The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was signed into law in 1990. Over the next decade, his depictions and discussions of how people used the landmark law took over the airwaves. Attorney Cary LaCheen researched more than 80 of his news or “newsmagazine” programs that aired on television and radio in 1998 and found that the coverage was “about media and public assumptions about disability rights and his ADA.” ” Judged what you revealed.
LaCheen explains that much of the broadcast focused on lawsuits aimed at entities potentially violating the ADA. She argues that the emphasis on litigation “helps the opposition to the ADA because it is a problem for the disability rights community and sends the message that everything the disability community does is litigation.” She said many of the lawsuits were filed by private attorneys.
She also identified other issues with the way the ADA was treated by the mass media during the year, and how people with certain disabilities were portrayed as particularly “undeserving” of access, both in news reports and fictional representations. I noticed that as she explains,
In the minds of the public and media, there are ‘legitimate’ and ‘worthy’ disabilities, usually macroscopic disabilities such as mobility impairment and blindness. At the other end of the spectrum are the “worthless disabled people” who are blamed for their condition.
People who are overweight, have alcohol or substance abuse problems, have psychiatric disorders, multiple chemical sensitivities, learning disabilities, myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome, (ADA Protects People with Mental Illness).
LaCheen gives several examples of the negative portrayal of “undeserved disabled people” on popular television shows. For example, in “King Size Homer”, the 7th season episode. simpsons, Homer tries to gain a lot of weight so that his employer will allow him to work from home. Much of the episode’s humor relies on the books Homer has read. am i disabled? for inspiration. The episode also fosters unsubstantiated claims that some people with disabilities “avoid individual responsibility for their actions.”
LaCheen uses its portrayal of obesity to address the myth that if it’s a common condition, it’s not a disability. “The more prevalent a physical or mental condition is, the harder it is for the media and the public to see it as a disability,” she points out.Public and media skepticism about her ADA case linked to obesity case arises
Not only because our society blames obese people for their condition, but because obesity is so common in the United States, it is rapidly becoming the rule rather than the exception. […] A corollary to this phenomenon is that the more widespread the treatment of a disease, the more difficult it becomes for the media and the public to see it as an adaptation to disability.
These assumptions partially explain the limited media understanding of the ADA cases they actually reported. Sutton vs United Airlines (acute myopia), Murphy v. United Parcel Service (high blood pressure), and Albertsons Inc v. Kirkingburg (all degrees of visual impairment), all of which went to the Supreme Court.
“All three lawsuits raised the question of whether the plaintiff was an individual protected by the ADA,” explains LaCheen. It was often the question whether plaintiffs who were denied work or dismissed because of their physical condition had the right to sue to challenge these employment actions.”
She recommends a number of media strategies for the disability community to improve media representation of both ADA and people with disabilities. For example, the community may seek to direct media attention to the issue and implications of discriminatory treatment, minimizing discussion of whether a particular plaintiff “deserves” legal protection. Explaining how the lack of access to the building affects groups of people would gain more sympathy from the public, especially if they were made aware of the specific issues before the ADA lawsuit was filed. may be obtained.
Another possible approach is to personalize the issue. As a 2021 BBC documentary sickness and lies It shows that the idea persists that someone may be contributing to their disability, or even “faking” it. But what if your cousin got fired because he needed to take a break to test his blood sugar or eat?
“If you can personalize the problem and get people to pay attention to it, [discriminatory] Perhaps we can move the discussion away from the question of whether someone has sufficient disability to be protected by the ADA.
Support JSTOR Daily! Join Patreon’s new membership program today.
