"What If I Told You That Television Impacted Society's Views?" - (Dis)ability on Demand, Part Two

David Kurs, who spoke up in HBO’s (2007) “Written on the Body” states that, “It [a (dis)abled role] needs to be there on a token level, as well as on a meaningful level, because sometimes it’s very evident that they [producers] don’t know what to do with these people once they’re on the show” (p. 39). Many, including myself and Kurs, believe that these roles featuring (dis)abled characters need to be included. Obviously, that’s why I completing this review. Anything can help the dismal situation I illustrated in “(Dis)ability on Demand, Part One,” right? This overwhelming agreement originated from the argument that (dis)abilities are generally excluded from representation in the media (Haller & Zhang, 2013, p. 321).

However, I wonder, “At what costs do these particular, possibly negative roles come with?”

(Dis)ability studies scholars and activists alike take issue with these more problematic character portrayals. For instance, Donaldson (1981) speaks to these negativities when he writes that “prime time television is not exerting a significant influence in shaping positive societal attitudes toward individuals who are handicapped” (p. 415). Moreover, Perepa & Samsel (2013) find an even greater deficit and claim that “television programs lack positive representation altogether, of those with disabilities and special educational needs” (142).

Taking into account the overwhelming evidence that very little or no positive representations of (dis)abled characters are aired on television, it is impossible to deny the impact (both good and bad) this fact has on all students and teachers, whether (dis)abled or not. Below, I will individually dissect the repercussions felt by each party of the education system.

Non (Dis)abled Students
Alison Wilde (2010), in her study, “Spectacle Performance, and the Re-Presentation of Disability and Impairment," found that many non (dis)abled young people wanted to “watch T.V. sometimes for the normality of it, just to laugh for five minutes” (p. 38). With this being the case, why is it important for non (dis)abled students to view television programming that contains (dis)abled characters and actors? 

To answer this question, I bring to light a study conducted by Byrd & Elliot (1984) in which they presented eight grade and collegiate freshman males with two portrayals of the (dis)ability found on television, a professional film developed by the American Foundation for the Blind entitled What Do You Do When You Meet a Blind Person? (similar to this video, I am sure) and an episode of the popular sitcom Mork and Mindy. The researchers found, after administering a pre- and posttest judging attitudes toward (dis)abled individuals, that viewing these programs, particularly the first, “may effectively reduce anxiety in a non-disabled person which would be detrimental to interaction with a disabled person (Donaldson, 1980)” (p. 6).

Thus, the exposure to such programming eases tensions that may arise during an initial encounter between a (dis)abled person and a non (dis)abled person. With this in mind, I hypothesize that this type of introduction should begin to occur at a very early age. Coincidently, many children’s programs, such as Sesame Street, have taken action due to this call for inclusion, and have regularly featured children and adults with (dis)abilities. 

(Dis)abled Students
As previously included above, (dis)abled youth are not being exposed to enough positive role models, in the form of (dis)abled characters and actors, who enjoy comfortable and productive lives in accordance to the mainstream view of today’s society. According to Donaldson (1981), these young people “may, therefore, not envision such adults roles for themselves” (p. 415). This pessimistic framing of (dis)ability perpetuates preexisting prejudices against the (dis)abled community, does nothing to advance the (dis)ability rights movement, and reinforces self-hatred felt by people with (dis)abilities (Haller, 2010).

Despite the compelling consequences, these negative roles still exist and have created three major stereotypes, as viewed by (dis)abled individuals. They are: “supercrips, [the] disadvantaged, or ill victims. Among these dominant media representations, most of them are stigmatizing, except the supercrip model” (Haller & Zhang, 2013, p. 329). Personally, I have seen the “disadvantaged” and the “ill victim” on various occasions, as many programs feature the “non (dis)abled savior” who assists the (dis)abled person to come to term with their (dis)ability, to change their negative attitude, and to stop feeling sorry for themselves (HBO, 2007, p. 36). 

Nonetheless, I am intrigued by this “supercrip model,” its phrasing, its meaning, and its implications (Haller & Zhang, 2013, p. 329). To elaborate on my thought process, my mind immediately jumps to (dis)abled superheroes (combining two of my research interests!), such as DC Comics' Oracle and Marvel's Daredevil, because the creators of this thought-provoking term elaborate that, “In the supercrip model, people with disabilities are represented as “superhuman” because they achieve unexpected accomplishments or live a normal life just like people with no disabilities (Clogston, 1990)” (p. 329). With the fun and unique possibility of the “supercrip model” for directors to pursue, I wonder why these characters are still hard to find or to exist really?

[Hmmm… I see an investigation of the “supercrip model” in my future.]

Educators, Both (Dis)abled and Non
It has been proven in various studies across the world that teacher’s beliefs may influence their behavior in the classroom, their teaching practices, and, eventually, their expectations from their students (Kagan, 1992). Additionally, there are numerous studies that support this view in relation to children with disabilities, whether it be exhibiting pity or lowering one’s expectations (Clark, 1997; Gibbs, 2007; Brady and Woolfson, 2008). Unfortunately, I have found this to be true due to my own experiences as both a teacher and a student. From these memories, I learned to always keep my beliefs and biases in check, but it is always so easy?

Interestingly, I found research conducted by Perepa and Samsel (2013) that takes these previous studies on teaching practices and expectations toward (dis)abled students and adds a focus on media. Their findings, included below, are quite interesting:

However, while they feel that their teaching practice is not influenced by what they view on television and in films, the vast majority acknowledged that their understanding of disabilities was. This seems to raise a contradiction, as all teachers agreed on the importance of the media in shaping people’s perceptions, and therefore attitudes to those with disabilities, and yet they claim that there is no such impact on their own attitudes or expectations towards their students (p. 143).

In fact, it isn’t always so easy. As Perepa and Samsel (2013) divulge, television programming does influence educators’ perceptions of students with (dis)abilities, whether they realize it or not. It is important to note that this change does not always happen in a negative matter; these changes can also be educated and informed. 

Still, one must proceed with caution. 

Byrd, Byrd, & Dillion (1980), citing Liebert (1975) as their source, claim that “the more frequently you observe a disability in a certain light, the more convincing that observation becomes and less likely one is to see differences among individuals with the same disability” (p. 67). While a portrayal may be beneficial and its frequency of exposure high, it is, the educator’s responsibility to realize that every child is different, is an individual with their own, personal positive attributes, even if he or she has a (dis)abilities. 

Obviously, “…characterizations are used to strengthen or weaken cultural identifications and to articulate, negotiate or maintain patterns of exclusion and inclusion between people” (Wilde, 2010, p. 42). That is why it is important that students and teachers realize what they are watching influences the way they are thinking. They must analyze these “push-Pull” tensions that can occur during these positionings in the media and become critical readers of popular culture texts and audiences of popular culture images like the ones shown of (dis)abled characters on television (Alvermann, 2012, p. 7).

Next, I will include and analyze a collection of academic pieces that feature specific examples of these negative and positive portrayals of (dis)abled characters (played by both (dis)abled and non (dis)abled actors) in television and become a critical reader of popular culture texts myself.

Works Cited

Alvermann, D. E. (2012). Is there a place for popular culture in curriculum and classroom  instruction? In A. J. Eakle (Ed.), Curriculum and Instruction, Vol. 2, 214-220, 227-228. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Brady, K. & Woolfson, L. (2008). What teacher factors influences their attributions for children’s difficulties in learning? British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78. 527-544.

Byrd, D., Byrd, K., & Dillon, C. (1980).

Television and disability. Journal of 

Rehabilitation, October/November/December. 

67-69.

Byrd, E. K., & Elliott, T. R. (1984, March). 

Attitude Change toward Disability through 

Television Portrayals with Male College 

Students. Paper presented at Annual Meeting 

of the Southeastern Psychological 

Association, New Orleans, LA. Abstract 

received from ERIC.

Clark, M. D. (1997). Teachers’ response to

learning disability: A test of attributional 

principles. Journal of Learning Difficulties, 

30(1). 69-79.

Donaldson, J. (1981). The visibility and 

image of handicapped people on television. 

Exceptional Children, 47(6), 413-416.

Gibbs, S. (2007). Teachers’ perceptions of 

efficacy: Beliefs that may support inclusion 

or segregation. Educational and Child 

Psychology, 24(3). 47-53.

Haller, B. A. (2010). Representing disability 

in an ableist world: Essays on mass media. 

Louisville, KY: Avocado Press, Incorporated.

Haller, B. A. & Zhang, L. (2013). Consuming 

image: How mass media impact the identity of 

people with disabilities. Communication 

Quarterly, 61(3). 319-334.

HBO. (2007). A conversation about disability 

written on the body: Part two. Dramatist, 

9(5), 36-41.

Kagan, D. M. (1992). Implications of research 

on teacher belief. Educational Psychologist, 

27(1). 65-90.

Perepa, P. & Samsel, M. (2013). The impact of 

media representation of disabilities on 

teachers' perceptions. British Journal of 

Learning Support, 28(4), 138-145.

Wilde, A. (2010). Spectacle, performance, and 

the re-presentation of disability and 

impairment. Review of Disability Studies, 

6(3). 34-53.