| Disability Studies Quarterly Spring 2001, Volume 21, No. 2 <www.dsq-sds.org> Copyright 2001 by the Society for Disability Studies |
Disability is Not so Beautiful: A Semiotic Analysis of Advertisements for Rehabilitation Goods Lorraine Thomas |
Abstract
Much of the literature on the presentation of disabled people has centered on their portrayal in the movies, telethons, news presentations, cartoons, art, newspapers, magazines, film and theater and literature (Woodhill, 1996). It is noted that visibly disabled persons did not appear in American advertisements (and by extension North American advertising) until the 1980s (Longmore, cited in Hahn, 1987a:561). In the main, advertising and disability has been restricted historically and predominantly through fundraising campaigns (Brolley & Anderson, 1986). The portrayal of disabled people is largely restricted to medical and rehabilitation product catalogues, disability magazines and disability organization posters and brochures. The sense is that disability is the "invisible issue" in all forms of communication media (Ruffner, 1984:143) and that the "proliferation of `able-bodied' values and the misrepresentation of disabled people" reflects a dominant able-bodied policy that discriminates against disabled people (Barnes, 1996:56). The mass media are viewed as being guilty of portraying negative stereotypes by presenting persons with disabilities as "pitiable victims of a tragic fate, as noteworthy only when they've done something extraordinary, and incapable of a fulfilling life" (Christians, 1998:6). They are also usually portrayed as being childlike or incompetent, needing total care, as non-productive members of society and a drain on taxpayers' money (Nelson, 1994:5). More importantly, many of the images of disability that are depicted are based in medical assumptions and unexamined views of normality (Barton, 1996:145). Today, where the "importance and desirability of bodily perfection is endemic to western culture" (Barnes, 1996:56), the "disabled body" is regarded as being non-eligible for portrayal. Faced with the impossibility of identifying themselves as "subjects" in consumer society, disabled bodies occupy an anomalous position in the media. Their bodies are not models, because they do not lend themselves to imitation and at the same time the role models they are offered as the `chosen' are impractical as models of likeness, even a likeness constructed on the basis of self-exhibition, fashion or appearance. The empire of technologies that empower the body, the nomadism of identity, the possibility of being different and public visibility are concepts that only reinforce disabled people's feeling of exclusion from, and not belonging to contemporary society (Fontes, 1998:25). In recent years attempts have been made to develop alternative approaches to the definition of the "disabled body" in Western society. Prevailing and still dominant orthodox definitions of disability include the medical model which views disability as a sign of sickness and focuses on individually based functional impairments (Woodhill, 1996:214). From the medical perspective people are disabled as a result of their individual physical and mental impairments and medicine attempts to cure or rehabilitate them. By way of contrast, a materialist account of disability stresses the importance of attitudinal and environmental factors (Drake, 1996:149). From this stance one does not speak about "having a disability" in the sense that one has a particular condition, but rather the "emergence of physical differences" or "the invention of handicaps" which indicates that these conditions are the social creations of a given culture (Woodhill, 1996: 202). The materialist framework suggests that the basis of the present day status of disabled people in Western society rests in the material and ideological or cultural changes that accompanied the emergence of capitalist society (Barnes, 1996: 47). It acknowledges the influence of the central values upon which Western capitalism rests - namely individualism, competitive free enterprise, and consumerism (Barnes, 1996: 45). First, according to the materialist framework, disability can be viewed as an economic problem because throughout the 19th and 20th century work has been organized around the twin principles of competition between workers and maximization of profit (Barton, 1996:33). Second, the rise of the institution and more specifically the medical profession became a means of controlling individual bodies and attempting to reintegrate them into the larger social body (Davis, 1995; Oliver, 1996). Last, but not least, the use of the body as an advertising tool to perpetuate and validate cultural concerns and values with bodily perfection was and is aided by the technological development of the mass media (Hahn, 1987a). Bearing the above in mind, it is only in recent years that attention has been focused on the impact of media advertisements on the attitudes of the general public towards disabled persons (Brolley & Anderson, 1986:147). Related research on disability and advertising has shown that effective advertising was curtailed by the deliberate manipulation of negative emotions such as pity, inadvertently reinforcing the stigma of disability through wording, lengthy explanations of the disability involved, the absence of color, and not demonstrating respect for those represented in the advertisements (Brolley & Anderson, 1986; Wang, 1992). Design of the Study A primary consideration in the process of determining the study population was the fact that advertising images utilizing disabled individuals are few and far between in mainstream media publications. For this reason it was decided to focus the ad analysis on disability-oriented magazines that contained a wider selection of ads containing disabled individuals. Two Canadian based publications, Abilities and Disability Today, were chosen because they both featured a similar magazine content, advertising layout, and audience composition and size. Abilities and Disability Today can be described as cross-disability, lifestyle-oriented magazines. The term "cross-disability" indicates a wide continuum of disabilities from physical impairment to mental illness. Both these magazines target not only people with disabilities, but also their families and professionals engaged in disability issues. Following the example of Williamson (1978), the techniques of semiology are adopted to act as "tools" by which to identify the means by which signs are created in advertisements for rehabilitation goods and the meanings they can generate. A "middle range" sampling process that combined both quantitative and qualitative strategies was utilized (Leiss, Kline and Jhally, 1986). A predetermined coding scheme that determined the exact definitions and boundaries of what constituted an advertisement for a rehabilitation good was developed. Following this a census of the ads for the full span of the published issues for both magazines was conducted. A secondary census then determined the range of possible ads that would lend themselves to semiotic analysis. From this a final sampling of 18 ads was created for detailed analysis. The 18 ads thus chosen for analysis were determined according to "aesthetic complexity" which involved a consideration of the overall visual nature of the ad, for example: the number of pictorial and textual elements; the degree of sophistication of the arrangement of the pictorial and textual elements; the use of notable camera angles and other photographic effects; the artistic utilization of light and shadow, and of color, where applicable; and the graphic quality and variety of the textual elements. The primary consideration in the ad analysis was to understand the social status of the "disabled body" as depicted in the ads. It also considered how the "disabled body" related to the able-bodied hierarchy. In this way it was made possible to highlight the recurrent themes in how the sampled ads portrayed the disabled as a group. This reading considered, among other things, what sort of dialectics are present in the ads: Is the "disabled body" contrasted with a "non-disabled body"? Who dominates within the non-verbal communication within the frame of the ad? What might this ad be implying about the nature of relationships between the able-bodied and disabled as a group? How is the group under study depicted in interaction with other categories of persons - family members, doctors, etc.? What is the ad conveying about social status or class? Findings Overall, it is difficult to state whether the portrayal of the "disabled body" in the ads analyzed was positive or negative. Positive portrayals of the "disabled body" included placing it in position where there was no opportunity for an unfavorable dialectic between able-bodied and disabled. The creative use of metaphor also aided in developing a positive range of associations when linked with the "disabled body. More often, however, the strength of an affirmative portrayal was undermined by a diminishing narrative that inadvertently contradicted the positive presentation. This was the case with ads reflecting a strong medical/professional discourse. To further elaborate, nearly all of the 18 ads sampled portrayed "sanitized" images of the "disabled body." The disability was portrayed in a way so that it did not intrude upon the viewer's aesthetic consciousness. In several cases, the models used were not obviously physically disabled, unless by virtue of being associated with the product. Even if the disability was very obvious there was still no threat to the integrity of body image because there was no great disparity between an expected "normal" body and the actual perceived reality. This was further reinforced by the fact that all of the 18 ads sampled contained underlying concepts such as youth, health, athletic prowess, personal appearance and wholeness (Livneh, 1984). Another underlying perception was that the good promoted held the ability to project and protect the individual's image of the physical self as "whole" and "inviolate." In cases where the aid in question was visible, they reinforced the product's ability to allow the user to regain or replicate "natural" functions such as walking, standing or running with ease. These concepts were conveyed in several ways. One way was to link the product with an activity that became the central cue in relating the person and the product. For example, use was made of activities that triggered associations of athleticism and courage. They featured a "disabled body" in the process of running/completing a race and being involved in the world of motor car racing. The latter, in particular, featured a person with multiple disabilities. He is in a wheelchair and missing his left forearm, yet because he is cast in the light of a "daredevil" in the world of car racing, the disability paradoxically becomes an accessory to his portrayal. Nearly a quarter of the ads sampled seemed to explicitly reflect a concern with the potential economic productivity of the "disabled body." The rehabilitation good advertised was placed within distinctly identifiable contexts suggestive of a work office: business suits, the back drop of a downtown "office building," and a highlighted page of a open desk planner. Here, the product was viewed primarily as the means to a productive end - emphasis was placed on personal productiveness and achievement. The "disabled body" was regarded as being non-functional in a capitalist economy: mal-functioning bodies seemed to be considered a hindrance to the smooth operation of commercial activities. Corbett (1991) comments that the concept of normality contains a paradox: "It engenders a fear of difference," but is also linked to the idea of individuality as a desirable commodity. In the ads the achievement of individuality was expressed in the adoption of a particular lifestyle. "Lifestyle" was defined as that which was considered daring, out of the way, or simply distinguishing oneself by means of acquiring a "status" product. This pursuit of individuality was also reflected in efforts to excel in culturally accepted and valued endeavors such as sport. True to form, a number of ads used a sports/fitness oriented theme in their presentation. Another technique was to utilize the qualifications of an "knowledgeable authority" to certify the good (Leiss, Kline and Jhally, 1986). The "expert" voice was found in two categories. The first was where a known athlete or sports person, albeit disabled, was used to confirm the product's trustworthiness. Hence, in two ads a tri-athlete, to promote a prosthetic limb, and a former race car driver, for a wheelchair, were utilized. In other examples, the voice of authority was identified as being that of the medical professional. An ongoing narrative referred and subscribed to the seemingly omniscient medical/professional. Emphasis also seemed to be placed on controlling specific functional aspects of the body, by which process the "disabled body" could be reintegrated into the wider social body. In a different approach, other ads utilized the technique of directly addressing the reader and encouraging him or her to "Ask [their] prosthetist today" and to "Call now to learn more about it." This omniscient professional voice presented itself as knowing what was best for the "disabled body." Its discourse was based on conceptions of what is proper and desirable behavior for the average person (Friedson, 1965:71). From the perspective of the professional the onus is thus placed on the client or patient to assume a rehabilitation "role" whereby he or she is obligated to maximize existing abilities as well as an obligation to assume as many "normal" functions as possible (Safilos-Rothschild, 1970). Secondary observations include the fact that all the models utilized were Caucasian men and women. As this study was based on a limited sample population and was restricted in terms of logistics, this observation cannot be taken as being conclusive. It does, however, present the possibility of an ironic observation that in a study which considers the under-representation and misrepresentation of a minority group often excluded on the basis of aesthetics, the self same ads failed to be visually representative of the cross-ethnic aspects of disability. Also notable was the fact that in a sample population of 18 ads only five featured "disabled" women. More significantly, the women were placed in positions of relative passivity. They were not presented as athletes nor as part of any particular lifestyle. Instead, they were either placed in "domestic" settings either as the "grandmother" and "proud homemaker" respectively; or as passive "objects" for the rehabilitation good which metaphorically showed a woman "with possibilities" and a woman being given a "new way to work and play," respectively. This provides room for speculation about the perception of women with disabilities, both in terms of gender stereotyping and perceptions of their sexuality. Limitations of the study The results of this study are based on the semiotic analysis of a limited number of ads. This study, therefore, cannot claim to make any conclusive statements about the portrayal of the "disabled body" or to presume that this is a satisfactory representative sampling that could be applied across the board to all disability magazines. However, because the strength of semiotic analysis lies in its insistence on identifying the context in which the inferences are made, the conclusions arrived at become more useful for inferring generalizations than for applying them. The in-depth focus gives the researcher an opportunity to do a thorough analysis. It serves to provide a solid base for "inference" which can be useful in outlining the conditions under which a generalization can be expected to hold (Dey, 1993: 263). If one were to make a generalization based in the context of this study sample, it could be suggested that in North America, not only are "disabled bodies"/consumers viewed as purchasers of services and goods, they also paradoxically become the raw material and finished products of the advertising industry (Albrecht, 1992). As potentially consuming "bodies," they are the focus of socio-cultural forces. They become "embodied" in such a way as to sell goods but they are also bodies that have been inscribed with attendant socio-cultural myths of what it means to be "disabled." Conclusion This study served to underline the importance of cultural institutions in determining and reinforcing aspects of what it perceives to be the "normal" body. To a greater extent, a materialist theory of disability can adequately explain the portrayal of the "disabled body" in the advertisements. The usefulness of the materialist framework in this study is such that it recognizes and explains disability as a social construction. As was noted earlier, the basis of the materialist framework is such that an economy that is production-oriented would by necessity demand that its workers be "functional" for economic purposes. Individual worth becomes determined in terms of what one can contribute to the economic system as a whole. The creation and representation of the "disabled body" becomes a reflection of the relationship between an individual and the social and physical environment around him or her. Are the deaf, deaf? Are blind persons really sightless? Or is it the social setting we place them in? In their social relations they communicate, they `see'...we place them in specific social relations that make them deaf (Gadacz, 1994: 5). In view of what has been demonstrated in the overall findings as regards appearance and functionality, it may not be incorrect to state that today's rehabilitation good manufacturers are seemingly engaged in a process of duplicating functions of the body and creating products that perform, provide comfort and more importantly, please the eye (Tiesson, 1996b). This leads one to speculate that the presentation of the disabled body is linked to the dynamics of advertising and economic profit. Conceivably, the image of "damaged goods" is transferred from products to people where the "disabled body" is viewed as being "damaged," "defective" and less "socially marketable" than the non-disabled body (Susman, 1994). Like mainstream advertisements, the advertisements for rehabilitation goods can be viewed as being a cultural "text," that is representative of a capitalist economy and society. They act as a repository for certain beliefs and ideologies. Not unlike mainstream advertising, they also reflect a distinct commercial imagery of approved body attributes: the body beautiful, the importance of sports, and of keeping fit, all of which are perceived as being features of self-development.
Appendix List of "aesthetically" richer ads sampled for semiotic analysis AD #1
AD #2
AD #3
AD #4
AD #5
AD #6
AD #7
AD #8
AD #9
AD #10
AD #11
AD #12
AD #13
AD #14
AD #15
AD #16
AD #17
AD #18
References and Bibliography Albrecht, G. (1992). The Disability Business - Rehabilitation in America. California: Sage Publications, Inc. Barnes, C. (1996). Theories of disability and the origins of the oppression of disabled people in western society. In L. Barton (Ed.), Disability and Society: Emerging Issues and Insights (pp. 43-60). Harlow, Essex: Addison Wesley Longman Ltd. Berg, B. (1998). Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences (3rd ed). Boston: Allan and Bacon. Biklen, D. (1987). The Culture of Policy: Disability Images and their analogues in public policy. Policy Studies Journal, 15 (3), 515-535. Blundell, V., Shepherd, J. & Taylor, I. (1993). Editor's Introduction. In V. Blundell, J. Shepherd & I. Taylor (Eds.), Relocating Cultural Studies: Developments in Theory and Research (pp. 1-20). London: Routledge. Bogdan, R., Biklen, D., Shapiro, A., & Spelkoman, D. (1982). The Disabled: Media's Monster. In M. Nagler (Ed.), Perspectives on disability (pp. 138-142). Palo Alto, CA: Health Markets Research. Brolley, D. & Anderson, S. (1986). Advertising and Attitudes. In M. Nagler (Ed.), Perspectives on disability (147-150). Palo Alto, CA: Health Markets Research. Byrd, K. (1989). Theory regarding attitudes and how they may relate to Media Portrayal of Disability. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 20 (4), 36-38. Corbett, J. (1991). So, who wants to be normal? Disability, Handicap and Society, 6 (3), 259-260. Christians, C. (1998). The sacredness of life. Media Development, Vol. XLV, 3-7. Cohn, R. (1988, Fall). My word! Abilities 1 (1), 5. Crocker J. & Major B. (1994). Reactions to Stigma: The Moderating Role of Justifications. In M. Zanna and J. Olson (Eds.), The Psychology of Prejudice: The Ontario Symposium, Volume 7 (289-314). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Davis, L. (1995). Enforcing Normalcy: Disability, Deafness and the Body. London: Verso. Dingena, M. (1994). The Creation of Meaning in Advertising: Interaction of Figurative Advertising and Individual Differences in Processing Styles. Amsterdam: Thesis Publishers. Drake, R. (1996). A Critique of the role of the traditional charities. In L. Barton (Ed.), Disability and Society: Emerging issues and Insights (pp. 147-166). Harlow, Essex: Addison Wesley Longman Ltd. Fontes, M. (1998). Disabled people are strangers in their own land. Media Development, XLV (2), 25-26. Friedson, E. (1965). Disability as Social Deviance. In M. Sussman (Ed.), Sociology and Rehabilitation (pp. 71-87). American Sociological Association. Fulcher, G. (1996). Beyond Normalization but not Utopia. In L. Barton (Ed.), Disability and Society: Emerging Issues and Insights (pp. 167-190). Harlow, Essex: Addison Wesley Longman Ltd. Gadacz, R. (1994). Rethinking Disability. Edmonton: University of Alberta Press. Gliedman, J. & Roth, W. (1980). The Unexpected Minority - Handicapped Children in America. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc. Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of a spoiled identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Gordon, C. (Ed.). (1980). Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972 - 1977 by Michel Foucault (2nd ed.). Pantheon Books: New York. Guberium, J. and Silverman, D. (Eds.). (1989). The Politics of Field Research : Sociology beyond Enlightenment. London: Sage. Halberstam J. & Livingston, I. (1995). Introduction: Posthuman Bodies. In J. Halberstam and I. Livingston (Eds.), Posthuman Bodies (pp. 1-20). Bloomingdale and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. Hahn, H. (1987a). Advertising the Acceptably Employable Image: Disability and Capitalism. Policy Studies Journal, 15 (3), 551-571. Hahn, H. (1987b). The Politics of Physical Difference: Disability and Discrimination. Journal of Social Sciences, 44(1), 39-47. Hahn, H. (1988). Can Disability be Beautiful? Social Policy Journal,18, 26-30. Hall, S. (1997a). Introduction. In S. Hall (Ed.), Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices (pp. 1-12). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hall, S. (1997b). The Work of Representation. In S. Hall (Ed.), Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices (pp. 13-74). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Hall, S. (1997c). The Spectacle of the `Other.' In S. Hall (Ed.), Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices (pp. 223-290). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Havrenek, J. (1991). The Social and Individual Costs of Negative Attitudes toward Persons with Physical Disabilities. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 22 (1), 15-21. Haynes, R. (1988). Moral, Mental and Physical: Medical Attitudes Towards Male Sport and Exercise in Victorian England 1860-1914, Dissertation (M.A., English). University of Windsor. Henderson G. & Bryan, W. (1984). Psychological aspects of disability. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas. Lalonde, R. & Cameron J. (1994). Behavioral Responses to Discrimination: A Focus on Action. In M. Zanna & J. Olson (Eds.), The Psychology of Prejudice: The Ontario Symposium Volume 7 (pp. 233-255). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Leiss, W., Kline, S. & Jhally, S. (1986). Social Communication in Advertising - persons products and images of wellbeing. Agincourt, Ontario, Canada: Methuen Publications. O'Barr, W. (1994). Culture and the Ad: Exploring Otherness in the World of Advertising. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press Ltd. Oliver M. (1996). A Sociology of Disability or a Disablist Sociology? In L. Barton (Ed.), Disability and Society: Emerging issues and Insights (pp. 18-42). Harlow, Essex: Addison Wesley Longman Ltd. Peters, S. (1996). The Politics of disability identity. In L. Barton (Ed.) , Disability and Society: Emerging Issues and Insights (pp. 215-234). Harlow, Essex: Addison Wesley Longman Ltd. Real, M. (1989). Super media: a cultural studies approach. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications Inc. Rioux, M. (1996). Introduction. In M. Bach and M. Rioux (Eds.), Disability is not Measles: New Research Paradigms in Disability (pp. 1-23). North York, Ont.: Roher Institute Rubin, R., Rubin, A. & Piele, L. (1996). Communication research: Strategies and sources (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Ruffner, R. (1984). The Invisible Issue: Disability in the Media. Rehabilitation Digest, Winter 1984, 15 (4). Safilos-Rothschild, C. (1970). The Sociology and Social Psychology of Disability and Rehabilitation. N.Y: Random House. Schlenkar, B. (1980). Impression Management: The Self Concept, Social Identity and Interpersonal Relations. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company. Schwartz, H. (1990). Further Thoughts on a "Sociology of Acceptance" for Disabled People. In M. Nagler (Ed.), Perspectives on Disability (pp. 131-136). Palo Alto, CA: Health Markets Research. Schur, E. (1980). The Politics of Deviance: Stigma Contests and the Uses of Power. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc. Shoham, S. (1970). The Mark of Cain: The Stigma Theory of Crime and Social Deviation. New York: Oceana Publications, Inc. Stebbins, R. (1988). Deviance: Tolerable Differences. Toronto: McGraw Hill Ryerson Ltd. Strohman, D. (1982). The Awakening Minorities - the Physically Handicapped in America. Washington: University Press of America. Susman, J. (1994). Disability, Stigma and Deviance. Social Science and Medicine, 38 (1), 15 -22. Thomas, D. (1982). The Experience of Handicap. London: Methuen and Co. Ltd. Tiessen, J. (1997, Winter). Publisher's note. Active Living, 6 (5), 6. Tiessen, J. (1996b, Winter). Orthotics and Prosthetics - Fit and Fashion join a Tradition of Function. Disability Today 6, (2), 22-25. Tiessen, J. (1991, Fall). Publisher's note. Disability Today, 1 (1), 3. Tseelon, E. (1991). The Method is the Message: On the Meaning of Methods as Ideologies. Theory and Psychology, 1 (3), 299-316. Turner, B. (1996). The Body and Society. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications Inc. Wang, C. (1992). Culture, Meaning and Disability: Injury Prevention Campaigns and the Production of Stigma. Social Science and Medicine, 35, 1093-1102. Williamson, J. (1978). Decoding Advertisements. Brewer Street, London: Marion Boyars Publishers Ltd.
Originally from Trinidad, West Indies, L. Thomas holds a Master of Arts in Communication Studies (1999) from the University of Windsor, Ontario, Canada. As a severely hearing-impaired individual, she is personally committed to the exploration of disability and communication issues in the academic and professional spheres. She is currently coordinator of the Windsor Snoezelen Room, a sensory/leisure program for individuals with physical and developmental challenges in Windsor, Ontario, Canada. |
Disability Studies Quarterly (DSQ) is the journal of the Society for Disability Studies (SDS). It is a multidisciplinary and international journal of interest to social scientists, scholars in the humanities and arts, disability rights advocates, and others concerned with the issues of people with disabilities. It represents the full range of methods, epistemologies, perspectives, and content that the field of disability studies embraces. DSQ is committed to developing theoretical and practical knowledge about disability and to promoting the full and equal participation of persons with disabilities in society. (ISSN: 1041-5718; eISSN: 2159-8371)
