I still have an ethical dilemma whether the context in which I am writing this anecdote is hypocritical, for the simple reason that I do not want it to be another purposefully written story about people with disabilities. But, starting from the assumption that every individual has special needs (for the rule of law, for quality education, for equal rights for all, for culture …); I deeply believe that we are all in the same position – equal, somewhere at the bottom, or at least a great many of us.
Vlado Krstovski, program manager of the association “Poraka” [Message], spoke about the media and people with disabilities at the workshop “Against Stereotypes and Discrimination with Inclusive Media Reporting” organized by the Council for Media Ethics in Macedonia. I was impressed by his words. “Stop reporting on people with disabilities with sympathy, pity or mercy. Stop making TV shows with sad music. Give them space in topics that do not apply to people with disabilities.”
And that is rightfully so. The air is polluted for everyone. The negotiations for membership in the European Union affect us all. But the word inclusive has the opposite meaning of “exclusive”, which has a special place in the media. Exclusive news, reporting about exclusive information, exclusive statement from … while advocating for inclusive education, inclusive reporting, and inclusion of people with disabilities in society.
In everyday life, appropriate terms are sought to avoid the use of words that will offend someone, calling them “invalid”, “handicapped”, “person with developmental disabilities”, etc.
Branislav Jovanovski, who has achieved impressive results in shooting, says that no one has ever addressed him otherwise than by name, surname or nickname. However, he is adamant that there is a need of an adopted and harmonized terminology in all institutions, in order to avoid unnecessary obstacles and hurdles.
Meanwhile, the associations are demanding more dedication from the journalists concerning these topics. And this should be the case. But, let us not forget that in the past decade the newsrooms have been decimated and devastated. If 20 years ago in the daily newspapers there were specialized sections with four or five journalists and an editor, today the total team in one editorial office is composed of four or five people. Somewhere even less. It is the responsibility of many journalists to follow politics (internal and external), and health, and education, and culture, and crime, and entertainment. They can only engage in social topics if they are “exclusive” (in our inclusive society we want to talk about so much). And most of them paid irregularly and below average, which makes them a part of the social story.
Thus, in our society, instead of seeking an appropriate definition of one’s condition, one needs empathy and, above all, a dignified attitude towards each of them (us). Functional institutions, laws, access paths and public transport … should these be the topic of discussion?! Unfortunately, yes. And it will probably remain like this for a long time.
P.S. Physicist and cosmologist Stephen Hawking was constantly present in the media. In headlines or on the science pages; and he did not talk about access paths. That is the level I want us to strive and reach.