Disability Media Studies

Theoretical Foundation for Digital Accessibility

To critically examine the way disability and media interact, the combination of both the studies of media and disability is needed. The result of this joint undertaking is the field of disability media studies.

One case for the characteristics and benefits of this field is made by Ellcessor and Kirkpatrick in their foundational volume titled “Disability Media Studies”.

Two concepts of Disability studies, they identify as central to Disability Media Studies, are the social model of disability and the identification and critique of the "normal", or normative.

The social model of disability

The social model of disability was conceived by activist movements in the mid-1970s and further developed by the emerging field of disability studies in the early 1980s. In rejection of the individual model of disability that views disability as an individual tragedy or the sole focus on a medically diagnosable condition, the social model considers the society in its analysis of disability (see Ellcessor 2016, page 4).

Underlying is the differentiation between the terms “impairment” and “disability”. The former is defined as a physical attribute like a “defective limb, organ or mechanism of the body” while disability is identified as the experiences and disadvantages imposed on top of the physical impairment by society (see U P I A S and D A 1975, page 14).

Consequently, the social model of disability views people with disabilities as an oppressed group that is disabled by a society unable or unwilling to accommodate their physical or mental differences. Therefore Disability Media Studies aim to investigate the social, political, and cultural power relations embedded in media (see Ellcessor 2016, page 3).

The identification of the Normative

This notion insists that not only disability and, to a certain extend, impairment are socially constructed terms – the concepts “normal”, and “able-bodiedness”, are too. They are propagated and upheld by “material, social, and cultural institutions” (see Ellcessor et al. 2017, page 7).

The term "normative" references an idealized body that serves as the embodied standard in a certain society. The description of this otherwise invisible norm makes it possible to analyze how it is reproduced by social actors, mediated discourse, or built environments. Further, it enables a discussion of these norms without having to rely on equally fluid terms like disability. The term “cis” has a similar function in gender studies.

In disability media studies this concept is transferred into the “normative user position” by Ellcessor (2016, page 25). This user position is then too often placed at the center of media technology design and discourse. Leading to a marginalization of minority groups like people with disabilities. They are denied access to media technologies and, crucially, to powerful modes of civil participation.

More on the importance of digital accessibility and the alternative use of the web by blind people can be found on the page Introduction to Web Accessibility.

Literature

Ellcessor, Elizabeth (2016). Restricted Access. Media, Disability, and the Politics of Participation. New York: New York University Press.

Ellcessor, Elizabeth & Kirkpatrick, Bill (Editors) (2017). Disability Media Studies. New York: New York University Press.

Ellis, Katie & Kent, Mike (2011). Disability and New Media. New York: Routledge.

Union of the Physically Impaired Against Segregation and Disability Alliance (U P I A S and D A) (1975). Fundamental Principles of Disability. London.