People with Disabilities and the Media Working Together

Limited copies of this book available from Rehabilitation International, 25 E 21st Street, NY, NY 10010, USA. Tel.: 1 212 420 1500. Fax: 1 212 505-0871.

Use of an On-Going National Media and Disability Committee  
First Disability Film/Video Festival in Africa: a case study  
Content Criteria  
Production Criteria  

Use of an On-Going National Media and Disability Committee
In several countries an on-going National Media and Disability Committee has been effective in cultivating a working relationship between the mass media and disability communities. A permanent committee, as opposed to ad hoc activities, has the advantage of an overall strategy which can be monitored and developed year by year. Examples of activities National Committees are carrying out are:

  1. Developing a theme each year, e.g., accessibility. The Committee can encourage or sponsor:
    • a film/video on access

    • development of traditional or film media on this topic for rural communities

    • public service announcements for radio and television

    • brochures for employers on practical tips on accessibility of the workplace

  2. Sponsoring a disability Film/Video Festival. A Festival can:
    • educate and create awareness of the public

    • help develop media expertise among the disability community

    • increase disability expertise of media professionals and provide incentives (through awards) to media producers to develop more material promoting creative and positive approaches to disability issues.
First Disability Film/Video Festival in Africa: a case study
In September 1992 an international Film and Video Festival was held in Nairobi in association with Rehabilitation International's 17th World Congress.
  1. More than 70 films and videos entered by 12 countries and three UN agencies; about 3/4 of the films concerned adults with disabilities and 1/4 focused on children;

  2. Judges from Africa, Europe, North and South America and Asia and the Pacific evaluated the films. The seven judges from Kenya were all high level media professionals; two of them were involved in disability issues. The judges from other countries were disabled and non-disabled persons working in the disability field, most of whom had some direct experience in producing media. It was an intense educational interchange as the media and disability experts taught each other the fine points of their different perspectives on what makes a superior film/video.

  3. The videos were produced by groups varying from high budgeted television crews to rehabilitation service agencies in developing countries. The objectives of the materials also ranged widely. The jury selected four categories for awards so that the films could be fairly grouped. The categories were videos/films which conveyed:

    • people with disabilities as positive role models for disabled children or adults;

    • a change of attitude about people with disabilities;

    • practical information about disability and rehabilitation services; and

    • community-based services and education.

  4. As there were many excellent entries, one first prize and two runners-up were awarded in each category. In order that the jury could evaluate the large number of entries during the four days allotted for its work, a "short-listing" method was adopted. Each film was shown for seven minutes, after which a vote was taken to determine if that entry had the potential for an award. If the majority voted "yes", the entry was set aside for full viewing. In this way, two days were spent in "short-listing" and two days in evaluating potential winners.
Judging criteria had been developed prior to the Festival and circulated to each judge. The criteria follow.

Evaluation: Following the Festival, the judges held a final meeting to evaluate procedures and make recommendations for future festivals. They agreed that:
  1. the mix of media and disability experts had been valuable for both groups;

  2. if possible, the jury should meet prior to a public festival(or conference or congress) and decide the winning entries without the pressures and distractions of other events. Then the winning films, decided on beforehand, could be given special promotions during the Festival.

  3. the categories for entries should be established beforehand so that producers enter material into categories they select. The judges found it difficult to categorise an entry; and

  4. a release for showing on television should be obtained from the producer of each film/video at the time of entry. This way, the winners could be shown to a much wider audience than festival participants.

Content Criteria
  1. Positive portrayal of people with disabilities: whether the film/video is focused on adults or children, the portrayal of disabled persons should be as multidimensional and active as non-disabled persons. Disabled adults should be shown speaking for themselves not merely spoken about. Disabled children be portrayed as having a range of interests and abilities paralleling those non-disabled children.

  2. Practical information: In many cases, an objective of the film will be to demystify disability or to clarify a disability Issue for the public or a particular audience. This is best accomplished by conveying practical information, not by asserting platitudes or admonitions. For example, if a film is explaining accessibility, a range of solutions should be shown, not just the problems caused by inaccessibility. In general a good ratio is that 10% of the film should present the problem or situation and 90% should be devoted to exploring solutions or possibilities.

  3. Does the script: enhance the visuals, maintain viewer interest, convey balance of practical information and motivating messages? Is the level of language appropriate to the intended audience?

  4. Rights not Charity: If an objective of the film is to motivate the viewing audience toward action, the rationale should be that disabled persons, representing at least 10% of the world's population, have the same right to education, services, employment, housing, transport, etc. as other citizens. The motivation should not just be an emotional appeal to the feelings of the audience, such as charity pity etc., as this implies that disabled persons, access to society depends upon the attitude of non-disabled people.

  5. Stereotypes and mythology should not be reinforced. Whether a disability film originates from a developed or developing country, there are often stereotypes, misinformation and mythology imbedded in its verbal and visual messages.

    Examples are:
    • If a film features a disabled person who has achieved success in an area of endeavor such as sports, employment, the performing arts, etc., this person should not be presented as a superhuman role model for all disabled persons. This is a stereotype often put forward in the media and the underlying message is, "if this person can do that, why not you?" Disabled people have the same range of talents as other people; the problems of access and attitudes faced by the disabled population as a whole are separate issues.

    • Disability is caused by a variety of factors, but it is misinformation and mythology to suggest that these causes include: punishment for behaviour of the parents, retribution for a past life, or the result of encountering a disabled person or a disturbing incident during pregnancy.

    • It is mythology to suggest that a person with one impairment, e.g. blindness, is automatically compensated by superiority in another area, e.g. acute hearing or extraordinary memory. It is accurate that some individuals may develop remaining senses to a higher degree than others but mythology to suggest that this is a divine redistribution of skills and talents.
Production Criteria
  1. Length: is the film an appropriate length in relation to its objectives?

  2. Direction: Is there enough variety and creativity (camera angles, shifts in perspective) to maintain viewer interest or is it just "talking heads"?

  3. Sound: Is the sound production quality sufficient so that all spoken messages can be heard clearly and at a speed or cadence which is easily understood?

  4. Music: If there is music accompanying the film, is it intrusive; does it encourage exaggerated emotion; or does it underscore the message?

  5. Subtitles: if the film is subtitled, are the words large enough and on the screen long enough to be read and understood?
return to International Disability Video Catalogue