, does it regard disabled people in the same way as everyone else?

Many lifestyle/features and daytime series feature members of the public as contributors. Consider including more disabled people in order that your programme features a good cross-section of society. However in order to do this it is often necessary to actively seek out disabled people. Don’t forget that men and women, people of different races, religions, ages and sexual orientation will also be disabled.

• Don’t be too precious or too politically correct – being super sensitive to the right and wrong language an depictions of disabled people will stop you doing anything. All images can play in important role is raising visibility – even so-called negative ones.
• Consider disabled characters in scenarios that might be commonplace for a non-disabled person. For example, showing a disabled person being fired for negligence or incompetence would be a positive depiction precisely because it would challenge an employer’s often quoted reason for not hiring disabled people in the first place – the assumption that you can’t fire disabled people without getting into legal trouble for discrimination.
• Consider disabled characters as rounded individuals, with good and bad qualities. Showing a disabled person as being mean, or nasty might be a challenge, but how many non-disabled people are “nice” all the time? A disabled character might get angry, bitter, depressed at times but could also be witty, sexy and the life of the party. Maybe a disabled mother gets angry with her child for refusing to brush its teeth, but this is about motherhood, not disability. Framing the context clearly enables you to do this. Often it is non-disabled people who are more sensitive about these issues than people with disabilities.
• Walk-on roles offer a huge opportunity to feature disabled people in better roles. You may feel it is inappropriate to cast a disabled character in your lead role, but don’t automatically rule out a disabled person in a role where they are featured as a secondary or passing character. This would be better than just an “extra” role and may provide an opportunity to feature a disabled person in a situation or role that has nothing to do with disability. Showing disabled people in walk-on parts as competent fellow managers and work colleagues, for example, would indicate real inclusion.
• Don’t just think of wheelchair users when you think disability. It is convenient, because it is a known and visible disability, but it becomes a cliché. Less than 8% of disabled people use wheelchairs, so consider featuring another disability.
• Be wary of depicting disabled people in disempowered or “victim” roles. While it is true that some people are disabled by accidents, acts of terrorism or war, there are many more disabled people who do not consider themselves victims at all. They want the same respect that is given to anybody, not pity.
• Similarly avoid the other extreme of the “hero” - constantly showing disabled high achievers. A gold medal disabled athlete is no more representative of disabled people than footballer David Beckham is of non-disabled people. Extraordinary people exist in all walks of life, but heroic achievement can mask the everyday reality for disabled people, allowing the viewer to see the achievement as compensating for the disability. It evokes the idea that the person has “conquered” their impairment and has no need of further consideration.
• It is also patronising to consider disabled people to be heroes because they are disabled, so avoid references to disabled people being “brave” in coping with their impairments.
• Consider showing everyday situations that include disabled people, rather than situations associated with disability. It gives a more positive image of integration to show disabled people interacting with non-disabled people. Showing disabled people on their own or isolated can imply they are separated from the rest of society.
• There is no need to be afraid of showing disabled people doing things differently to non-disabled people, but show disabled people as equals. Let them speak for themselves, give them good lines and let them demonstrate their empowerment.