Policy development general Archives -

Reporting disability issues in the media

Media Diversity Australia has updated their handbook for reporting on disability issues in the media. The 2024 edition is written for both journalists and marketing professionals.

A key point for journalists and marketing professionals is the scarcity of appropriate stock images of people with disability and older people. For example, at Getty Images, the visuals downloaded by Australian businesses and media in 2020 focused on white people with physical disability.

This is a well researched document that covers more than the usual topics. It also has specific “how to” guides for interviewing people with different disabilities. The Disability Reporting Handbook is a good companion to the ABC guide to disability content – see below.

The Handbook covers the usual introductions to disability and golden rules about language and images. Infographics for statistics provide useful information about disability in Australia. The handbook also covers:

- - Intersectionality with disability in relation to women, First Nations people, people from linguistically diverse backgrounds and LGBTQIA+ communities.
  - Violence and disability, including support services available.
  - How-to guides for interviewing people with disability covering physical, sensory, cognitive, psychosocial and neurodiverse conditions.
  - Images and audio
  - Marketing and advertising

“The biggest barrier to full participation in the community for people with disability is attitude. Most Australian’s with disability experience the soft bigotry of low expectations”. (Graeme Innes, former Disability Discrimination Commissioner)

The contributors have varied backgrounds in media and journalism. They consulted widely in the development of this comprehensive publication. Media Diversity Australia is a not for profit organisation that believes the media should reflect the cultural diversity of Australia. They have another publication, Who Gets to Tell Australian Stories?

ABC guide to disability content

Australia’s public broadcaster, the ABC, has a guide to disability content. The guide covers appropriate behaviour and language in reporting and portraying disability content. It’s applicable to all ABC platforms including social media. It’s a good guide for all journalism and anyone new to interacting with people with disability.

The title of the guide is, Reporting and Portraying Disability in ABC Content. Arranging and conducting interviews, asking questions, language and terminology are all covered. Many journalists are up to date with their language now, but images are still a problem. And there is still a tendency to place people with disability into a victim or a hero role.

The information about arranging and conducting interviews includes checking on any assistance or support they might need. Saying someone is inspirational is not appropriate. So check facts and don’t run with assumptions.

Photographers and camera operators need similar information to avoid showing pitying pictures or focusing on assistive equipment. Wheelchairs are not the sum total of people with disability.

Images of disability in journalism

The guide gives the following advice:

- Avoid portraying individuals as objects of pity. For example, photograph a person using a wheelchair at their level, not looking down on them. Powerful, positive reinforcing images are generally preferred, depending on the editorial context.
- Only show the person’s disability if it is critical to the story.
- Avoid focusing on equipment unless that is the focus of the story. Avoid gratuitous cutaways of wheelchairs, canes, hearing aids and other devices.
- Avoid having the talent’s carers or family in photos or video unless they are also part of the story. Show the talent as having autonomy over their own lives.
- Avoid showing the person with disability as isolated from the community unless that is the focus of the story.
- Avoid using stock images as the majority reinforce stereotypes of disability and are of poor quality.
- Avoid using images of mobility aids, such as photos of wheelchairs, as a generic image for a story about disability.
- Do consider using people with disabilities to illustrate stories that are not about disability, to show they are a regular part of the community.
- Do aim for diversity in imagery of people with disabilities and include people culturally diverse backgrounds and gender diverse people also live with disability
- Do show people with disabilities doing normal things, such as catching public transport or shopping, but avoid making it ‘inspiration porn’. It’s just life.
- Do show people with disabilities in positions of power and authority.

Image from ABC News website

Legal documents favour visible disabilities

Norway has been following the underlying concepts of universal design for 25 years. This means they have a history of policy and activities to reflect upon. Previous papers have highlighted successes and where there is room for improvement. A new Norwegian study looks at universal design through a legislative lens and finds legal documents favour visible disabilities.

In more recent years, people with invisible disabilities have raised their voices in the disability rights movement. However, their voices are yet to be incorporated into legislative documents. Historically, people with mobility and vision impairments led the way in disability rights. This means their needs were front of mind when legislation was formed.

The Norwegian researchers wanted to find out if there is a “disability prestige” at play. This is where some disabilities count more than others. Or is it something as basic as just having your disability visible to others? The researchers concluded that visibility was more important to explain discrimination between groups.

The Norwegian study can be generalised to many other countries. In Australia the Access to Premises Standard also favours people with mobility and vision impairments.

The Norwegian researchers carried out their study in the context of transport. They discuss the wording of documents and how terms such as “reduced mobility” are interpreted. It can mean a person with a physical and/or a cognitive impairment. However, it is most often linked to movement of the body.

Prestige versus visibility

In the Norwegian documents mobility impairments are mentioned more frequently than other disabilities. Vision impairments, also frequently mentioned, come in second. The researchers conclude that discrimination between disability types is mostly explained by the visibility of a disability.

Why does this matter? Because when provision for other disabilities and long term health conditions are not mentioned in legal documents, businesses and services don’t provide them.

The title is, How laws of universal design discriminate between different types of disabilities – Lessons learned from Norway.

Financial inclusion for all

Financial inclusion should be a top priority for policymakers keen to alleviate poverty. Five of the Sustainable Development Goals feature financial inclusion, including reducing gender based inequalities. Access to financial services is a human right but overlooked for people with disability.

Financial services include banking, credit, insurance and financial advisors. Each of these should be readily available to everyone. A literature review identified five key barriers:

People with disability have a lower demand for formal financial services than those without disability
Banks do not expect or welcome customers with disability
More appropriate technologies are needed to overcome communication barriers because communication technology (ICT) fails to meet the web content accessibility requirements
Financial services are not tailored to meet the needs of people with disability
The formal financial system requires accessible public infrastructure to include people with disability.

What are the solutions?

Multi-stakeholder collaboration to counter stigma and attitudinal barriers is the starting point. Financial education and accessible assistive technology and ICT is essential as well as the physical environment of financial institutions.

The title of the research article is, Financial inclusion for people with disability: a scoping review.

From the conclusion

Access to financial services is a human right that seems to have been overlooked for people with disability. The push for financial inclusion of people with disability is a matter of economic strategy as well as a moral imperative rooted in justice and equity.

The financial sector’s landscape, shaped by innovations in ICT, provides an unparalleled opportunity to bridge the financial divide faced by people with disability. However, it will take more than technological advancements to solve the problems.

True financial inclusion necessitates a paradigm shift in attitudes, policies, and strategies. Our findings underscore the urgency to redesign financial systems that are accessible to all and cognisant of the preferences and needs of people with disability.

Addressing the multiple dimensions of financial exclusion of people with disability requires a comprehensive, multifaceted approach, integrating attitudinal change, ICT accessibility, and a commitment to disability justice. There is an emphatic call for banks, policymakers, and society to converge their efforts.

From the abstract

Financial exclusion is a human rights issue affecting health equity. Evidence demonstrates that financial exclusion is exacerbated for people with disability and those in low- to middle-income countries. Barriers to financial access include limited demand for services, banking inadequacies in catering to people with disability, and insufficiently accessible information technologies (ICT) and infrastructure.

Recommendations include using ICT, digital innovation and multi-stakeholder collaboration to address the financial barriers experienced by people with disability. These efforts, rooted in social justice, aim to include people with disability as valued financial sector participants, promoting health and equity.

Disability messaging guide

The Commons Social Change Library has a new guide for disability messaging. The guide has tips based on research which shows effective ways of building public support. The document was led by a steering committee of people with disability and messaging experts.

The guide is supported by Disability Action Network Australia (DANA), Centre for Australian Progress and Common Cause Australia. Access via The Commons Social Change Library or download in PDF.

Website banner for the disability messaging guide. Dark blue background with white text surrounded by a narrow yellow border.

Key content

The guide begins with a note about language and why they prefer the term “disabled people”. The introduction covers the messaging principles such as the audience and speaking from the frame of experience. The overarching themes for talking about disability are self-determination and diversity. This is followed by the 7 top tips.

Story structure
Design Frame
Strengths language
Our story, not theirs
Bring NDIS back to values and benefits
Build empathy with human stories
Show change is possible

People on a fun run with two older adults being pushed in wheelchairs.

The guide has good examples to explain concepts and how to change old messages into ones that are more attuned to self determination. One example is to talk about being “led by disabled people” rather than “a seat at the table”. The reasoning is to replace inclusion and tokenism with self determination.

Another example is making passive sentences active. Rather than talk about how disabled people experience discrimination, say who is discriminating. And people like to be presented with solutions rather than problems so focus on these.

The title is By Us, For Us: Disability Messaging Guide.

Information in an emergency

Getting information in an emergency can mean the different between life and death. Or at least the difference between feeling helpless and knowing what to do. But communication is a complex process and not everyone responds to the same methods. So what is accessible information? It’s information provided in different formats.

Easy Read and Easy English use pictures as well as words. These are good for the 44% of the population with a low level of literacy. Targeting this group means people with higher levels of literacy can also get the message. It’s universal design.

A blackboard with words: learn, language, adjectives, nouns, verbs, adverbs written in chalk

Other formats are braille and Auslan, and captioning for videos. The Disability Discrimination Act lists places and services that must not discriminate, but there is nothing specific about information methods. This is something that needs to be made clearer in the legislation. However, the Commonwealth and state governments have policies to cover the provision of information.

Accessible emergency and crisis information

Researchers found four things to improve crisis information.

Accessible information providers, such as Easy Read professionals, are not experts in the subject at hand. They need support from experts such as doctors or police.

2. Accessible information providers need to stay up to date with changing details. Having one direct source is the best way to manage this.

3. Making high quality accessible information takes time and skill. It’s essential to have the capacity and capability ready to act – don’t wait for the crisis to happen.

4. Agencies need to be upskilled. Sometimes crisis information needs to be available immediately such as an evacuation order. Emergency services need more baseline skills to make this information themselves.

The title of the article from The Conversation is, Crisis communication saves lives – but people with disability often aren’t given the message. The call for action is to have accessible crisis information included in a new Disability Rights Act.

Four men with orange lifejackets are standing in a yellow State Emergency Service boat on a swollen river.

Media organisations, businesses and services need to get on board too. The more people who produce accessible information, the better.

Emergency awareness and universal design

A smartphone with a map and wording of Fires Near Me. It is the app of the NSW Rural Fire Service. It helps with emergency awareness.

Why do some people appear unable to take in what is happening around them in an emergency? Being able to act quickly requires a good sense of the situation. However, not everyone has a sense of emergency awareness. Consequently they find decision-making difficult and fail to act appropriately. A Norwegian study has investigated a universal design approach to mitigate this lack of awareness.

In an emergency, sight, hearing, use of hands and ability to concentrate can all be impaired. Smoke, dust, cold, noise and paralysis from fear can affect anyone’s ability to think clearly. Smart phone apps are a good way of reaching people quickly with important information, but do they account for likely cognitive and physical changes?

The issues and solutions for “situational disability” are outlined in a technical paper from Norway. It raises our awareness that individuals are likely to behave in unexpected ways during a disaster. With an increased rate of climate-based disasters, and the move to digital information systems, this is a timely study. The underlying concern of how people respond is an important one. The paper shows that universal design principles can guide the way in compensating for a lack of emergency awareness.

The full title of the article is, Towards Situational Disability-aware Universally Designed Information Support Systems for Enhanced Situational Awareness.

Emergency Design: Designing as you go

A woman is sitting on the ground and is being helped by a person in protective clothing and a hi vis vest. The woman looks distressed.

Designing FOR an emergency IN an emergency requires a different design approach to existing tried and true methods. When urgency is the driver of design, processes and methods need a re-think. COVID-19 is a clear case of designing for an emergency during the emergency. So how can “designing-as-you-go” be done?

Designs for emergencies, such as wars or an earthquake, are usually devised before the event. Or they are designed after the event in preparation for future events. The COVID pandemic arrived without notice and few countries were prepared. Hence the need to design for the emergency while it is happening.

A different approach

A case study from Brazil shows how a totally different design approach was required. Rather than using standard methods the researchers took an organic approach to the problem. It was basically designing on the run. The process encouraged the inclusion of people who are often marginalised. While history tells us that Brazil is has not fared well during the pandemic, the study still has value for future situations.

Their approach is based on qualitative techniques. They relied on the knowledge of local people and processes of working together in a horizontal rather than hierarchical format. This approach also allowed participants to see how they could deal with the current situation as well as improvements for the longer term.

“As a path, we point out the importance of identifying areas of convergence of interests, the creation of win-win policies and the daily encouragement of a culture of collaboration at the differing levels.”

The title of the paper is Design amid Emergency. It charts what they did, how they did it and what they learned from the process. Identifying areas of common interest and developing win-win policies to encourage a culture of collaboration was key. In summary, they found the co-creation design process the key to success. It can lead to improved quality of life in both the short and longer term. It also helps to embed resilience within the population.

The government saw the value of co-design with citizens. It remains to be seen if they actually follow through on this networking approach to solving issues.

From the abstract

This article presents the process for the “Design of services under the COVID19 emergency social protection plan”. It was drawn up by a team of researchers and designers from Porto Alegre in collaboration with the Porto Alegre City Government. The focus was on the provision of essential benefits to homeless and other vulnerable people during the pandemic.

The process was developed for the designers involved: without prior notice, within very short time frames and completely remotely, using only digital platforms. As such, the process was developed to respond to the emergency and amid the emergency. The objective of the article is to discuss how to design amid emergency.

The experience was guided by the methodological principles of action research and research through design. In addition to presenting the design results solutions aimed at the short, medium and long term. This article highlights the need to aim for the recognition of difference, the suggestion of alternative views, social innovation, the systemic transformation of society and sustainability.

Socioeconomic benefits and costs of universal design

Access and inclusion are considered a “good thing” until someone asks, “what will it cost?” Rarely does anyone ask “what does doing nothing cost?”. Many of the benefits are on the social scale, but are difficult for orthodox economists to measure with their current tools. So what to do about it? A report from Norway looks at studies of the socioeconomic benefits and costs of universal design and accessibility.

There is a risk that a disproportionate emphasis is put on the costs and benefits of universal design rather than its broader societal benefits.

Part of the front cover of the universal design and socioeconomic analyses report. It shows a blue city tram with a person about to board.

The Nordic nations are really keen to implement universal design policies. The high priority that Norway gives universal design makes it an international leader. Other Nordic countries are yet to show the same commitment. The report maps international socioeconomic analyses and related analyses. Although using different methods, the studies emphasise cost-benefit analysis.

Why do an analysis?

Cost-benefit analyses are commissioned for different reasons. There are four main types:

1. regulatory impact assessments to analyse the potential socioeconomic consequences of new legislation and regulation related to universal design or accessibility;
2. business case studies of the profitability of investing in universal design and accessibility;
3. cost-benefit analyses as part of an assessment of reasonable accommodation, primarily with regard to discrimination legislation; and
4. research projects examining the effects of accessibility measures in general, or of specific measures, or their benefit to different target groups.

What do they look at?

Most of the analyses are about housing and the built environment with a focus on legal access requirements. The studies mainly focus on the consequences in terms of participation, employment, risk of falls, and health benefits for people with disability.

Street scene of Oslo showing footpath dining and 2 cyclists.

In the transport sector, studies mainly looked at travel time and willingness to pay more to improve accessibility. Business case studies dominate the field of information and communication technology.

Costs are usually easier to measure in monetary terms than benefits. Assumptions based on hypothetical reasoning, such as accessibility results in increased employment, lacks evidence.

From the conclusions

Many studies indicate there are significant benefits for people with and without disabilities. However, evaluating these benefits against quantifiable costs entails other variables.

Regulatory impact assessments of new legislation lacks data for calculating different effects. Specialist consultancy firms often carry out these assessments as government staff lack expertise.

In other studies, new knowledge emerges but with different methods. Designing these studies and collecting data is a constant challenge. Measuring the benefits of universal design in its broadest sense is even more difficult than measuring statutory access requirements.

It is at least as important to study why people choose not to use, say public transport, as it is to study the benefits for those who do. Any cost-benefit analysis of universal design and accessibility must be accompanied by what constitutes a cost and for whom.

The report presents areas for improvement and development including the ongoing exchange of experience and knowledge.

The title of the report is Universal design and socioeconomic analysis: A survey of analyses and literature. The main part of the report is in Swedish, but the English language summary begins on page 105. Included in the list of documents at the end is the Australian Building Codes Board Regulatory Impact Statement on accessible housing.

Abstract

What do measures for increased accessibility for people with disabilities cost? And what benefit do the measures provide? What analysis methods are there to evaluate the effects of increased accessibility? This report presents a survey of socio-economic analyses carried out in the Nordic countries and internationally.

An accessible society is a priority goal for the Nordic countries’ disability policy. The concept of universal design has become increasingly central to the Nordic countries’ work.

Calculations of the costs and benefits of measures for increased accessibility are requested by authorities and companies as well as organizations. The report presents studies, methods and analyses to evaluate the benefits and costs of various measures within universal design and accessibility.

The focus is on cost-benefit analyzes and impact studies. The mapping has been carried out via a literature search, surveys to experts and two workshops. A total of 45 studies and seven literature reviews are presented in an English-language appendix.

Who gets heard in research methods?

Many studies use research methods that are not designed to enable everyone to participate. This means only some people get heard and for others, researchers aren’t hearing them. Whether it’s academic research or a workplace survey researchers could be missing out on valuable information. Cathy Basterfield makes this point in her short article on who gets heard in research methods .

Co-design processes are another form of research – action research. But will that process include people with intellectual, physical and sensory conditions? If there is a reading component, will everyone be able to read and interpret written information?

An international group of adults stand with a big board in front of them. It says, Make Things Happen. There are lots of coloured post it notes on the board. Who gets heard in research methods?

Basterfield lists some common problems with surveys: use of difficult vocabulary, imprecise response options, and ableist language or concepts.

People who need Easy English find it confusing to be asked to read a statement and rate their agreement on a scale. They prefer to be asked a direct question.

Picture of a hand holding a pen and filling in boxes on a survey form

Expecting every person to have the ability to access websites is another barrier. 25% of Australian adults are digitally excluded according to Basterfield. Some only have a phone and completing surveys requiring text is difficult at the best of times. Basterfield’s tips to help make sure everyone can understand your information:

add prefaces to increase precision or explain context
simplify sentence structure for questions
replace difficult words with straitforward terms
drop the jargon

A boy sits at a desk, pen in hand ready to write on the paper.

There is more information in Cathy Basterfield’s article Inclusive research and surveys.

Assistive technology and universal design

All the universally designed places, spaces, and services are of no use if a person cannot access them due to lack of the assistive technology they need. On the other hand, a wheelchair, for example, is of little use without level access in the built environment. Together, assistive technology and universal design form the disability inclusion continuum. Both are needed but are rarely discussed together.

Together, assistive technology (AT) and home modifications are essential for independent living. But access to the funding schemes is somewhat haphazard, especially for the majority of people who are not NDIS participants. The cost of AT and home modifications is the cited as the reason for letting the status quo remain. But who is really paying for NOT funding AT for the people who need these devices? Until now, there has been little research on this issue.

A team at Monash University set up a study to identify the many AT and home modification schemes in Australia. They also conducted an economic analysis of the data they collected to form policy recommendations. The fact that there are 88 government funders administering 109 schemes tells us there is a problem here. Difficulties obtaining data from these schemes confounds the issues further.

Recommendations

The NDIS, and the misplaced assumption that it will cover everyone with a disability, has caused greater inequity in the provision of AT. It now makes the matter more urgent.

The most obvious recommendation is to take a whole of government approach to tackle the inequity of access to AT and home modifications. The second, is to devise a way of capturing data for more informed decision making. Data are essential for measuring needs and outcomes. The third recommendation is to co-design – a universal design concept – with stakeholders.

Governments cannot expect to achieve significant change within Australia’s new Disability Strategy unless people with disability have access to AT and HM they need. The current study offers new evidence to inform government responses to realise the potential of AT and HM through public policy reform.

Assistive technology was peviously known as “aids and equipment for people with disability”. That’s because it is not mainstream equipment such as a pair of scissors, or a bicycle. Anyone requiring assistive technology requires a prescription by a health professional to access a funding scheme. The same goes for anyone requiring a home modification so they can live safely at home.

The title of the paper is, It is time for nationally equitable access to assistive technology and home modifications in Australia: An equity benchmarking study. It is open access.

From the abstract

Australians with disability have inequitable access to assistive technology (AT) and home modifications (HM). This is inconsistent with human rights obligations and fails to capitalise on internationally recognised potential return on investment.

This study quantifies the public provision of AT and HM in Australia by identifying all publicly funded schemes and comparing data on the spend per person.

An environmental scan and data survey identified 88 government funders administering 109 schemes. Data were available for 1/3 of schemes. Economic evaluation of available cost and participant data estimated the annual AT/HM spend per person per scheme.

Data demonstrated significant AT/HM spend variability across schemes. Modelled costs are presented for a $16 billion national scheme where all Australians with disability are funded NDIS-equivalent. There are substantial service provision gaps and an urgent need for change in disability policy. A cost model and policy principles are proposed to achieve economies of scale and equity in the provision of AT and HM.

Victoria’s Autism Plan

The Victoria’s Autism Plan builds on their Absolutely everyone: state disability plan. It incorporates commitments to remove specific barriers faced by people in the autistic community. The plan is based on feedback from a parliamentary inquiry into the needs of autistic people and their families. Building helpful attitudes toward autistic people is a key element of Victoria’s Autism Plan.

The document begins with personal stories, which is pleasing to see because they are more revealing than statistics or diagnoses. It sets the tone for the rest of the document and acknowledges additional barriers faced by the autistic community.

Front cover of Victorian Autism plan showing a child in a blue track suit on a swing. A woman stands behind him.

A note on language

The term Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is no longer the preferred term. Language is influential in changing community attitudes so choosing the right terms is important. Individuals and advocacy bodies were asked which term they thought should be used in the plan. There was general agreement that the term “autistic people” should be used. An important point – ask people what terms they prefer.

Key points in the plan

The parliamentary inquiry found that autistic people experience social isolation, and difficulty accessing health and other public services. Specific barriers included:

lack of community understanding
accessing education that meets their needs
exclusion from employment opportunities
limited access to supports and services
additional barriers to inclusion for autistic people with intersecting identities

A boy and a woman lay on the grass together looking up at the sky.

The commitments in this plan relate to the key areas in the state disability plan: inclusive communities; health housing and wellbeing; fairness and safety; and contributing lives. The plan has more detail on each commitment and useful case studies illustrate success stories.

Although there is greater community awareness of autism, community attitudes remain the biggest barrier to inclusion in social and economic life. Many autistic people avoid environmental barriers such as crowds, noise and light levels. Worrying how people will treat them or respond to them adds to social isolation.

There are four ways to access the plan on the website: Full version in PDF, Easy English Version in PDF, a text version in Word, and an Auslan summary. Or you can download the full PDF version, Victorian Autism Plan.

Category: Policy development general