Journalist and editor calls for action to stop ableist reporting in the UK media

On 31 January 2023, disabled editor, journalist, and activist Rachel Charlton-Dailey shared her frustration on Twitter regarding the way "disabled people are written about in the media," and quickly asked other Twitter users to share examples of coverage they would consider "ableist".

Before long, many articles were added in response to the original tweet, including examples from most of the large national media publications.

So what does ableist content look like?

Ableism is defined by disability equality charity Scope as "discrimination in favour of non-disabled people". Ableist content hence includes using stereotypes to portray people with disabilities as victims (such as using the term “wheelchair bound”), medical miracles, or as superheroes (to get out of bed or having a job, for instance). The last one is also called "inspiration porn", a term coined by late Australian comedian and activist Stella Young, which in short suggests that bad attitudes are what holds disabled people back.

This is far from the first time the British media is called out for ableism. During the pandemic, many disabled people, journalists and campaigners highlighted issues with the coverage of disabled people's experiences (17.8 per cent of the English and Welsh population).

Many felt "abandoned" by the government, and by the lack of notice from the media. In a piece published by Refinery29 in August 2021, activist Imani Barbarin described her dread "as the media repeated over and over that the "healthy” had nothing to fear from the virus."

Other recent examples include articles about ADHD, questioning the validity of a late-in-life diagnosis or claiming an over-diagnosis of the condition.

Why file a complaint?

Charlton-Dailey’s call followed a meeting she had with Jane Debois, head of standards and regulations at the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) this year in which she was told "there’s no remit for guidance on reporting disability because they don’t get enough complaints."

Willing to demonstrate the extent of the issue, Charlton-Dailey decided to crowdsource examples and prompt people to complain formally through IPSO's complaint form.

Ableist coverage falls under discriminatory content, and is therefore in breach of both IPSO's Editors' code and the Independent Monitor for the Press' (IMPRESS) Standards, both independent UK media regulators.

Charlton-Dailey wants additional guidance from these organisations, the like of which produced for other known issues, such as reporting on Islam, or using social media.

Asked about how they decide when to issue guidance on specific subjects, a spokesperson from IPSO explained: “We make decisions about when to issue guidance based on a range of factors. One of those, but not the only factor, is whether we have identified a pattern of complaints or breaches of the Editors’ Code of Practice.”

IPSO also highlighted that complaints provide powerful case studies, helping journalists understand how the Editors’ Code applies in a particular area and the standards expected by the regulator. It consequently encourages people who have concerns about editorial standards to come forward and make complaints to them.

The regulator is currently consulting on draft guidance on reporting of sex and gender identity, and they completed a consultation on changes to bring to the Editors’ code in 2020.

Not all publications are regulated by IPSO, however. Not all publications are regulated by IPSO, however. IMPRESS, the second independent press regulator with which many smaller publications are registered, told Journalism.co.uk that the latest edition of their Code will be launched next week (16 February 2023), following the latest two-year review.

It is an open process for which they encourage "contributions from every walk of life." The regulator also highlighted they work with "civil society and third sector organisations" to develop guidance.

Fighting a systemic issue

Charlton-Dailey worries about this approach, explaining that complaint forms are not accessible for all disabled people and it can take up 'mental energy' they do not have.

An alternative is bringing together journalists and people with concerns to discuss the issue. IPSO is also looking to do this, as well as provide training for journalists. This would be better because it is a media-wide issue, Charlton-Dailey adds, rather than specific to any news organisation.

"It’s not about one paper. That’s the hard thing: it has been happening to us for decades," she says.

The media outlets called out on the Twitter thread referenced to above have all been contacted for comment.

Only The Mirror responded by acknowledging a failure to uphold its standards with the piece referenced. It has updated its headline and reiterated its efforts to be a publication without ableist content through, for instance, the publication of its own guidelines and working with columnists and guest editors with diverse voices.

Free daily newsletter

If you like our news and feature articles, you can sign up to receive our free daily (Mon-Fri) email newsletter (mobile friendly).