What image do the mass media convey of handicap and handicapped people?
That's the question the Institute for Economic and Social Research of Friuli-Venezia Giulia set out to answer. Working with four consortiums of social cooperatives scattered across Italy, they produced a final report titled No Pity—a document difficult to find in bookstores because it isn't sold commercially. Those interested in obtaining the full research findings should contact one of the four consortiums. Their websites are:
- coinsociale.it
- elpendu.com
- gescosiale.it
- impresasociale.it
The research findings are brutal for television and newspapers alike—especially television. Both emerge hammered by a series of criticisms, most of them well-founded, which we'll try to summarize. In fairness, many of these critiques should really be aimed at society as a whole: they reflect less the nature of the media themselves than the mentality of those who work within them. It's not television's fault, in other words, if a reporter—perhaps encountering a severely disabled person for the first time—forgets to be the dispassionate observer his job demands and instead projects himself into the uncomfortable position of the person across from him, producing a grim portrait devoid of even a flicker of hope.
But let's start at the beginning.
What, then, are the main criticisms the interviewed subjects level at the mass media?
The critique of mass media
First and foremost: the inability to show the "everyday disabled person." Television and newspapers cannot account for the many ordinary lives lived by disabled people—lives marked by practical difficulties perhaps greater than average, but also by relationships and feelings richer than average. Instead, the models that "get through" are the sick patient or the superhero.
The sick patient: the individual burdened by unspeakable suffering. "For example," writes Rai journalist Luciano Scateni, "a disabled person who not only lives with disability but is also mistreated or loses a parent provokes anger and pity, which increases engagement and ratings." Or the superhero: someone who overcomes disability through extraordinary willpower to succeed in a particular field—sports, politics, entertainment.
The image of the disabled person as "other than us" reinforces our sense of difference and thus reassures us.
In both cases—and this is the crucial criticism—the image of the disabled person becomes "other than us," reinforcing our sense of difference and thus reassuring us.
Another question: Do we need "stories" to report on disability?
Journalists do nothing but ask for stories, examples, concrete cases. The voluntary sector gives them reluctantly. It fears spectacle, exploitation. But there's a fundamental question to ask: in the name of greater openness toward the world of disability and disabled people, are we willing to accept the rules of the mass media game? If yes, we must understand that—as one of the giants of our journalism, Demetrio Volcic, writes—television is not process-oriented but event-oriented. Its grammar begins with a concrete fact (a story, that is) and then attempts generalization; it is ill-suited to explaining phenomena and abstract processes. This is one of the rules to accept if you want to deal with media at all. The skill of those who "communicate" disability lies in recognizing whether the journalist in front of you is hunting a story to understand and help others understand, or is one of the vultures one so often encounters.
And the journalists?
Don Vinicio Albanesi, president of the Capodarco Community, raises a pointed question: "Why do newspaper editors demand particular expertise when assigning reporters to cover sports or economics, yet send their newest, greenest staff to cover social issues?" The objection is fair, and this is not a rule of the game at all—it's a shabby practice that disabled people and their organizations can work to change. Building an equal relationship with media, becoming a trusted and savvy news source and dialogue partner—this also means having the power to ask editors: who's the incompetent you sent to interview us today? Next time, choose better.
Antonio Guidi, a former deputy and minister, also knows something about mass media and disability. He criticizes newspapers for treating handicapped people as "particular persons" rather than as "persons with particular problems." "If you don't have a leg, you're a cripple; if you have epileptic seizures, you're epileptic; if you have spasticity, you're spastic—in short, the deficit absorbs the whole person," he writes. Here too, we must recognize that media have a need to simplify their message. That doesn't mean accepting these simplifications passively, but understanding they exist and working to correct them by highlighting the strengths and fullness of the life of the "cripple," the "epileptic," the "spastic."
-Read also more on communication
To recoil in horror at media simplification and slam the door on the world is to deepen your own isolation. The research had to address Telethon. Do those massive charity marathons help or harm public understanding of disability? The answer is straightforward: they don't help much because to attract masses of "contributors," they recycle the tired, reassuring template of the handicapped person as an object of help and pity. Yet they rake in enormous sums—which often drain resources from smaller initiatives. Many people then say: we've already given. So they serve a purpose. Ileana Argentin, a city councilor in Rome, sums it up: "Telethon has two faces. As a disabled person, I have to speak ill of it. But once a year we can dress up like puppets since our organizations need money."
In closing
Disability and marginality get little media coverage because these are complex worlds that elude preset formulas and don't serve major economic interests (though watch out—this is changing: the social enterprise sector generates 1,500 billion a year, and ethical banks are taking root everywhere. Let's spread the word!). Journalists lack training and chase stunning stories of superheroes or supercreeps. But also because the world of disability itself struggles to overcome the distrust of those exploited and misunderstood too many times.
Yet an effort is needed: an effort to learn the rules of the media game and understand its utility—even for self-interested purposes. Television and newspapers have power. Perhaps if we stop treating them as adversaries, we'll find an ally instead.
- Vito Giannulo, 2000
Research by the Institute for Economic and Social Research of Friuli-Venezia Giulia - NO PITY, Ed. Images 1999, p. 186