God bless our troops.... THANK U 4 SERVING

1. Representing disability throughout the BBC | Scope's Blog

blog.scope.org.uk/2014/.../representing-disability-throughout-the-bbc/ - Cached - Similar

5 Aug 2014 ... I like that there's quite a few disabled people in the office, so I'm not the 'odd ... stamina as non-disabled folk; They are somehow less intelligent.

and...

Why aren't more disabled people becoming politicians?

Richard Moss Political editor, North East & Cumbria

· 15 February 2013

· From the section England

· comments

David Blunkett reached the top of politics but not many disabled people have followed

Although one in six people have a disability, only a handful of our MPs are disabled people.

And it seems despite the success of the likes of Jack Ashley and David Blunkett, the political representation of disabled people hasn't really improved substantially in recent years.

Perhaps it's asking too much to expect one in six MPs to have some form of disability, but surely it would be better if the commons chamber looked a bit more like the society it governs?

Disabled people might also wonder whether the policies that affect them might be drawn a little differently if they had more of a say.

The experience of one disabled councillor in York might not encourage others to enter politics though.

Lynn Jeffries has been a well-known campaigner on disability issues for more than 20 years.

In fact she was so well-known that in 2010, Labour approached her to join the party and stand for the council.

After some hesitation, she decided that she might be able to achieve even more inside the political machine.

There was quite a lot of being patronised, and a lot of believing that disabled people are people you do things forCouncillor Lynn Jeffries, Disabled York councillor

Two years on, although she remains a councillor, she has resigned from the Labour group after finding it hard to get her voice heard.

She said: "There was quite a lot of being patronised, and a lot of believing that disabled people are people you do things for.

"That's such a shame because what councils miss is that experience of being a disabled person.

"It's so valuable to them in terms of policy-making as disabled people bring solutions to their own difficulties.

"Not to get that and not to engage with disabled people is quite a loss really."

Party system

At the time of her resignation York's Labour group leader accused Ms Jeffries of walking out after failing to win the arguments within the group.

But the campaigner felt the party whip prevented her speaking when she disagreed with policies that affected disabled people.

And other campaigners also fear they would get lost in the party system.

Steve Wilkinson is well-known in Newcastle and beyond for his campaigning zeal on disability access. He's clashed with councils over the years about their lack of action.

And the wheelchair user has been asked whether he would be interested in entering politics. But he says that's not for him.

He said: "I think with the first past the post system you really have to be either Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat or perhaps UKIP.

Disabled people have protested about the impact of politicians' decisions but few enter parliament

"You could stand as an independent, but the chances are you wouldn't get elected, so I don't think I'd be able to champion the causes of the people I'd want to represent."

Of course there are also other barriers as well. Not all of our council offices and ministries have great disabled access, and extra support might be needed.

But there is some help at hand with those issues.

Last year the government began offering grants to disabled people with aspirations to enter politics.

The Access to Elected Office for Disabled People fund has £2.6m available.

Individuals can apply for up to £20,000 to help them stand for office.

The government says it's about levelling the playing field rather than giving disabled people an unfair advantage.

For example, the money could be used to support the extra transport costs of someone with mobility problems or provide sign language interpreters for deaf people.

Disabled Prime Minister?

And some people do think there are grounds for optimism.

I do think over the years things will change and we will get more disabled people in politicsAlison Blackburn, Chair, Newcastle Disability Forum

Newcastle Disability Forum's chair Alison Blackburn believes we could even have a disabled prime minister in the future.

She said: "Anything in politics is gruelling and the person has got to be supported with certain areas of their disability and in their home life.

"But I do think over the years things will change and we will get more disabled people in politics."

But so far interest in that government access fund has been limited.

By February 2013, just £33,970 has been awarded to six applicants, with six more applications being considered.

If that sluggish pace continues only a fraction of the fund will be spent by the time it's due to end in summer 2014.

Some then believe further change is needed. The campaign group Disability Politics UK wants the law changed to allow MPs to job share.

It believes that would allow more disabled people to enter parliament.

Labour MP John McDonnell has presented a private members bill to make it possible, but without government support it is unlikely to succeed.

But perhaps our political parties also need to look at their own attitudes.

Lynn Jeffries certainly believes the existing political elite needs to change its attitude to remove psychological as well as physical barriers.

She said: "Lots of the barriers start because councillors don't engage properly with disabled people.

"To be honest, unless that changes I do not think we will get disabled people wanting to be councillors."

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-21464655?postId=115358957

-------------------

Women are turning to male escorts for sexual thrills ... - Metro

metro.co.uk › Weird › Sex

Nicholas Reilly for Metro.co.ukFriday 22 May 2015 10:12 am. 1.1k. Women are ...MORE: Man begs bus company for help after losing bag containing cheating sex tape... New Law Cracks Down on Right to Use CashBonner & Partners. Undo.

-----------------

BLOGSPOT:
CANADA MILITARY NEWS: Disabled have great sex lives folks and always have/CHINA teaching disabled children and youth about embracing their sexuality and it's healthy/ SEXTING- what it means global articles/ PLATO - Asexual- Platonic love and friendships work and millions and millions like the honesty of asexality/ MASTERBATION is healthy folks- get used 2 it

http://nova0000scotia.blogspot.ca/2015/07/canada-military-news-disabled-have.html

---------------------

AMI This Week

www.ami.ca/AMI-tv/Pages/AMI-This-Week.aspxCached

AMI This Week Season 3, Episode 33 Mother's Day. We’re celebrating moms on this Mother’s Day episode of AMI This Week! From Halifax, Jennie Bovard learns how ...

---------

The Presence, Portrayal and Participation of Persons with Disabilities on Television Programming

A Research Report Presented to the
Canadian Association of Broadcasters

August 2005

Acknowledgements

CONNECTUS Consulting Inc. would like to thank all those who participated in the Study, from the disability community, the broadcasting industry and all other organizations that took the time to speak with us.
Jim Sanders , President and CEO of the Canadian National Institute for the Blind was Special Advisor to the Study, and provided important direction on the project’s development. Many thanks for a valuable contribution.
We would also like to thank the members of the Canadian Association of Broadcasters (CAB) Steering Committee on the Presence, Portrayal and Participation of Persons with Disabilities, and especially Committee Chair Sarah Crawford (Vice President, Public Affairs, CHUM Limited) for their support and assistance throughout the course of the Study.
The CAB Outreach Committee on Presence, Portrayal and Participation of Persons with Disabilities also provided important commentary on the Study and on the Final Report, and we thank them very much for their efforts and attention to detail.
Finally, a special thanks to Susan Wheeler, Senior Director, Policy and Regulatory Affairs with the CAB. As project manager for the Study on behalf of the CAB, Susan provided outstanding support and direction to all aspects of the Study.

Richard Cavanagh
Lil Krstic
Nancy Steele
August 2005

Executive Summary

Part I: Introduction and Background

Introduction

Study Description and Methodologies

Part II: Persons with Disabilities in Canada Today

Part III: Research Findings on Presence, Portrayal and Participation

Presence of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming

Portrayal of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming

Participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming

Part IV: Considerations for a Broadcaster Toolkit

Bibliography

Appendix A: International and Canadian Best Practices

Executive Summary

This Report presents findings from a three-part research initiative conducted for the Canadian Association of Broadcasters (CAB) between May 15 and August 18, 2005 to collect and analyze qualitative evidence of issues, barriers and potential tools or initiatives respecting The Presence, Portrayal and Participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming Programming (the Study).
The Study was based on the following methodologies:

Extensive consultations through one-on-one interviews with representatives from disability non-government organizations (disability NGOs), persons with disabilities within the broadcasting sector, government officials, senior managers in the broadcasting industry and representatives from the Canadian production sector.

A total of 56 people representing 43 organizations from across Canada were interviewed between May 31and July 31, 2005.

A Stakeholder Forum held July 15, 2005 in Toronto, which brought together 20 disability NGOs, broadcasters, performers and producers in a facilitated discussion of issues, barriers and tools/initiatives.

An additional 16 observers from government and the broadcasting industry attended the event; these included members of the CAB Steering Committee overseeing the research; members of the CAB Outreach Committee of persons with disabilities serving as an advisory group to the Study; and two officials from the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission.
Best Practices research and analysis, focused on broadcasting industry initiatives and industry-related initiatives in the U.K., the U.S. and Canada.

The Study was guided by the CAB Steering Committee on Presence, Portrayal and Participation of Persons with Disabilities and the CAB Outreach Committee. The Steering Committee included representatives from private English- and French-language conventional and specialty & pay television broadcasters, while the Outreach Committee was comprised solely of persons with disabilities, many of which had previous experience in broadcasting.

The Study was focused on researching and reporting on issues, barriers and potential initiatives respecting presence, portrayal and participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming Programming. As such, the examination of issues relating to assistive broadcast technologies (e.g. closed captioning and described video), radio, advertising and public broadcasting were beyond the scope of the research.

Top

Key Findings

All Study respondents agree that on-screen presence of persons with disabilities is extremely low. Negative social attitudes, resistance from the independent production sector and a lack of direction from the education sector are viewed as key barriers.
Negative and stereotypical portrayals of persons with disabilities continue in both dramatic and news programming. Given the small numbers of persons with disabilities on-screen, it is important that portrayals are fair, accurate and complete. Negative social attitudes and a lack of consultation and research by the independent production sector are cited as key barriers.
Issues of portrayal in news programming are viewed as more critical than in dramatic programming, owing in part to the perceived use of inappropriate or insensitive language referencing persons with disabilities in news coverage.
Low participation of persons with disabilities in the broadcasting industry, both on-screen and behind the scenes, is attributed to a number of factors, including an education system that does not promote careers in broadcasting.
There is a general belief that greater inclusion of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming Programming presents opportunities for broadcasters to increase audiences, gain a competitive edge and benefit all employees by implementing accommodation measures.
Study participants agree that building communication/outreach between broadcasters and the disability community is a key starting point for a broadcaster toolkit.

Top

Persons with Disabilities in Canada

The federal government’s 2001 national census identifies 3.6 million Canadians as living with a disability, although it is generally agreed that this number is much larger, since not all persons with disabilities will self-identify in official reporting. An additional 2.8 million Canadians are caregivers to family members or a friend with a disability or a long-term health condition.
Persons with disabilities fall below the general population on key indicators of well-being. For example, just over 51 percent of persons with disabilities are employed, compared to 83 percent of those without disabilities. In addition, persons with disabilities encounter significant underemployment stemming from attitudes that undervalue their skills and abilities. However, where accommodations have been made, persons with disabilities have demonstrated success in education and work.

Top

Key Barriers to Participation and Activity

Evidence from previous research and findings from the Study indicate that persons with disabilities encounter significant barriers to education, employment, income and leisure/recreational pursuits. These barriers include:

Attitudes held by Canadians, including perceptions that persons with disabilities cannot perform in education or work at a level matching or exceeding the able-bodied, and an overestimation of the costs of accommodation on the part of employers.

Poverty stemming from high unemployment and underemployment rates;

Lack of access, especially to information, support and jobs, as well as physical access to buildings;

Lack of accessible transportation and the negative impact this has on availability and choice for school, work and personal pursuits;

Lack of accommodation in workplaces and schools, from physical accommodation to the availability of adaptive software;

Stigmatization and stereotyping of persons with disabilities as objects of pity or victims, or as heroically overcoming a disability; and

Marginalization as a result of the above factors, where persons with disabilities are rendered less visible in everyday life, and consequently in the media.

Top

Presence of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming

Study respondents agree that persons with disabilities have an extremely low presence on television programming of any description. There is a broad perception that persons with disabilities lag far behind other designated groups (women, visible minorities and Aboriginal Peoples) in on-screen presence, and are underrepresented in television programming as a proportion of their presence in the general population.
There is a sense among some respondents from the disability community that presence has improved somewhat, due to the inclusion of a few primary or secondary characters with disabilities in recently aired prime time dramatic programming.
As a secondary impression, many respondents noted that on-screen presence tends to be limited to visible disabilities, while invisible disabilities – such as those related to learning or mental illness – are more rarely presented in programming.
Study respondents identified a number of barriers to the on-screen presence of persons with disabilities, including social attitudes, a small talent pool of performers with disabilities and factors related to work environments in broadcasting and/or production (e.g. stamina required for long days, accessibility of location shooting, studio space/lighting, etc.).
Two barriers emerged as central to limitations of persons with disabilities on-screen: characteristics of the independent production sector and a lack of focus/attention on broadcasting/performing by the education sector.
The independent production sector plays a critical role in the Canadian programming infrastructure, where production companies are important partners for broadcasters, in that they conceive and create programming for purchase by broadcasters. Key creative personnel, such as writers, casting directors and producers develop dramatic roles and hold decision-making power about opportunities for performers with disabilities.
The overall perception on the part of respondents is that the independent production sector is resistant to creating and producing programming that includes persons with disabilities.
A number of respondents identified the education sector as presenting significant barriers to on-screen presence, as students with disabilities are not encouraged to pursue broadcasting or production as viable career paths.

Top

Portrayal of Persons with Disabilities – Dramatic Programming

The portrayal of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming – both dramatic and news genres – is tope of many for many in the disability community.
Respondents perceived that stereotyping of characters with disabilities remains an issue in dramatic programming, where myths about persons with disabilities are captured in character and storyline, such as weakness, vulnerability and victimization. In addition, depictions of less visible disabilities such as mental illness are seen as inaccurate and “fear-inducing”.
A number of strong opinions about appropriation of voice emerged, with many from the disability community expressing concern about realistic portrayal and loss of job opportunities for performers with disabilities through the use of able-bodied actors in roles for characters with disabilities. However, there is disagreement among people in the disability community about whether a character with a disability should necessarily and always be portrayed by a performer with a disability.
As was the case in findings about on-screen presence, some improvements in portrayal were noted in recent dramatic programming, through efforts to depict the attributes of a character other than that character’s disability. Overall, improvement in portrayals is viewed as a work in progress, and positive portrayals are viewed as particularly important given very low numbers of persons with disabilities on-screen.
There were two predominant views about causes of inaccurate or stereotypical portrayals. First, many respondents indicated that public attitudes permeate the infrastructure of broadcasting and production, and myths or misinformation about disabilities become reproduced in programming.
Second, there was a strong sense that the independent production sector does not engage in the consultations and research required in order to accurately create and portray a character with a disability. Professional writers of television dramas were noted as a group that should consult more broadly with persons with disabilities when creating stories involving characters with disabilities or disability-related storylines/themes.

Top

Portrayal of Persons with Disabilities – News Programming

There was a strong level of concern expressed by respondents about the portrayal of persons with disabilities in news programming. Perspectives generally revolved around (i) an overall lack of coverage of disability issues by television news, (ii) types of coverage that focus on the disability rather than the person and (iii) the use of inappropriate language when referring to persons with disabilities in news programming.
Among perspectives about portrayal in news programming, use of inappropriate or insensitive language received the most comments. Many respondents indicated that use of language such as “suffering from” or “confined to a wheelchair” contributes to negative stereotypes and perpetuates myths about persons with disabilities.
Negative social attitudes were once again cited as a key barrier to positive or more accurate portrayal of persons with disabilities in news programming. However, many respondents suggested that more role models, such as on-air personalities with disabilities and employees with disabilities in newsrooms, would positively influence social and workplace attitudes.
A number of respondents once again cited concerns with the education sector, for failing to guide students with disabilities towards careers in broadcast journalism.

Top

Participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming

The research first explored barriers to participation in the workforce generally. These were perceived as: (i) a lack of knowledge about workplace accommodation on the part of employers, (ii) an overestimation about the costs of accommodation by employers, (iii) a sense that employees with disabilities are a burden rather than an asset, and (iv) myths and misinformation about persons with disabilities that carry into the workplace, such as beliefs that persons with disabilities are unable to perform to the level or standard of able-bodied employees.
Many broadcaster respondents indicated that their industry offers excellent prospects for employing persons with disabilities, but recognized that issues and barriers must be managed. For example, several broadcasters stated that a lack of experience with co-workers who have disabilities could cause uncertainty about hiring persons with disabilities into an extremely busy work environment.
A number of Study respondents raised the unique attributes of the broadcaster workplace, where older buildings pose difficulties in accommodation. In addition, the multi-location nature of broadcasting and production operations was noted as especially challenging for employees with disabilities given a lack of accessible transportation in major urban centers.
The independent production sector was perceived by respondents from the broadcasting industry and the disability community to be resistant to implementing accommodations for persons with disabilities.
The education sector was cited as a key external barrier to participation in the broadcasting industry, in that the sector does not seem to recognize, promote and/or understand the viability of careers in broadcasting for students with disabilities. A lack of communication and outreach between and among educators, the disability community and broadcasters was raised a number of times by respondents as an area requiring some focus when developing initiatives.

Top

Considerations for a Broadcaster Toolkit

There is a general belief cited by many Study respondents that the inclusion of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming creates a number of business opportunities for broadcasters, including a market of persons with disabilities and their families, friends and caregiver; achieving a competitive edge by tapping into creative resources of a more diverse talent pool; and benefiting all employees through accommodation measures.
Given the perspective that “diversity is good business”, and the prospects of positive influence on social attitudes through advancements in presence, portrayal and participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming, respondents identified a number of tools or initiatives for consideration by broadcasters.
The predominant focus was on considerations for communication and outreach, especially between the broadcasting industry and the disability community. Other suggestions targeted partnerships with the education sector, measures for the independent production sector, programming initiatives such as Public Service Announcements by broadcasters and cable-style local programming to be produced and presented by persons with disabilities.

Top

Best Practices

Research findings on Best Practices on presence, portrayal and participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming identified a number of initiatives in the U.K. through the Broadcasting and Creative Industries Disability Network, and in the U.S. through the California-based Media Access Office.
Canadian broadcasters report initiatives regarding persons with disabilities in their annual returns (i.e. annual reporting) to the CRTC, and several Canadian broadcasters have developed education and human resource initiatives that focus on inclusion of persons with disabilities.

Top

Part I: Introduction and Background

A) Introduction

CONNECTUS Consulting Inc. (CONNECTUS) is pleased to present the Canadian Association of Broadcasters (CAB) with our Research Report on The Presence, Portrayal and Participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming (the Study).
Over the past several months we have, with the assistance and support of the CAB and its Steering Committee overseeing this work, undertaken a range of consultations and background research with the following objectives:

Through broad consultations, identify key issues and barriers concerning presence, portrayal and participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming;
Identify relevant Best Practices, both internationally and in Canada, which may be of value to Canadian broadcasters in their inclusiveness practices going forward; and
Outline those tools and initiatives as considerations for Canadian television broadcasters in their efforts to advance the presence, portrayal and participation of persons with disabilities in their industry.

In order to present our findings in as detailed a fashion as possible, we have organized our Report in the following manner:

Part I: Introduction and Background

Introduction to the Study and Objectives
Study Description and Methodologies
Methodology Notes
Definitions

Part II: An Overview of Persons with Disabilities in Canada

Statistical profile of persons with disabilities, using the most recent numbers available from Statistics Canada and Social Development Canada
A brief summary of available data on employment of persons with disabilities in Canadian broadcasting

Part III: Research Findings

A detailed description and analysis of findings from qualitative research on the presence, portrayal and participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming.

Part IV: Considerations for a Broadcaster Toolkit

The tools and initiatives derived through consultations and research, and recommended for consideration by broadcasters.

We have attached four appendices to our Report:
Appendix A: A Summary of International and Canadian Best Practices
Appendix B: Organizations/Individuals Consulted
Appendix C: Stakeholder Forum Report
Appendix D: Other Issues Raised/Future Research

Top

B) Study Description and Methodologies

This Study was designed as a qualitative investigation and analysis of issues and barriers respecting the presence, portrayal and participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming. In consultation with the CAB Steering Committee, it was determined at an early stage that quantitative assessment of televisual presence and related content analysis – i.e. counting/estimating the number of persons with disabilities on-screen and analyzing their roles – would not be required for the Study, given the very low numbers of persons with disabilities on-screen.
In addition, accurately quantifying the number of persons with disabilities on-screen would be extremely difficult, as analysis of programming might not capture persons with less visible or invisible disabilities, such as those with learning disabilities or disease-related disabilities.
The Study was also designed on the principle of inclusiveness, in that the direction of the Study would be fundamentally guided through consultation with the Canadian disability community. To this end, the Study was based on the following qualitative methodologies:

Extensive consultations through one-on-one interviews and discussion with representatives from disability non-government organizations (disability NGOs), persons with disabilities within the broadcasting industry, government officials, senior managers in the broadcasting industry and representatives from the Canadian production sector.

A total of 56 people representing 45 disability NGOs, broadcasters, production associations, performers, producers and government officials were interviewed between May 31, 2005 and July 31, 2005. Respondents were from British Columbia, the Prairies, Ontario, Quebec and all provinces in Atlantic Canada. Interviews ranged from 30 minutes to 90 minutes, depending on the number of people participating in any single consultation. While a full list is provided in Appendix B of this Report, the breakdown of consultations is as follows:
- 23 disability NGOs
- 11 broadcasters
- 8 industry-related organizations/producers (including producer associations, writers’ and directors’ guilds and performer unions)
- 2 employees/performers with disabilities
- 1 government department

A Stakeholder Forum , which brought together 20 disability NGOs, broadcasters, performers and producers in a day-long facilitated discussion of issues, barriers and tools/initiatives.

The Stakeholder Forum was held in Toronto on July 15, 2005 when one-on-one consultations and Best Practices research were almost complete. An additional 16 individuals from government and the broadcasting industry attended the Forum as observers, including members of the CAB Steering Committee of broadcasters overseeing the project, members of the CAB Outreach Committee of persons with disabilities serving as an advisory group to the Study, and two officials from the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC).

The Stakeholder Forum was initiated as an alternative to holding cross-country focus groups. This is because (i) the CAB had previously conducted a series of consultations in the preparation of its Action Plan to Examine Issues Concerning the Presence, Portrayal and Participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming (submitted to the CRTC in August 2004), and (ii) one-on-one consultations as described above would be comprehensive and inclusive enough to negate the need for additional focus groups.

In our research planning, the Forum was envisioned as a larger type of focus group, through which preliminary findings would be filtered and broader discussions would take place.

While findings from the Stakeholder Forum are integrated into Part III on Research Findings below, we have attached a stand-alone summary of the session as Appendix C of our Report.

Best Practices research and analysis, focused on broadcasting industry initiatives in the U.K. and the U.S. and related industry initiatives in Canada.

Our summary of Best Practices is attached as Appendix A of our Report.
Beyond those qualitative measures outlined above, we carried out additional secondary research as required, including the compilations of recent statistical profiles of persons with disabilities in Canada.
Certain issues identified in the course of consultations were beyond the scope of the Study. These included: assistive technologies such as described video and closed captioning for television viewing by persons with sensory disabilities; advertising; radio; concerns regarding the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC); and public broadcasting. These issues are summarized in Appendix D.

A Note on Our Methodological Approach

Given its qualitative research design, this Study is based on perceptions and opinions of those interviewed, as well as on the views expressed by participants at the July 15, 2005 Stakeholder Forum. While studies of this nature are inherently subjective, both the numbers and types of consultations that took place with disability NGOs and broadcasting companies were more than sufficient to derive a series of comprehensive findings.
Moreover, the qualitative approach to the Study has yielded a very rich foundation of information upon which additional work and initiatives can be undertaken.
Definitions
For purposes of the Study, we based our research on the following definitions:

Persons with disabilities as referenced throughout the Study include individuals with sensory (hearing, vision, speech), mobility, learning, psychological and/or intellectual/developmental disabilities. In this way, both “visible” and “invisible” disabilities, as well as persons with acquired or multiple disabilities were included in the Study.

Disability NGO refers to a Non-government Organization representing a disability or cross-disability group. A consumer-driven Disability NGO is an organization run by and for persons with disabilities. A service Disability NGO is one that provides particular services to, but is not run by persons with disabilities.

Designated group refers to the four population groups identified by Canadian Employment Equity legislation and policy: women, visible minorities, Aboriginal Canadians and persons with disabilities.

Presence refers to the on-screen presence of a person with a disability, e.g. a performer, journalist, newsreader, or subject of a news story or public affairs program.

Portrayal refers to the manner in which persons with disabilities are depicted through characterization, i.e. the role or attributes of a character with a disability and the manner in which this role is presented on-screen.

Participation primarily refers to employment in the broadcasting industry and/or related industries such as production or performing, whether on-screen or behind the scenes. Consulting or advising on programming and appearing on-screen as subject matter experts for news stories are other forms of participation. However, the predominant reference on participation is to employment in the industry.

Television Programming refers to a very broad range of programming available to Canadians, whether dramatic, news/public affairs, sports, variety or children’s programming, whether it is Canadian or non-Canadian in origin. We anticipated that many respondents would identify non-Canadian programs as those programs that included persons with disabilities in on-screen roles.

Since there was no quantitative research and analysis associated with the Study, the research team believed that programming referenced by respondents from any television broadcasting source would potentially provide relevant information for Canadian broadcasters. In each interview, the research team identified the CAB as the association representing Canada’s private broadcasters, and provided examples of networks, stations and specialty services to further explain this category of the industry to respondents. Consequently, respondents provided very few comments about public broadcasting in Canada, e.g. CBC/SRC, TV Ontario, Télé-Québec.

Top

Part II: Persons with Disabilities in Canada

Population Overview

Statistics Canada defines “disability” as a condition – physical or mental – or a health problem that restricts an individual’s ability to perform everyday activities such as working, attending school, travelling, or performing daily domestic tasks.

While the data outlined below represent the official numbers from Statistics Canada, it is generally agreed that the total number of persons with disabilities in Canadian society today is much larger. This is due in part to the self-identification factor in the reporting of a disability, where individuals may not consider themselves as “disabled”. In other instances, a person with a disability may not wish to disclose this to an employer, perhaps fearing consequences for their employment status or future career.

The Participation and Activity Limitation Survey (PALS) undertaken by the federal government in 2001 identifies 3.6 million Canadians as living with a disability. While seniors (age 65 and over) have the highest rate of disability, it is working-age adults (age 16 to 64) that comprise the largest group of persons with disabilities.

Chart 1: Disability Rate by Age and Sex (2001) ¹

(Age Groups and Percentages)

Beyond this overall perspective of persons with disabilities in Canada:

31% of Aboriginal adults have a disability, more than 1.5 times the non-Aboriginal population

Women are generally more likely than men to have a disability

2 million adult Canadians with disabilities require assistive devices and aids, with roughly 67 percent having all assistive needs met;

Mobility, agility and pain are the most common types of disabilities in Canada, with hearing disabilities next; and
Some 2.8 million Canadians are caregivers to family members or a friend with a disability or long-term health condition.

Top

Key Indicators of Well-being ²

With respect to key indicators of well-being, persons with disabilities fall below the general population on measurements of education, employment and income.
For example, younger Canadians with disabilities are about one-half as likely as those without disabilities to complete university.
Just over 51 percent of persons with disabilities aged 25 to 54 are employed, compared to nearly 83 percent of those without disabilities. In addition, roughly 43 percent of persons with disabilities are out of the labour force, compared to 12.5 percent of able-bodied persons in this age group.
Moreover, beyond higher rates of unemployment, persons with disabilities encounter significant underemployment, in large part as a result of attitudes that undervalue their skills and abilities. ³
However, where accommodations have been made, persons with disabilities have clearly demonstrated success in education and work.

Top

Key Barriers to Participation and Activity ⁴

An increasing number of persons with disabilities identify social, political and environmental factors in assessing barriers to education, employment, income and leisure/recreational pursuits. We asked all respondents (with and without disabilities) for their perceptions about the main barriers for persons with disabilities in Canada today. Key barriers cited include:

Attitudes held by Canadians that permeate and create barriers within all areas of Canadian society, including education and the workplace. Prevalent among attitudes is the perception that persons with disabilities are incapable of performing (in school, on the job) at a level that meets or exceeds those without disabilities. There is a general sense that the public misunderstands persons with disabilities, and what life with a disability is like. This is linked to a misperception on the part of employers that accommodating persons with disabilities in the workplace is expensive and that persons with disabilities are a “burden” in the workplace.
Poverty and related socio-economic barriers, stemming in part from high unemployment and underemployment rates, as well as non-participation in the workforce among persons with disabilities.

Lack of access in a general sense, but especially access to information (for example, in multiple formats), to supports of various types, to jobs and physical access to buildings, shops, etc.

Lack of accommodation for persons with disabilities through a range of settings such as workplaces and schools, which can include physical accommodation through wider doorways and hallways, to adaptive technologies such as special software for using computers, to on-site interpretation for the Deaf, deafened and/or hard of hearing.

Accessible transportation systems and the impact that a lack of transportation can have on availability and choice of school, employment and personal pursuits.

Stigmatization and stereotyping of persons with disabilities, where individuals are viewed as either the objects of pity and depicted as having the same attributes and characteristics no matter what the disability may be, or as “heroically overcoming” a disability.

Marginalization resulting from all of the above factors, where persons with disabilities are rendered less visible in everyday life – and consequently, in the media.

As the reported research findings below indicate, many of these issues and barriers are perceived by stakeholders as part of the challenge that persons with disabilities encounter in presence, portrayal and participation in television programming.

Top

Part III: Research Findings on Presence, Portrayal and Participation

The following three sections comprise the reporting of our findings on presence, portrayal and participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming.
In each section, core findings are presented together with supporting quotations acquired from both consultations and the Stakeholder Forum. Quotations are verbatim, and identified by the person’s type of organization and/or role (i.e. NGO Representative, Broadcaster, Industry-related Organization, Employee/Performer). Several NGO Representatives and government officials consulted for the Study had previous experience in broadcasting and/or performing; this is noted where warranted. In all cases, individual attribution of quotes was withheld in order to generate frank discussion in all consultations.
In addition to the reporting of perspectives on presence, portrayal and participation, we also report on barriers that are perceived by respondents as relevant to issues of presence, portrayal and participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming, i.e. the “why” of the issue.
Responses reveal that, although commitment and effort are required on the part of both broadcasters and the disability community to improve the inclusion of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming, important advances have already been made. There was wide consensus on issues and barriers, between the disability community and the broadcasting industry, and consistently across the regions of Canada.

Top

A) Presence of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming

We aren’t on television. We are vastly underrepresented. (NGO Representative)
There is definitely a lack of representation of persons with disabilities on-screen. (Broadcaster)
There are hardly any numbers to count. (Employee/Performer)

Almost without exception, respondents in consultations and participants at the Stakeholder Forum agree – whether from the disability community, the broadcasting industry, or industry-related organizations – that persons with disabilities have an extremely low presence on television programming of any description.
Compounding this perception is a sense that persons with disabilities lag far behind the three other designated groups (i.e. women, visible minorities and Aboriginal Peoples) in terms of on-screen presence.

We are well behind all other designated groups…women, [ethnic or racial] minorities, Aboriginal people with APTN; they are all far more in evidence than people with disabilities. (NGO Representative)
Most stations have representatives from the other diversity groups...but there is one remaining group that television has to say, “Wait a minute. Why aren’t they there, on-air?” Well, why not? (Broadcaster)
No one blinks an eye at seeing a person of colour on television. (NGO Representative)
No one would care if Ian Hanomansing took over from Peter Mansbridge. But someone with a disability? No way. (Broadcaster)

The last quote above points to the widely held perspective that persons with disabilities are vastly underrepresented in news and public affairs programming as newsreaders, journalists, assignment reporters and in other roles.

There’s David Onley (Citytv), and Craig Oliver (CTV) and Patrick Watson (formerly CBC) come to mind. But other than that? (Broadcaster, multiple mentions of the same individuals)
Chantal Petitclerc is well known as an on-air personality in Quebec. (NGO Representative, multiple mentions of the same individual)

There is also a sense among many respondents that the very low presence of persons with disabilities on-screen is disproportionate to their presence in the general population, contrary to the other three designated groups.

Given that we are 15 percent of the population…we are proportionately not there. The Paralympics is probably the only exception. (NGO Representative)

However, despite the general agreement that the on-screen presence of persons with disabilities remains low, there is a sense among some in the disability community that presence has somewhat improved, and may continue to do so. Much of this was attributed to the inclusion of a small number of primary and secondary characters with disabilities on popular dramatic programming.

[Presence] is still low, but my sense is that things are improving…the double amputee on “CSI”, and the lead character on “CSI” is losing his hearing…” (NGO Representative; multiple mentions of the program by other respondents from all sectors)
The lead character in “Sue Thomas F.B. Eye” is Deaf. ( NGO Representative; multiple mentions of the program)
There are some recent shows like “Degrassi” and “Joan of Arcadia” [that include secondary characters with disabilities]. (NGO Representative; multiple mentions of the programs)
“The West Wing” has Marlee Matlin [Deaf actor] on sometimes, and she’s using an interpreter.” (NGO Representatives; multiple mentions of the program)
“Blind Justice” has a lead character who is blind, as an acquired disability. (NGO Representative; multiple mentions of the program)

As a secondary impression, a number of respondents noted that on-screen presence tends to be limited to visible disabilities, such as individuals in wheelchairs. Respondents suggested that invisible disabilities – such as those associated with learning or mental illness – are even more rare in programming of any category. Most comments on invisible disabilities were related to portrayal of persons with disabilities, and are outlined below.
Finally, a number of respondents indicated that the presence of persons with disabilities as background performers in dramatic programming is also very low. Many respondents viewed this as an important element in reducing the marginalization of persons with disabilities in society more generally, where persons in wheelchairs or using white canes/guide dogs would be integrated into background scenes.

With cultural diversity, people complain they are only in the background. Persons with disabilities want to be in the background [as well as in the foreground]. (NGO Representative)
Rarely if ever are we interviewed on the street, by a reporter. We just aren’t seen as having opinions. (NGO Representative)

This points to a perception held by virtually all Study participants: television is a powerful medium that can influence social attitudes, including attitudes about persons with disabilities. Television is universally recognized as a medium that can make a significant contribution to advancing the acceptance of persons with disabilities in society through on-screen inclusion.

Top

Perceived Barriers to On-screen Presence

Discussions about on-screen presence invariably drew additional perceptions about why there are few persons with disabilities on screen. Many respondents identified barriers to on-screen presence, which were filtered and discussed at the Stakeholder Forum (see below).

Perceived barriers ranged from the very broad…

Negative attitudes permeate the whole industry. (Employee/Performer)
The system is broken, it’s not working for the disabled. (Employee/Performer)

… to much more specific encounters with physical barriers…

Access to auditions is impossible. You can’t get in the door with a wheelchair. (NGO Representative with performing experience)

…to comments and concerns about whether there are enough performers with disabilities (i.e. developed as opposed to raw talent) that can appear on-screen.

The talent pool just doesn’t seem that large, very few performers [with disabilities] come forward. (Broadcaster)
Hard to find talent. (Broadcaster)
There may not be such a big talent pool, but – unconsciously or consciously – producers may not be looking. (Industry-related Organization)

Several respondents perceived that television is a visual medium that promotes and thrives on beauty and image. As such, persons with disabilities may encounter a “beauty barrier” to on-screen presence.

Blind people look different. Unless we look right, we won’t get on [television]. (NGO Representative)
We aren’t pretty enough [that’s what people think]. (NGO Representative)

Others suggested that environmental factors, long days and location shooting pose unexpected barriers for persons with disabilities, many of whom can already have health problems.

The studio lights were so bright…it was impossible for me to see. (NGO Representative with performing experience)
It can be a stamina thing. Ten-hour shoots, it can be too much. (Government Official with performing experience)
Some sets and studios are simply not accessible. You either can’t get transportation to them, or you can’t get around in them once you’re there. (NGO Representative with broadcasting experience)

Respondents perceived and provided extensive comment on two barriers that are viewed as the most daunting, and the most prevalent: characteristics of the independent production sector and historical practices in the education sector.
The independent production sector is a vital part of the Canadian programming infrastructure, and production companies are extremely important partners for Canadian broadcasters. This is because independent production companies conceive and create programming for purchase by broadcasters.
The independent production sector consequently involves key creative personnel in the development of dramatic roles and their assignment to performers, including writers, casting directors, producers and directors, among others. Given their importance in the conception and creation of programming, a good deal of decision-making power about roles/performance opportunities for persons with disabilities resides within the independent production community.
Many respondents interviewed for the Study were aware of the important role played by the independent production industry in the creation of programming. The overall perception – from those consulted within the disability community and the broadcasting industry – is that there is significant resistance from the independent production sector with respect to creating and producing programming that includes persons with disabilities. This perception extended to both the development of characters and the use of performers with disabilities (for acting jobs overall).

The independent producers seem really resistant to roles for and/or performers with disabilities…I don’t know why this is. (Broadcaster)
Producers say, “It costs money [to include a person with a disability]”. That’s total bullshit. (Employee/Performer)
You know, at the level of the producer, the casting director, the writer, there’s so little awareness. Agents don’t consider it either, it’s just viewed as a burden.” (NGO Representative)
It takes courage to cast someone in a wheelchair. (NGO Representative)

Compounding these general perceptions of resistance from the independent production sector is the sense that a lack of inclusion may stem from a lack of persons with disabilities currently working at the creative level in programming production.
In other words, there is a perception that there are very few professionals with disabilities working as writers or directors, or filling other key creative roles, in the production sector today. Such individuals could potentially serve as role models in the industry for younger Canadians with disabilities.

The infrastructure breaks down at an early age, doesn’t it? Kids make decisions about writing, acting, being in a newsroom or making drama early. (NGO Representative)
Kids with disabilities don’t see us on the career path. The education sector has not been too successful at this. (Broadcaster)
[Career] counselors really need to expand their view of what we can do. (NGO Representative)

Many respondents identified the education sector as presenting significant barriers to on-screen presence of persons with disabilities, primarily because students with disabilities are not encouraged to pursue production or broadcasting as viable careers. This may stem from a “fear factor” on the part of educators, who may be reluctant to direct students with disabilities to an industry that seems remote or inaccessible, and points to a need to “educate the educators” about the broadcasting industry and opportunities for persons with disabilities.
Respondents also noted that issues with the education sector may be a reflection of negative public attitudes that permeate the system, reaching to parents who may not encourage careers in these fields, and resulting in a lack of communication or outreach among educators, the disability community and broadcasters.

Top

Stakeholder Forum – Participant Views about On-screen Presence

Stakeholder Forum participants recognized the reality that on-screen presence among persons with disabilities is very low, and recommended a range of tools, initiatives and strategies for consideration in addressing this issue (outlined in Part IV below).
Participants at the Forum focused their discussion about presence on a number of barriers to the inclusion of persons with disabilities on-screen, identifying the following as especially critical:

A lack of roles for persons with disabilities coming out of the production sector.
Few on-screen role models (for dramatic programming) influencing a lack of interest in performing at an early age.
A lack of support from the education sector for on-screen professions.
A lack of training opportunities for persons with disabilities.

Participants were far less inclined to view “beauty and image” as a barrier to on-screen inclusion. In fact, contrary to the views of many respondents in the one-on-one consultations, Forum participants were largely dismissive of the notion that the physical appearance of persons with disabilities and/or their use of assistive devices work as barriers to on-screen inclusion.
Participants at the Stakeholder Forum also discussed the business case for greater inclusion of persons with disabilities on-screen, particularly in terms of the impact that greater on-screen presence could potentially have on broadcaster (and advertiser) ability to reach a wider market of persons with disabilities, their families, friends and/or caregivers. The business case for inclusion is discussed further in Part IV of this Report.

Top

B) Portrayal of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming

In this section of the Report, we present and discuss our findings on portrayal, i.e. the manner in which persons with disabilities are perceived as depicted in television programming.
We have divided our discussion on portrayal into two sections. The first section deals with portrayal of persons with disabilities in programming genres such as drama, comedy, variety or children’s shows. The second section examines the portrayal of persons with disabilities in news, sports and public affairs programming.
Once again, as was the case with the presentation of findings about on-screen presence above, the discussion to follow is based on the perceptions and views of respondents through one-on-one consultations and of participants at the Stakeholder Forum.

Top

Portrayal in Dramatic Programming

Not unlike the discussion of presence above, perceptions of portrayal from respondents during one-on-one consultations and participants at the Stakeholder Forum range from the very negative to the more positive. But there is little doubt that issues associated with portrayal are top of mind for many in the disability community.
Given the relatively low on-screen presence of persons with disabilities, many respondents expressed their views with the stated recognition that the available number of portrayals is small. With this in mind, the following themes emerged as central to perceptions on portrayal:

Stereotyping , where characters with disabilities are portrayed in ways that perpetuate myths about life with a disability or feature inaccurate information about disabilities, or overemphasize such qualities of life as helplessness or misery;

Victimization , where characters with disabilities are portrayed as vulnerable and weak, often as the victims of crime or other wrongdoing;

Appropriation of voice , which refers to able-bodied performers portraying persons with disabilities or the creation of roles for characters with disabilities by non-disabled writers; and

Inclusions and non-marginalization , where characters with disabilities are portrayed for their non-disabled attributes first, e.g. as professionals, as friends, as parents, as opposed to disabled professionals, disabled friends, or disabled parents.

As a general observation, we noted that these themes of portrayal emerged in a consensus fashion, in that these perspectives are held by representatives from disability NGOs, the broadcasting industry, industry-related associations and employees/performers with disabilities.
Of all perspectives received during one-on-one consultations, stereotyping and perpetuating myths associated with disabilities received the most comment. Many respondents were of the view that stereotyping was the prevailing problem of persons with disabilities.

Stereotyping negatively contributes to self-identification and self-image. And there is too much stereotyping of people with disabilities on television. ( NGO Representative)
You still get all kinds of stereotypes, and the focus is always on the disability. The media needs to start portraying this as normal. (NGO Representative)
We’re still the “Hunchback of Notre Dame” – a menace, or a monster. ( NGO Representative)
Broadcasters have an obligation to promote the positive portrayals, but they don’t. It’s very rare. (NGO Representative)
Only physical disabilities seem to get any attention. Less visible disabilities don’t get on TV. (NGO Representative)

Victimization of persons with disabilities was often viewed as among the more negative of stereotyped portrayals on television.

We’re still too often the victim. (NGO Representative)
[A character with a disability] is usually someone to be pitied, a victim of some type. (NGO Representative)
Two minutes into “Law & Order”, we’re mugged or murdered. (Employee/Performer)
You are either a hero or a victim. You don’t see a disabled lawyer in a court scene. (Industry-related Organization)

Many perspectives relating to stereotyped portrayals identified specific disabilities, often those that are less visible and therefore, according to several respondents, more “fear-inducing”. This fear becomes perpetuated through dramatic representation.

Propensity for violence by mentally ill is perpetuated…the idea that the mentally ill are dangerous. (NGO Representative)
You often see criminality associated with invisible disabilities, like learning disabilities. (NGO Representative)

With respect to appropriation of voice, a number of strong opinions emerged about the use of able-bodied performers in roles portraying persons with disabilities. In many comments, concerns about realistic portrayal, taking jobs away from performers with disabilities and professional ethics emerged.

More often than not, you still see actors without disabilities playing the role [of a person with a disability]. (NGO Representative)
It drives me nuts when they use able-bodied people to portray us. They are missing out on a realistic portrayal. (NGO Representative)
To the trained eye, you can tell. “That guy doesn’t have a disability”. (NGO Representative)
Using able-bodied actors…well there’s no more brown paint and pretending to be Aboriginal. (Government Official)

While the above represents the predominant view about the portrayal of characters with disabilities by able-bodied performers, a contrary view was also voiced.

Acting is a profession, so they should use professional actors regardless of whether they are disabled or not. Playing a person with a disability would be acting, wouldn’t it? (NGO Representative)

Many respondents expressed contrary views to the perspectives on portrayal outlined above, where improvements in recent programming were noted in much the same fashion as observations about presence outlined above. Many of these comments identified the more positive efforts to promote inclusion and non-marginalization by focusing on attributes of a character other than that character’s disability.

On balance – it’s getting better, but the stereotyping still prevails. (NGO Representative)
Some are positive and some are not. It’s positive to the extent that these characters are there at all, at least there seems to be progress overall. (Broadcaster)
There seems to be less stereotyping now…some characters are better. But they are still few and far between. (NGO Representative)
I’ve noticed an improvement of late. It seems more rare to see a negative portrayal. (NGO Representative)

Many respondents identified specific programs that portray persons with disabilities more accurately, or with a more positive brush. In many cases, these programs include characters with disabilities who are portrayed by performers with disabilities.

“CSI” and “Law & Order” do a better job, more accurately portray people with learning disabilities. (NGO Representative)
Overall it seems to be improving, even less visible disabilities are being portrayed, like the fellow losing his hearing on “CSI”. (Broadcaster)
“Sue Thomas” is a good role model for the Deaf community…shows the Deaf can do the same things as able-bodied people. (NGO Representative)
It’s positive to have Marlee Matlin on “The West Wing”… (her character) is a respected professional…she uses an interpreter, too. (NGO Representative)

Occasional storylines were mentioned as more accurately portraying life with a disability…

An episode of ER where an artist going blind committed suicide at the end. You know what? That kind of thing happens. That wasn’t negative. (NGO Representative)
O.K. so the stories on “Blind Justice” might be straining reality, and the guy’s not really blind, but it’s not a bad job of showing life with a disability and what you go through. (NGO Representative)

…while others were viewed as less accurate.

Oh, please. I’ve been blind since birth and I’ve never touched anyone’s face in my entire life. (NGO Representative)

Finally, a number of respondents voiced a view about portrayals as a work in progress, in a more balanced sense.

Portrayals do seem more positive lately, with “Sue Thomas” and the doctor on “CSI”. These are positive role models. But you still get some victims, on reality shows like “Extreme Makeover”, where they renovate homes for poor people and the families always seem to have a child with a disability. (Broadcaster)

Respondents also emphasized that given the very low numbers of persons with disabilities on-screen, it is important that portrayals are fair, accurate and complete.

Top

Perceived Barriers to Accurate/Positive Portrayal of Persons with Disabilities

Many respondents expressed their views about why stereotypical or negative portrayals of persons with disabilities continue – even when there is evidence of progress and improvement. Unlike perspectives that were voiced about barriers to presence, there were just two predominant views about barriers to positive depiction.
Without question, the number one barrier to more progress on portrayals was viewed as public attitudes that carry over into the depiction of persons with disabilities in programming. Such attitudes – which include the reproduction of myths and misinformation about disabilities and life with a disability – are viewed by many Study participants as permeating the entire infrastructure of production and broadcasting.

…still a surprise to see a person with a disability in a role. It’s an extension of public attitudes. (NGO Representative)
The public misunderstands us. Maybe it’s not surprising this carries over to television. (NGO Representative)
Attitudinal barriers equate with stereotyping. (Industry-related Organization)
We’re supposed to be pitied, be victims…at least, that’s the prevailing public attitude. (Employee/Performer)

Some respondents linked this barrier to the manner in which barriers for other designated groups have weakened or dissolved through time.

It’s like the early days when blacks on television were stereotyped. That’s much better now. Getting past the disability is tough, it takes time. There’s still tokenism. (Industry-related Organization)
Reminiscent of women on television, when they were just stereotyped. It’s come a long way. (Broadcaster)

The second barrier to improving the depiction of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming is believed to reside within the production sector itself. Many respondents believe that there is a general lack of effort made on consultation and research – particularly among professional writers of television programming – that would result in more accurate depictions.

Writers and producers take the easy route in portraying disability. They don’t consult…more writers need to contribute more effort. (Broadcaster)
There’s just no consultation. If you are talking about Aboriginals, then talk to Aboriginals…same thing goes for persons with disabilities. (Industry-related Organization)
Very few guidelines are in place…producers tend to have a cast that looks like the community they are trying to produce for, to reflect that audience and stay relevant [i.e. a lack of inclusion in defining their audience]. (Industry-related Organization)
I’ve never been consulted about creating a role. We could help. (NGO Representative)

The last quote above is one response to a question asked of respondents from disability NGOs and other persons with disabilities consulted for the Study. From our consultations, two NGO representatives (out of 45 individuals from 22 organizations) had been consulted by a writer or producer about accurately depicting a person with a disability.
Other respondents indicated that broadcasters themselves could do a better job at insisting on accurate portrayals from third-party productions, but encounter their own challenges in doing so.

We’re better at making roles more positive, but don’t have enough experience. We’re not nearly as good at figuring how to integrate [persons with disabilities] into storylines. (Broadcaster)
There’s an effort to be sensitive. But when you buy co-productions you don’t see a lot [of good portrayals] coming from other countries. (Broadcaster)

Top

Stakeholder Forum – Participant Views about Portrayal

Participants at the Stakeholder Forum discussed portrayal issues and barriers at length, largely confirming the views of respondents from consultations but with a different order of emphasis. Key issues were viewed as:

Appropriation of voice through (i) the creation of roles with disabilities by non-disabled writers and (ii) the performance of characters with disabilities by non-disabled performers; and

Stereotyping of characters with disabilities.

In particular, participants at the Stakeholder Forum voiced their concern about the creation of roles with disabilities by non-disabled writers, where disability culture and the reality of living with a disability are viewed as inaccurately portrayed.
Participants at the Stakeholder Forum also engaged in a lengthy discussion about appropriation of voice, concerning the performance of characters with disabilities by able-bodied actors. The range of discussion reflected the findings from the consultations, where there is disagreement among the disability community/ individuals with disabilities and broadcasters about the importance or relevance of this issue. The range of individual perspectives included:

Able-bodied performers should never portray characters with disabilities as they are fundamentally unable to accurately convey life with a disability;

“Doctors do not play television doctors, police officers do not play television police officers”; therefore, characters with disabilities can be portrayed by any skilled actor;

However, a man does not play a woman in a role, unless that’s what the role calls for.

Finally, acting is a profession, and the best professionals should be assigned roles, whether those people have disabilities or not, for any role. At the same time, performers with disabilities should have the opportunity to play any role.

With respect to discussions about stereotyping, many participants at the Stakeholder Forum were also of the view that myths about disabilities/living with a disability carry into portrayals. These myths range from notions that all persons with disabilities are victims and are somehow to be pitied, to patterns of speech/use of language, and body language. In addition, the myth that persons with disabilities are “suffering” and that disabilities are “conditions” to be “heroically overcome” still find their way into on-screen portrayals.
While the above considerations generally dominated discussions about portrayal at the Stakeholder Forum, participants also acknowledged during roundtable discussion that – as is the case with presence – some progress is being made on depiction through characterizations that focus on the person/skills as opposed to the character’s disability.

Top

Portrayal of Persons with Disabilities in News Programming

As noted above in reporting findings on presence of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming , respondents perceive a very low number of on-air personalities with disabilities in news and public affairs programming.
While most respondents tended to view this lack of presence in a pragmatic fashion, and linked to a lack of initiative on the part of the education system in neglecting to direct students with disabilities to careers in broadcast journalism, there was a great deal more concern expressed by respondents about the portrayal of persons with disabilities in news programming.
Many respondents commented not only on national news coverage, but on local coverage as well. In many instances, concerns about portrayal in television news programming were tied to local media coverage more generally, e.g. radio, print and television. With this in mind, the following themes emerged as central to respondent perceptions of portrayal in news and public affairs programming:

Overall lack of coverage of disability issues by television news outlets;

Types of coverage that marginalizes or stereotypes persons with disabilities;

Use of inappropriate language when referring to persons with disabilities in news stories, which in turn perpetuates myths about persons with disabilities as suffering from an affliction; and

A lack of public affairs programming and documentaries dealing with disability issues and persons with disabilities.

There was a near-unanimous perspective voiced by respondents about the general lack of coverage of disability issues by television news.

Our issues have difficulty getting airtime and ink. (NGO Representative)
Coverage of some issues, like getting autistic kids back to their parents in Ontario, has been good. But other coverage has been poor, inadequate. (Broadcaster)
I’m not Superwoman, I need some assistance and can’t do everything independently. But the focus should not be me, the focus should be on not being able to vote alone. It’s the issue that needs to be portrayed. (NGO Representative)

When disability issues and persons with disabilities are reported by television news, there is a sense that coverage is skewed in a manner that marginalizes or stereotypes persons with disabilities.

There’s a lack of normalization in news…only the exceptional stories or people are the focus. We don’t want to be amazing. We want to be normal. (NGO Representative)
In general, it’s tragedy, victimization, or criminality. (Government Official)
[In news coverage] there is still too much focus on the victim, rather than the individual. Focus on the person. (Broadcaster)
It’s either tragedy or heroism. Or it’s the hyper-accomplished, like Rick Hansen or Chantal Petitclerc. (Government Official)
Of course there is more interest by the media in celebrities with disabilities, the Rick Hansens and Chantal Petitclercs. That’s good, but there are too few stories about the average person with a disability in the local community. (NGO Representative)

Top of mind for many respondents was the insensitivity of portrayals of persons with disabilities on television news programming, as indicated through the kind of language used in stories. The central concern expressed is that the use of insensitive language perpetuates stereotyping of persons with disabilities as somehow afflicted with a condition that victimizes and medicalizes their status.

There is a problem with language about people with disabilities in news. “Overcoming a disability” and the like. It plays out as a negative thing. (NGO Representative)
It’s all about the medical model, the “suffering”. Coverage seems to have regressed. (Industry-related Organization)
The biggest problem is the negative language, “confined”, “suffering”. They covered Tracy [Latimer] in such a dehumanizing way. (NGO Representative)
News is a big area of concern for us, it reflects society…and the news category does have some insensitive portrayals. (Broadcaster)
There is still troubling terminology – “the disabled”, “the elderly”. (NGO Representative)
News coverage is far more knowledgeable and appropriate than ever before. Paralympics coverage is excellent. But language could still improve, avoid things like “confined to a wheelchair”. (NGO Representative)

Despite these concerns, respondents did not indicate any initiatives that might be helpful in addressing in appropriate language, in either one-on-one consultations or at the Stakeholder Forum.
Other respondents expressed their perspectives on the types of disabilities covered by television news…

As for learning disabilities, they are rarely dealt with (in news programming) at all. (NGO Representative)

…while others indicated advances in some areas…

Canadian news is not nearly as bad as the U.S. in linking mental illness to crime, but still needs to work on avoiding sensationalizing mental illness. (NGO Representative)

…and others recognized there is a need for progress in news portrayals.

There is more sensitivity to issues, points of view are more useful, but there is a ways to go. (Broadcaster)

Beyond coverage of disability issues/persons with disabilities in news coverage, a number of respondents shared their perspectives on other types of public affairs programming and sports. Many indicated a need for programming that focuses more deeply on disability culture.

CBC had “Moving On”…apart from that, there has been no extended coverage of disabilities or life with a disability. (NGO Representative, multiple mentions of this program)
I think [a Canadian network] had a documentary about disabilities that was excellent…couldn’t there be more of this? (NGO Representative)
We have everyday lives, we’re more normal than anyone realizes. We have sex lives, families. This could be represented. (NGO Representative)

And once again, a sense of some progress being made.

[One of our productions] looked at sex and disability, really a good job at normalizing. (Broadcaster)

Top

Perceived Barriers to Accurate/Positive Portrayal of Persons with Disabilities in News Programming

Respondents identified a number of barriers to better portrayal of persons with disabilities in news programming, ranging from the influence of public attitudes to a lack of on-air talent.

News portrayal is improving, but I find it incredible that there are not more newscasters on TV, for example those with physical disabilities. (Broadcaster)
[Public] attitudes permeate the news. (Employee/Performer)

With respect to perceived issues concerning the use of inappropriate language, one respondent suggested the following:

A new generation of reporter has slipped back to the old language. They have a long way to go in showing respect and learning about us. (NGO Representative)

Several respondents identified a lack of persons with disabilities as on-air and newsroom role models that would ostensibly encourage better portrayals and more on-air presence overall.

[Having more] persons with disabilities in the newsroom is a definite help. (Broadcaster)
You need more role models, more people with disabilities in the newsroom – there are too few now. (Broadcaster)

A number of respondents flagged concerns with the education sector in failing to guide students with disabilities toward careers in broadcast journalism. (This barrier was perceived as a predominant factor in participation in the broadcasting industry by persons with disabilities as a whole, and is examined in detail in Part C below.) As one example of this perspective:

There’s no outreach, to schools or communities. Until some visionaries in the industry commit to change, nothing will happen. (Broadcaster)

Finally, several broadcaster respondents identified one particular area that could work to include and accurately portray Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming news: through the use of subject matter experts with disabilities, as expert commentators on news stories (i.e. not just as commentators on disability issues). This was not raised as a perspective by any respondents with disabilities or any representatives from disability NGOs. As noted by one broadcaster,

We have a hard time identifying subject matter experts [with disabilities] to come in for [comment/analysis of] news stories…but we’d like to know who they are. (Broadcaster)

Top

Stakeholder Forum – Participant Views about Portrayal in News Programming

Stakeholder Forum participants expressed a single perspective and a related barrier in discussions concerning portrayal of persons with disabilities in news programming: sensitivity issues in coverage, including the use of inappropriate language and a lack of understanding about disability issues.
Participants also identified the lack of employees with disabilities in newsrooms as a key barrier to advancing portrayals of persons with disabilities in news programming.
With respect to the use of inappropriate language, a Forum participant offered an opinion that this may be due to systemic barriers for persons with disabilities, and less about insensitivity of a new generation of journalist.
There was also some debate about the use of appropriate language, with reference to the correct terminology to apply to Deaf persons. One perspective argues that references should be made to the person where the disability is secondary (e.g. a Canadian who is Deaf) while another perspective argues that primacy should be given to the disability in terminology (e.g. a Deaf Canadian). This difference of opinion underpins the importance of recognizing that cultural differences can exist within the disability community.
As noted above, there was no consensus on ways of dealing with terminology and appropriate language.
Lack of coverage of disability issues in news programming was also cited as an issue by participants at the Forum, but did not receive further discussion.

Top

C) Participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming

In this section of our Report, we present our findings on the participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming, primarily from the perspective of obtaining and retaining employment in the industry. We first briefly revisit issues of participation in the workforce generally, followed by a discussion of perspectives raised by respondents about participation in the broadcasting industry more specifically.
This is followed by some reporting on barriers to participation in broadcasting as perceived by respondents during consultations, and a summary of views about participation by those attending the Stakeholder Forum.

Top

Participation by Persons with Disabilities in the Workforce Generally

In the course of one-on-one consultations, each respondent was asked for their perspective on issues and barriers respecting participation in the workforce and the workplace, in general. This was done in order to ascertain the experiences of respondents in their own employment and workplaces, and to enrich the subsequent discussion about participation in the broadcasting industry.
Respondents viewed the central issues of participation in the workforce as:

A lack of knowledge and understanding on the part of employers about workplace accommodation (i.e. measures taken to accommodate employees with disabilities, such as automated doors, wider doorways, accessible washrooms, technology aids, lighting or other environmental factors).
There’s a lack of knowledge about technology, both on the part of disabled people and on the part of corporations. It’s likely the biggest barrier behind attitudes in terms of workforce participation. (NGO Representative)
Advances in technology really level the playing field (for accommodation). (NGO Representative)

An overestimation about the costs of accommodation on the part of employers (i.e. a belief on the part of employers that accommodating employees with disabilities is costly) and misinformation about the true costs of accommodation.
The costs of accommodation are simply overestimated. It’s amazing how easy accommodation can be…and we can help. (NGO Representative)
There is a definite belief that the cost of accommodation is high. But remember, changes benefit all workers like curb cuts for strollers…employers should see this as an investment in all their people. (NGO Representative)
Wouldn’t you rather pay $1100 for some software, and get in return an employee who will bring far greater value to your company? (NGO Representative)

A general sense on the part of employers that employees with disabilities are a burden, rather than an asset, and will not be productive.
No question, we are viewed as a burden, something that an employer does not want to take on. With minimal assistance, we’re as productive as the next guy. (NGO Representative)
Attitudes are the core problem. There is an expectation that we can’t work. (NGO Representative)

A general “fear factor” in the workplace, with reluctance among employees with disabilities to self-identify for fear of losing their jobs or hindering their careers, and a reluctance among employers to sanction or fire employees with disabilities for fear of repercussions.
My vision was going…I kept looking for assignments that would keep me out of taxis and in the office. I had no idea whether I should tell [my employer] or not. (NGO Representative with experience in broadcasting)

Pervasive myths about the abilities of persons with disabilities, and the notion that a physical disability somehow equates with intellectual deficiencies or shortcomings, and the impact of this on employer attitudes.
Persons with disabilities have to prove themselves, that their disability will not prevent them from doing the job. (NGO Representative)
There’s a negative notion of prospects [for children with disabilities], and as a result, a lower push by parents. (NGO Representative)
A lot of people with disabilities were never asked, “What do you want to do when you grow up?” (NGO Representative)
The education system could definitely do more on this front…kids with disabilities are not told, “You can go on to do bigger and better things”. (NGO Representative)

Top

Perspectives on Participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming

Not surprisingly, a number of the above noted issues and barriers about participation in the workforce generally were viewed by respondents as factors concerning participation by Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming. Many respondents raised additional issues and barriers with respect to employment in the broadcasting industry, where less than 2 percent of the workforce is comprised of persons with disabilities. ⁵
Respondents included their perspectives on:

Opportunities in the broadcasting industry for persons with disabilities.

Attitudes of employers specifically referencing broadcasters;

Issues relating to accommodation in the broadcaster workplace;

Issues relating to education and training, and the general lack of support from the education system in promoting broadcasting as a career path for students with disabilities; and

The importance of communication and outreach between the disability community and broadcasters.

As a general observation, we encountered a very positive range of perspectives about participation in the broadcasting industry overall, and recorded a willingness on the part of both the disability community and broadcasters to address the issues and barriers inhibiting greater inclusion of persons with disabilities in the industry. There is little to report in the way of hesitation or reluctance about this on the part of any respondents.
To this end, a number of respondents indicated that the broadcasting industry presents excellent opportunities for persons with disabilities.

Broadcasting is not that different from other industries, it’s a great industry for persons with disabilities, really diverse, creative, welcoming. (Broadcaster)
There are plenty of jobs for people with sensory disabilities in broadcasting…chase producers [locating and securing interviews for news broadcasts] sit all day. (Employee/Performer)
There are some design considerations, but some folks with physical disabilities would be perfect for some kinds of jobs in broadcasting. (Broadcaster)
Let’s get on with it. (Broadcaster)

While enthusiasm for advancing participating in the broadcasting industry is high among many respondents, there is also a recognition that there are issues to deal with and barriers to break down.
Some perspectives on issues and barriers identified those that are more internal to the broadcasting industry. For example, with respect to attitudes, many broadcasters likened the “fear factor” associated with the recruiting and hiring of persons with disabilities to similar attitudes once held about the recruiting and hiring of women in the broadcasting industry.

This parallels the struggles of women to get access to jobs in the industry, with the same arguments: “No qualified people.” (Broadcaster)
It’s like the original perception of women in the workplace. They’ll slow you down. Not so. (Broadcaster)
It’s just like working with anyone else. (Broadcaster)

A number of broadcasters identified the daily realities of the broadcasting industry as creating hesitation in recruiting and hiring persons with disabilities.

Managers are doing four jobs at once…and see an employee with a disability as an added burden. It’s a sensitizing issue, we have to show it’s a benefit, not a burden. (Broadcaster, multiple mentions of the issue)
There’s a fear among some managers, of not knowing how to interact with a disabled person. (Broadcaster)

Many respondents identified the internal issue of accommodation as an important concern about participation in the broadcasting industry by persons with disabilities, and one which highlights the relative uniqueness of the broadcaster workplace environment.
Of particular emphasis on the part of broadcaster respondents was the physical age of some buildings, and other factors relating to physical accommodation for wheelchairs.

We’re in an older building…there is no elevator to the cafeteria, we only just got a ramp outside. For us, accommodation is more expensive. (Broadcaster, multiple mentions of the issue)
We don’t own our building, we lease space. It can be doubly tough to accommodate as a result. (Broadcaster)
Some studios are just not accessible. Getting from place to place can be tough. But the physical barriers are the worst. (NGO Representative with experience in broadcasting)

The multi-location nature of broadcasting operations and production operations was also viewed as related to a broader social barrier for persons with disabilities, i.e. transportation.

Physical transportation from location to location can be an inhibitor. (NGO Representative)
I would run up such a taxi bill! There was no other way to get around. (NGO Representative with broadcasting experience)

Some respondents saw a relationship between the glamour of the broadcasting industry and the presumption of barriers to entry on the part of younger people with disabilities.

The culture of television, the image of television, that’s a huge inhibitor for a person with a disability. (NGO Representative)

Several respondents drew a connection between a lack of on-air role models in television news, and a lack of interest among younger people with disabilities in participating in the industry whether on-air or behind the camera.

You do need more role models, like more reporters with disabilities. Just don’t have them do only disability stories. That’s like having women reporters do only women’s issues. (NGO Representative, multiple mentions)
It’s a Catch-22…if you don’t see yourself, you won’t want to go there. (Government Official)

Issues of accommodation were also expressed regarding the production sector.

The independent producers are very disability-unfriendly, their set-ups [for accommodating persons with disabilities] are not good, that’s the reality of independent production. (Broadcaster)
There are physical barriers to casting facilities, you can’t get in the door. (Industry-related Organization)

Others saw the opportunity deriving from accommodation as part of the business case for diversity.

Broadcasters need to assess the investment of accommodation versus the cost of not accommodating . (Government Official)

A number of other issues and barriers to participation in the broadcasting industry reflected on those that are external to the industry. For example, a significant number of respondents identified the education sector as shouldering a great deal of responsibility for failing to promote (or understand) broadcasting as viable careers for students with disabilities.

Counselors really need to expand their view of what people can do. Not every profession is open to the able-bodied. But for the disabled: most kids will write themselves off before they would even try for a media job. (NGO Representative)
There is not a great track record on the education side for getting people into broadcasting…for the Deaf, there are graphics, animation, there might be some great ideas out there. (NGO Representative)

Others suggested that it might be time to look for alternatives to the education system to help persons with disabilities acquire skills necessary for job in broadcasting.

The education sector has not been that successful in directing students with disabilities to careers in broadcasting…maybe the [disability] groups should do it. (Broadcaster)
There are on-going challenges to identifying qualified candidates with disabilities and accessing the resource pool. I wonder if the disability communities could screen in advance? (Broadcaster)

A number of respondents indicated that educational institutions themselves, especially in the post-secondary environment, have done a poor job of accommodation, and therefore in attracting promising students with disabilities to their programs.

Look at [a community college in British Columbia]…three-quarters of their classes are in buildings that are inaccessible. (NGO Representative)
Schools, media arts and journalism programs need to do a better job of accommodating. I may not be able to operate a camera, but I would make a heck of an interviewer. That should be taken into account. (NGO Representative)
Colleges and uni versities could do a much better job at accommodation. (NGO Representative)

The lack of on-going training in the production sector was also raised.

Training in production is not well crafted or well organized, it’s ad hoc at best. The production environment is just not set up for disabled people. (Industry-related Organization)

Consultations with respondents about participation in the industry often highlighted the need for more and better communication and outreach among the education sector, the broadcasting and production sector, and the disability community. Broadcasters and representatives from disability NGOs in particular raised the need for greater communication between them.

There is not enough outreach by broadcasters into the community [of persons with disabilities]…we don’t really know what opportunities there are. (NGO Representative)
We have to do a better job of connecting with broadcasters. We haven’t done so well at this, yet. (NGO Representative)
There are too many NGOs…we wonder if there could be one-stop shopping, something like WorkAble which provided training, counseling, employees, all in one place. (Broadcaster)
Disability groups do seem very scattered, who do we talk to? It’s tough for one employee in my company to talk to 20 groups. (Broadcaster)
We don’t know where to start. Tell us where to start. (Broadcaster)

Issues of communication were also raised with respect to outreach with the education sector…

You need to step back, get into the schools and I mean elementary schools and get to them early. (Broadcaster)
Employers in the broadcasting industry need more willingness to actively promote opportunities to persons with disabilities, using career and placement centres in colleges and universities. (NGO Representative)

…and on the part of the production sector.

There is very little encouragement by the guilds (writing, directing)…there is no outreach and it tends to be extremely competitive. (Industry-related Organization)

Top

Stakeholder Forum – Participant Views about Participation in Television Programming

Participants at the Stakeholder Forum identified a number of issues concerning participation in television programming, most notably about employment in the broadcasting industry. Participants in particular emphasized:

A lack of communication and outreach between the disability community and the broadcasting industry;

Accommodation issues in general, e.g. employers overestimating the costs involved in accommodation;

The perceived inaccessibility of the broadcasting industry, e.g. a perception on the part of young people with disabilities that the industry is large, complex and difficult to gain entry into;

A lack of knowledge on the part of persons with disabilities about available jobs in the industry;

Attitudinal issues, such as a view that employees with disabilities are a burden, not an asset;

Difficulties encountered in entering and staying in the workforce by persons with “multiple barriers”, such as an accent and a disability; and

Reluctance or the “fear factor” among employees to disclose disabilities and among employers to sanction or fire.

Among the above issues, participants noted the lack of communication and outreach between the disability community and broadcasters as a predominant factor. Many participants pointed to the Stakeholder Forum itself as among the first opportunities these sectors have had to communicate with each other about the issues, and begin some discussion on ways to move forward.
A table summarizing Study findings on issues, barriers and opportunities respecting the presence, portrayal and participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming is presented on the following page.

Table 1 – Summary of Findings
on the Presence, Portrayal and Participation of Persons
with Disabilities in Television Programming

Category	Key Issues	Key Barriers	Comments	Opportunities
Presence	Very low on-screen presence Perceived to lag behind other designated groups	Negative social attitudes “Fear factor” Environmental factors Ind. production sector Education system	Recent progress perceived in some primetime drama with primary or secondary characters with disabilities. Small numbers make accurate portrayals imperative	There is a general belief that moving forward on inclusion of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming creates a number of opportunities: Attracting a market of persons with disabilities/families/ friends/caregivers Competitive edge by tapping into all creative resources Accommodation measures can benefit all employees Broadcasting industry is seen as a potential agent of change that can influence social attitudes.
Portrayal - Drama	Stereotyping Victimization Appropriation of Voice	Negative social attitudes carry into portrayal Ind. production/creators viewed as disability-unfriendly	Creation and/or portrayal of roles with disabilities by able-bodied seen by the disability community as a continuing problem.
Portrayal – News	Little coverage of issues Focus is on the disability Inappropriate language	Negative social attitudes Few role models Education system	Issues in news programming are seen as more critical than in dramatic programming.
Participation	Social attitudes carry into workplaces Access to buildings/facilities/studios Accommodation costs overestimated by employers Employees with disabilities viewed as burden Education and training are lacking; education system does little to promote careers in broadcasting Belief that communication/outreach is lacking.		Developing initiatives to build communication and outreach between broadcasters/ disability community is viewed as a key starting point by most Study participants.

Top

Part IV: Considerations for a Broadcaster Toolkit

Respondents in one-on-one consultations and participants at the Stakeholder Forum were asked for their perspectives on potential tools or initiatives that might be considered in the advancement of presence, portrayal and participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming.
As a general observation about the findings presented in this part of the Report, we note that all individuals, companies and organizations consulted for the Study agreed that tools or initiatives could be developed for any of the following reasons:

Diversity is good business, and advancing the inclusion of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming can capture untapped markets when considering the population of persons with disabilities in Canada plus caregivers approaching six million people – and is much larger when families and friends are included.

More inclusion of persons with disabilities in a broadcasting company’s workforce potentially provides a competitive edge by ensuring that all of society’s available creative resources are tapped.

Accommodations for employees with disabilities benefit all employees, whether automatic doors, ramps or other modifications for access.

As a designated group, persons with disabilities lags well behind women, visible minorities and Aboriginal Peoples; greater inclusion will work to “level the playing field”.

Television broadcasting can have a significant influence on public attitudes about persons with disabilities, through advances in their presence, portrayal and participation.

Respondents to the one-on-one consultations and participants at the Stakeholder Forum suggested a variety of tools and initiatives for consideration by broadcasters, along the following themes:

Communication and Outreach
Human Resource and Accommodation Initiatives by Broadcasters and/or Disability NGOs
Initiatives Targeting Education Sector Partnerships
Programming Initiatives by Broadcasters
Initiatives Targeting the Production Sector

With respect to Initiatives Targeting Education Sector Partnerships and Initiatives Targeting the Production Sector, only a few NGO Representatives addressed these, even though education and production practices were raised as significant barriers to inclusion of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming.
Many NGO Representatives indicated that with few resources and the need to drive other initiatives, focusing the attention of educators on broadcasting careers for students with disabilities might be a task best left to broadcasters.
As for the production sector, many NGO representatives indicated they did not feel well informed enough about what the production sector could or could not do to improve presence, portrayal and participation. Once again, NGO Representatives indicated a strong willingness to work with broadcasters on any initiatives addressing the production sector, but do not feel equipped to lead on this front.

Top

Considerations for Communication and Outreach

Given a prevailing sense that the disability community and broadcasters need to “get to know each other better”, the predominant suggestions for a broadcaster toolkit focused on “getting started”.

Organize an initial roundtable bringing the disability community and the broadcasting industry together for a discussion of issues and potential tools (with many Study participants agreeing that the Stakeholder Forum addressed this, but suggesting more needs to be done along this line with a wider range of broadcasters).

Focus on the development of outreach initiatives through partnerships between the disability community and broadcasters, at the local, regional and national levels, in order to develop Best Practices and drive greater inclusion of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming.

Establish committees comprised of community-based disability groups and local broadcasters, as a kind of advisory body/editorial board for increasing presence and monitoring portrayal of persons with disabilities in news programming.

Create a committee/delegation of disability NGOs to meet with CEOs and other senior executives in the broadcasting industry, in order to introduce and discuss issues and barriers at the highest possible levels of industry management.
Engage broadcasters in disability culture and issues by inviting participation in and/or coverage of disability events, such as Deaf Days, National Access Awareness Week and other opportunities.

Create a network of consumer-driven disability NGOs to assist broadcasters with advancing inclusion. Such a network would provide information, training, centralized job postings and other services of value to the industry and the disability community.

Top

Considerations for Human Resource and Accommodation Initiatives by Broadcasters and/or Disability NGOs

Introduce training seminars for employees of broadcasting companies, to raise awareness about disability issues and promote positive workplace relationships. Include “when to disclose a disability” information to capture employees with invisible disabilities.

Conduct training seminars for employees with disabilities to assist with their orientation and integration into the workplace.

Develop guidelines and industry standards on presence, portrayal and participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming, for both broadcasters and the independent production community. Ensure the participation of the disability community in developing standards.

Create a central hub or clearinghouse that would identify subject matter experts and other resources; the Canadian Association of Broadcasters could potentially do this, but a network of consumer-driven disability NGOs may be a more viable host.

Partner with broadcasters or ensure participation of disability NGOs in job and career fairs.

Create bursaries for students with disabilities to assist with broadcast media studies.

Use workplace accommodation professionals or NGO-based expertise to assist broadcasters with accommodation planning and implementation.

Include accommodation as a line item when broadcasters undertake their annual budget planning process. Seek assistance from NGOs about estimating costs of accommodation going forward.

Create an “accommodation fund” through the Canadian Association of Broadcasters (i.e. a fund of contributions from all broadcasters which is then distributed by the CAB to members requiring assistance to fund accommodation measures in their workplaces).

Hire persons with disabilities from local or national groups to provide consulting services on a range of inclusion issues.

Place a list of consumer-driven disability NGOs (i.e. those run by and for persons with disabilities, as opposed to service organizations) on the CAB website as an information resource for broadcasters.

Top

Considerations for Initiatives Targeting Education Sector Partnerships

Focus on improving the role and contribution of the education sector in identifying broadcasting as a potential career path for students with disabilities. Activities could include providing broadcasting employees with disabilities to speak with students, teachers, staff and/or administrations.

Develop and use internships, mentorships, co-op placements and other means to direct students with disabilities to potential careers in the broadcasting industry.

Develop broadcaster scholarships for persons with disabilities in order to make broadcasting training and experience more accessible.

Top

Considerations for Initiatives Targeting the Production Sector

Scriptwriters should work with persons with disabilities to ensure correct portrayal. The production community in general should take steps to consult with persons with disabilities and disability NGOs.

Develop measures to target performers with disabilities, including training opportunities, casting calls and other initiatives to increase the pool of talent.

Top

Considerations for Programming Initiatives by Broadcasters

In collaboration with disability groups, develop Public Service Announcements to promote the value and importance of persons with disabilities in Canadian society as a means of influencing negative public attitudes about disability issues.

Develop a cable-style local program that would be produced and presented by persons with disabilities, to increase presence and create a grassroots media training opportunity for persons with disabilities at the local level.

Top

Additional Strategies Identified by Stakeholder Forum Participants

Advance anti-ableism education (i.e. education and training that target negative and discriminatory behaviour directed at persons with disabilities, in much the same manner as anti-racism education).

Increase the number of persons with disabilities on screen, using this as a catalyst for broader change.

Create a Canadian version of the U.S.-based Media Access Office.⁶

Introduce a strategy to address broader attitudinal change and measure progress.

Adapt selected Best Practices from the international level to avoid re-inventing the wheel.

Stakeholder Forum participants further noted that broadcasters are part of one, larger, connected industry. Full engagement of all partners within that infrastructure, including the independent production sector, is required in order to advance inclusion and effect change.

Top

Bibliography

Canadian Association of Broadcasters (CAB)
2004	CAB Action Plan to Examine Issues Concerning the Presence, Portrayal and Participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming Submission to the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, August 2004 www.cab-acr.ca

Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC)
2004	Public Notice 2004-4 Introduction to Broadcasting Decisions 2004-6 to 2004-27 renewing the licences of 22 specialty services www.crtc.gc.ca

Office of Disability Issues – Social Development Canada
2001	Participation and Activity Limitation Survey www.sdc.gc.ca
2004	Advancing the Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities www.sdc.gc.ca/en/gateways/nav/top_nav/program/odi.shtml

Task Force for Cultural Diversity on Television
2004	Reflecting Canadians: Best Practices for Cultural Diversity in Private Television Final Report www.cab-acr.ca

Top

Appendix A: International and Canadian Best Practices

As part of the qualitative research process, we reviewed Best Practices with a primary focus on broadcaster industry activities with communities of persons with disabilities in the United Kingdom and the United States, and industry-related activities in Canada.

Initiatives in The United Kingdom

1) Broadcasting and Creative Industries Disability Network (BCIDN)

Brings together the UK’s major broadcasters and others in the creative industries to explore and address disability as it relates to the media industry.

Started under the Employers’ Forum on Disability – all BCIDN members are Forum members (see below for a description of the Forum)

Enables members to recruit and retain persons with disabilities and to promote and share best practices.

Membership

BBC, BSkyB, Channel 4, COI, Discovery Networks Europe, Five, the UK Film Council, ITV (merged Carlton and Granada), PACT, Skillset and Turner Broadcasting System.

Associates included a small group of persons with disabilities with considerable media experience to help BCIDN Network better understand disability and the industry.

Manifesto 2002
In May 2002 the member organizations of the BCIDN committed to:

Increase the presence of persons with disabilities on air and on screen
Increase the number of persons with disabilities in all areas of the workforce
Increase access to services on and off air
Ensure access to all buildings
Produce and make public a Board-endorsed Action Plan, which details how these Key Commitments will be implemented.

Based on Manifesto 2002, member companies undertake the following activities and initiatives regarding presence, portrayal and participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming:

Top

BBC

BBC is the acknowledged industry leader in disability-related initiatives in the U.K.

Increase Presence and Improve Portrayal

Develop and deliver training for journalists, program creators and commissioners to increase presence of persons with disabilities on-air and to ensure that portrayal of disability is non-stereotypical.

Providing training for 600 Broadcast Journalists across the U.K.; taking steps to integrate training for journalist internally and within professional journalism schools.

BBC Sport Appointed a Disability Sports Coordinator, launched a new section at its website, continues to broadcast and develop new program and talent covering disability sport.

Regional programming covering disability issues and presenters with disabilities.

Encouraging producers to include persons with disabilities through a range of activities, including the Diversity Database (includes 1000+ potential contributors with disabilities).

Advising program creators on disability awareness and education through the BBC Diversity Centre, and through such initiatives as The Production Handbook – A guide for programme makers to the Disability Discrimination Act Part 3;

Monitors the presence of disability on-screen annually.

Increase Participation

Includes accommodation costs as a budget line item.

Reviews recruitment practices to ensure accessibility of job opportunities for persons with disabilities.

Undertakes annual disability audits.

Provides disability-related training to HR personnel and managers.

“Extend” offers approximately 40 work placement opportunities for persons with disabilities across the BBC annually.

Developed the position of Access Technology Strategist, to ensure employees with disabilities have access to appropriate technology in their jobs, including procurement of computer software, providing helpdesk support, and adapting existing technology.

Extending the disability production trainee program to offer five placements annually.

Established central support systems for all disabled staff. Established a Disability Computer Group, a pan-BBC Access Unit and appointed a Disability Employment Advisor.

Other BBC Initiatives

OUCH! A website operated by persons with disabilities for persons with disabilities, supported by BBC.

The BBC and Disability, a booklet that outlines measures to address the portrayal of persons with disabilities in BBC programming, develop new talent, and explain the activities of Extend, the BBC Access Unit and the Access Technology Strategist.

BBC/Channel 4 partnership to provide Talent Bursaries for over 20 actors with disabilities to develop their talent and to learn the craft of acting for television. Bursaries will be offered to over 20 actors.

The Disability Writersroom, a weeklong residential workshop for writers with disabilities, selected through a competition.

BBC Programming Targets

At least one regular disabled character with a disability in a returning drama series on BBC One; of every 100 background performers, two with performers with disabilities across all BBC One drama programming.

Three factual and leisure shows on BBC One and BBC Two are to feature at least one contributor with a disability per series.

Three game shows on BBC One and BBC Two are to feature a minimum of one contestant with a disability out of every 50 on each series.

BBC Three to broadcast one drama or entertainment series that features a recurring character with a disability.

BBC Research Report: “Disabling Prejudice: Attitudes Towards Disability and Portrayal on Television” (2003)

Undertaken with the Broadcasting Standards Commission and the Independent Television Commission; key findings included:
- Accurate portrayals are a key concern for viewers with disabilities
- Role models for young people with disabilities are key
- The industry recognizes that disability, as a political concern, is not yet as advanced as issues of ethnicity or gender equality; senior management must lead change
Many broadcasting professionals recognize the creative potential of persons with disabilities.

Report recommended the following focus:

Raising awareness and facilitating better relationships between the media and disability advocacy groups

Develop measures to address the talent pool of performers with disabilities

Encourage higher rates of employment of persons with disabilities in the industry

Training and education.
Top

British Sky Broadcasting (BskyB)

Increase Presence

Ensure all Producers are made aware of the details contained within “Adjusting the Picture” (A BCIDN/ITC publication – A producers guide to disability), and working work with the BCIDN and its associates to brief producers and those commissioning programmes.

Promote the use of disabled actors, presenters, experts etc and will support the BCIDN in identifying effective methods of measuring on screen disabled presence.

Represent persons with disabilities and disability issues in a supportive and responsible manner.

Develop a dedicated Sky Disability Service Team that offers a one-stop shop for disabled people.

Increase Participation

Creating a shared recruitment service that works to meet the recruitment needs of all hiring managers while providing a framework for selection and assessment.

Provides coaching and guidance to managers on every aspect of recruitment, including how and where to advertise.

Invites recruitment agencies to present their approach to disability and revised the selection criteria to include disability as part of the selection process for preferred suppliers.

Upgrading HR processes and Systems capability to allow improved monitoring of disabled persons.

Developing and implementing a Recruitment and Selection, requiring participation by all recruiting managers; focus is on practical assessment training and fair and equitable selection processes.

Provides three work experience placements to young people with disabilities

Top

Carlton Television

Increase Participation

Developed and currently funds an Entry Point bursary for two 6-month traineeships for persons with disabilities in Regional Programmed Production.

Sponsors the registration of 20 production personnel with disabilities on Productionbase.co.uk, a website directory for employers.

Reviews recruitment procedures to ensure optimum reach and accessibility for all applicants with disabilities, e.g. increase font size on application forms, create alternate formats for application packages, inquire about any accommodations needed for attending an interview.

Awareness

Integrating disability awareness training into core training modules for line managers through “Appreciating Difference” workshops.

Established disability as a regular item at production meetings to raise and maintain awareness among program decision-makers.

Includes regular reporting on portrayal and employment on agenda of production teams.

Promotes a positive and consistent message on disability internally and externally, including an awareness campaign (“Changing Attitudes”)

Commitment

Monitors disability portrayal across regional and network programming for regular reporting to the Boards of Broadcasting and Production Divisions

Top

Channel 4

Channel 4 pursues a number of Best Practices relating to presence, recruitment and training – with much of this activity managed by a full time Disability Advisor.

Increase Presence

Disability Advisor surveys disability inclusion in mainstream programming for the annual ITC report; works with commissioning editors and producers to achieve greater inclusion of persons with disabilities across all programming (including contributors, contestants, experts, presenters, actors, audience and interview subjects)

Disability Advisor compiles clips providing examples of good practice, and forwards with a letter encouraging 25 producers to follow these examples; also provided to commissioning editors.

“Four All” disability database website provides guidelines for Producers including advice on working with persons with disabilities, how to meet access needs, and how to hire sign language interpreters.

Increase Participation

All job advertisements are issued to the widest possible audience.

Plans industry recruitment events with disability advisors from other broadcasters.

Hosts a Media Information Day to encourage Deaf or Deafened to view broadcasting as a potential career choice.

Investigating feasibility and costs of having links from key disability web sites to Channel 4 Careers website.

Makes relevant advertising available to “jobability.com” (website for persons with disabilities)

Provides specialist trainers or use NGOs to meet training needs of employees with learning disabilities.

Holds Deaf Awareness and Disability Awareness sessions

Training in Program Production

Funds training of persons with disabilities in program production.

Sponsors ten actors with disabilities on a pilot Bursary Access Scheme at the Actors Centre in London.

These actors are provided with 12 months free membership at the Centre plus a fund to cover classes of their choice.

At the end of this period, each creates a DVD of performances and attends a networking event with drama producers and casting agents.

Top

Channel 5

Increase Presence

Simple monitoring form created for post-production record keeping, and circulated all major production companies (i.e. collection of data for tracking on-screen presence and production)

Encourages producers to include persons with disabilities in the full range of program genres, e.g. in studio audiences, interview subjects and experts.

Supports the web-site productionbase.co.uk

Circulate the BCIDN/ITC Producer’s Guide “Adjusting the Picture” to all Channel 5 program makers.

Increase Participation

Launched a graduate-level broadcast management trainee scheme for a young person with a disability.

Reviews recruitment practices to ensure that job opportunities are advertised in publications for persons with disabilities.

Assesses the level of employees with disabilities on an annual basis.

Runs a disability workshop for staff involved in interviewing and selection and plans to run refresher sessions on a yearly basis.

Consults with employees with disabilities about company policies and practices including accommodation practices.

Top

Discovery NetworksEurope

Encourages persons with disabilities to apply for advertised positions.

Facilitates disability diversity training to all manager-level staff

Interviews all candidates with disability who meet minimum criteria

Operates an internal “help-line”.

Promotes disability issues through Disclosure and through Newswire (global daily electronic bulletin)

Introduced a “Flexible Working Policy” to accommodate commitments outside the office.

Top

U.K.Film Council

Appointed “Access Matters” as Disability Advisor to work with the U.K. Film Council’s Board, staff and industry partners to raise awareness of disability issues and provide expert advice.

Disability Advisor producing a comprehensive Diversity Strategy involving consultation with persons with disabilities and a timed implementation plan.

Commissioned and completed an Accessibility Audit, a Policy and Procedures Audit, and a Website Audit, to “equality-proof” operations and address barriers.

Raises awareness of disability issues in the whole industry through advocacy and influence; published a research report entitled Cinema Access Technologies for People with Sensory Impairments, including recommendations to improve access to cinemas for persons with disabilities.

Shares information and collaborate with partners including members of the BDN on research regarding disability.

Ensures that all funding criteria take account of disability issues and make awareness and consideration of these issues a condition of all funding.

Undertakes further research on possible broadcast assistive devices for audience members with sensory disabilities.

Includes accommodation costs as a budget line item.

Provided Disability Awareness Training for U.K. Film Council members and staff.

Top

Granada Media plc (the Group)

Granada works primarily with the Deaf community in the U.K.

Increase Presence

Extending existing monitoring of on screen ethnic participation to disability.

Encourages producers working across all genres to include persons with disabilities in their programming by offering awareness training and ensuring access to “Adjusting the Picture”.

Contributes towards an industry-wide database of performers/talent with disabilities.

Increase Participation

Hired new Head of Resourcing to review all recruitment practices

Designed a jobsite to ensure job opportunities reach a more diverse audience

Audited all recruitment suppliers to ensure they demonstrate good practice on disability.

Reviewed and re-designed the Recruitment and Selection training to include a specific section on disability.

Training

Trained seven Deaf people as on-screen BSL (British Sign Language) interpreters.

Training 12 Deaf people in new media skills.

Training two Deaf technical operators; funding one Deaf staff through a two-year MA in Human Resource Management to move Deaf employees into senior management positions.

Disability awareness training to Managers and Staff.

Deaf awareness training for hearing staff and hearing awareness training for deaf staff.

Trains “front of house” staff in dealing with members of the public with disabilities visiting facilities.

Offers training schemes and work placement opportunities for disabled people.

Offers courses for Audience Stewards including specific training on emergency procedures for those with a disability

Launched a Disability Distance Learning exercise for 36 Managers and staff who have customer facing roles or recruitment responsibility.

Partnerships

Continuing to build relationships with schools and colleges with local Deaf programs

Continuing relationship with Disability Service Access to Work Scheme providing government funding to support employees with disabilities

Access

Ensures that initiatives to create programming with both Deaf and hearing presenters and a Deaf interpreter are followed up.

Continuing to develop Signpost as a centre of excellence in its provision of service for the Deaf and hard of hearing.

Continuing to monitor and account for all input from disability groups.

Top

PACT

Increasing Presence

Engaging writers to create characters with disabilities in films, television drama series and serials, and entertainment programs as integral part of the story.

Measures to ensure the integrated casting of actors with disabilities in roles for characters with disabilities and able-bodied roles.

Measures to include persons with disabilities in studio audiences: space for wheelchair users, induction loops, interpreters, access for guide dogs.

Increasing Participation

Recruiting persons with disabilities in production and technical roles.

Providing work experience placements and training opportunities to trainees with disabilities.

Contributing to the Disability Database in the recruitment of persons with disabilities.

Top

Turner Broadcasting System Europe

Training front-line staff in Disability Awareness.

Incorporating disability into Recruitment and Selection training course.

Creating two paid work placements for employees with disabilities in Network Operations Department.

Creating a work shadow placement in News Division.

Increasing advertising in disability-focused publications and newspapers to try to attract more disabled applicants.

Top

2) Broadcasting and Creative Industries Disability Network (BCIDN) Publications:

Disabled Talent An e-leaflet that is designed to advise producers and directors about the various sources of disabled talent, and to guide persons with disabilities about how to make their skills and availability better known.

Handbook on Disability – A Practical Guide for Producers

Produced by BCIDN to help producers better cater for disabled people as program contributors and as members of studio audiences. Addresses issues that producers need to consider especially for people with visual or hearing impairments, or with mobility impairments.

Moving into the Spotlight

A short guide for casting directors, issued to U.K. Casting Directors.

Make a Difference – Ideas for including disabled people in broadcasting and film

A guide (published jointly by BCIDN and ITV) to highlight practical and realistic ways in which commissioners and program makers can work with persons with disabilities as colleagues, contributors and as members of the audience.

Adjusting the Picture – A Producer’s Guide to Disability

The most referenced guide, widely distributed and intended for program makers in all genres, including news, drama, light entertainment, children’s, public affairs and sports. (Jointly published by BCIDN and ITV.)

Four All

Website providing guidance for producers on finding and working with “disabled contributors”, including actors. Includes background on searching for disabled talent; financial support available through government; and legal issues.

Top

The Employer’s Forum on Disability

Funded and managed by employers, focuses on disability in the workplace. The Forum has over 375 members, or companies/organizations employing 20% of the UK workforce.

Works to maximize the business advantages of best practices on disability

Provides access to specialist help on the Disability Discrimination Act and related legislation

Provides regular bulletins on disability issues, simplifies access to agencies and services for members.

Provides members with opportunities for networking/sharing Best Practices, regular events and conferences, and publications.

Top

Other Initiatives of the Employers’ Forum:

Business in the Community (BITC) Awards for Excellence 2004

British Sky Broadcasting’s (BskyB) was presented with the Realizing Ability Award for its work in promoting understanding of disability issues and providing dedicated services for persons with disabilities.

The Knowledge – Disability Solutions for Employers

A “best-practice” reference kit highlighting the tools needed for an inclusive approach to employees with disabilities, and the benefits of taking an inclusive approach.

Disability Confident

A comprehensive interactive training package on disability for business developed by the Employers’ Forum on Disabilities and Skill Boosters. It is an interactive multi-media e-learning resource to help managers and staff to become “disability confident”.

Online Briefings

Provides online briefings on disability for leading business advisors. These briefings examine the disability dimension in key areas such as employment, labour standards, human rights, customer relations and the digital divide.

The Disability Standard

A tool that enables organizations to assess their performance on disability as it affects risk management, customer care, employment, occupational health, premises and the built environment, IT systems, accessibility of goods and services and the impact of government policy. As many as 78 organizations have participated in the Disability Standard.

Top

Initiatives in the United States

1) The California Governor’s Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities

The Governor’s Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities (GCEPD) works to eliminate the barriers that preclude equal consideration for employment opportunities for people with disabilities.

Committee members are volunteers comprised of decision makers and leaders from the private and public sectors with expertise in supporting and building systems that promote universal access, remove barriers to work and enable people with disabilities to gain independence and economic self-sufficiency.

Major projects/awards include:
- Annual Employer (Best Practices) Awards
- California Business Leadership Network (CABLN)
- Disability Awareness Education
- Annual College Scholarships
- Affiliated Mayor’s Committees

Provides quarterly business conferences where employers and professionals in the field of disability employment can network to increase employers’ understanding of working with disabled employees.

Offers “Windmills”, a disability awareness training program together with other educational and informational resources to help dispel myths and stereotypes that hinder full inclusion of people with disabilities and can assist employers with all aspects of hiring and retaining employees with disabilities.

Top

GCEPD Media Access Office

Objective: actively promote the employment and accurate portrayal of persons with disabilities in all areas of the media and entertainment industry, ensuring that the industry recognizes people with disabilities as part of cultural diversity. Established in 1980.

Funded by the State of California, and by a range of fund raising activities.

Media Access Office services and programs include:

Casting Division: liaison for casting directors looking for actors with disabilities. Talent files include actors with visible and non-visible disabilities, union and non-union members and performers with and without agent representation.

Talent Development: including individual career development, reviewing and setting career goals and objectives, industry referrals, acting workshops, “business of the business” classes and low cost head shot sessions, resume clinics, and young performer + parent seminars.

Talent Agent Support: educating talent agents on how best to represent their clients with disabilities. Will advise on a young performer’s individual education program, focusing on vocational skills in the dramatic arts.

Project Development and Production Information: to answer questions relating to disability issues, current trends and political correctness, period piece information, questions pertaining to the Americans with Disabilities Act, and referrals to related organizations, products and services.

Community Education: provides speakers to address industry groups and the disability community.

“Media Access Awards – Celebrating Disability in the Entertainment Industry”
- Recognition for media professionals, films, television shows, commercials, and other products in the media and entertainment industry for their accurate portrayal of people with disabilities.
- Recognition is also given for employers employing and casting people with disabilities in the industry.
Seven different awards, including:
- Governor’s Award of Excellence, to an individual or organization in the media industry for promoting the awareness and dignity for people with disabilities.
- Screen Actors Guild – Harold Russell Award, to a SAG member with a disability who has made a significant contribution to public awareness and understanding of people with disabilities through the media.
- Casting Society of America Award, to a member who consistently casts roles based on ability, not disability.
- Producers Guild Award, to a member dedicated to elimination of stereotypes and the integration of accurate portrayals and employment of persons with disabilities in the industry.

Scholarships include:

Christopher Reeve Acting Scholarship
Young Performers Acting Scholarship
Norman G. Brooks Comedy Scholarship
Ricardo Montalban/Nosotros Acting Scholarship
KSA/Day Acting Scholarship

Top

2) Tax Credits – State of California

The State of California provides tax credits and deductions for employers including:
- Work Opportunity Tax Credit – available to employers who hire individuals from certain target groups including persons with disabilities.
- Disabled Access Credit – Helps small businesses cover the cost of making their businesses accessible.
- Architectural Transportation Tax Deduction – Businesses may deduct up to $15,000 for expenses incurred to remove physical, structural or transportation barriers.

Top

3) California Business Leadership Network (CABLN)

Extension of the nation-wide Business Leadership Network (USBLN) established in1994 by the former President’s Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities; dedicated to more effectively employing persons with disabilities.

Led by “Lead Companies” in their communities, the CABLN is an employer- to-employer network of small, medium and large companies that enables employers to share best practices, work collaboratively on common issues and effectively utilize community-based resources.

Develops partnerships to support Best Practice initiatives in recruiting, accommodating and retaining employees with disabilities; develop awareness training packages and seminars for companies.

Top

4) Non-traditional Casting Project

Established in 1986 to address and seek solutions to the problems of racism and exclusion in film, television and theatre; now serves as an expert advocate and educational resource for full inclusion in theatre, film, television and related media.

Current focus is to increase the participation of artists of colour and artists with disabilities in the industry: advocacy toward more inclusive standards and practices; consciousness raising and education, and specific programs through which producers, directors and casting directors can implement inclusion

Initiatives include:
- National Diversity Forum (online discussion forum)
- Artist Files/Online (talent bank)
- “Listening with an Open Eye” resource guide those employing actors with disabilities, focusing on Deaf actors
- Consulting and Information Programs
- Two national conferences on non-traditional casting and cultural diversity; nine regional conferences; 170 forums, panels and seminars with professional, community and educational institutions

Top

5) CBS

CBS Diversity 2005-06 Talent Showcases

In association with AFTRA, SAG and the California State Media Access Office, CBS sponsored its first talent showcase for performers with disabilities in Los Angeles.

CBS Entertainment development executives and casting directors from the Network’s primetime and daytime programs participated, as well as casting directors from production companies that work with CBS. (A showcase participant immediately landed a recurring role CSI: NY.)

CBS Diversity Events

Partnered with Non-Traditional Casting Project to host a two-part workshop with industry executives at CBS Headquarters in New York. The workshops provided television casting directors with important background and information on specific disabilities and on working with performers with disabilities.

Top

6) SAG/AFTRA

AFTRA partners with network television casting offices to produce showcases featuring promising actors with disabilities, as part of a continuing inclusion initiative.

Forum on Assistive Technology available to Increase Jobs for Performers with Disabilities, focus on new technologies can be used to increase employment opportunities for actors, writers and broadcasters with disabilities.

Top

Initiatives in Canada⁷

1)Alliance of Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA)

All collective bargaining agreements include affirmative action measures supporting performers with disabilities.

Producers need to liaise with and inform ACTRA if they wish to cast an able-bodied person in a role with a disability

Has re-launched “Mainstream Now”, showcasing actors with disabilities

ACTRA.ca “Face to Face” search engine enables talent searches for performers with disabilities

Top

2) ACTRA Toronto

ACTRA Toronto’s National Diversity Committee has set up a Task Force on Accessibility to encourage more work opportunities for performers with disabilities

3) Famous Players Theatres

Developed a Public Service Announcement (PSA) in partnership with Canadian Paraplegic Association promoting positive attitudes towards persons with disabilities, to be shown on all screens across Canada .

Top

4) Greater Vancouver Business Leadership Network

Employer-driven coalition of business, government, community organizations; designed to improve employment opportunities benefiting business and persons with disabilities

Members include Canadian Broadcasters

Focus on development of awareness training, seminars, recruitment and retention information and packages

Top

Appendix B: Individuals/Organizations Consulted

Disability Non-government Organizations Faye Joudrey
Abilities Foundation of Nova Scotia
Rob Sleath
Advocates for Sight Impaired Canadians
Larry Pempeit
Alberta Paraplegic Association
John Rae, Kim Kilpatrick, Judy Smith
Alliance for Equality of Blind Canadians
Teresa Penafiel
Association multi-éthnique pour l’integration des personnes handicapées
Serge Brassard
Association québecoise des étudiants ayant des incapacités au postsecondaire
Stephanie Cadieux
B.C. Paraplegic Association
Jihan Abbas
Canadian Association of Independent Living Centres
Evelyne Gounetenzi
Canadian Association of the Deaf
Harold Schnellert
Canadian Council of the Blind
Susan Main
Canadian Hearing Society
Jim Sanders
Canadian National Institute for the Blind
Valerie Ravary
Canadian Paraplegic Association
Mary Ennis
Coalition of Persons with Disabilities ( Newfoundland and Labrador)
Chloe Serradori
Conféderation des personnes handicapées du Québec
Laurie Beachell
Council of Canadians with Disabilities
Diane Sullivan
Learning Disabilities Association of Canada
Frank Smith
National Educational Association of Disabled Students
Constance McNight
National Network on Mental Health
Noel Browne, Nick Nash, Lannie Woodbine
Newfoundland and Labrador Paraplegic Association
Barry Schmidl
PEI Council of the Disabled
Shelley Rattai, Paul Young
People First of Canada
Véronique Vézina
Regroupement des aveugles et ambylopes du Québec

Broadcasters

Kim Carter
Alliance Atlantis
Jean-Pierre Laurendeau
Astral Media Inc.
Dawn Fell
Bell Globemedia Inc.
Sarah Crawford, Mary Kramolc
CHUM Limited
Ruth Schrier, Joanna Webb, Stephanie Byrne
CORUS
Barb Williams, David McCauley
Global Television Network
Ben-Marc Diendere
Québecor Media Inc.
Robert Parent
Radio Nord Communications Inc.
Madeline Ziniak
Rogers Television (Omni)
Bernard Guerin
TQS Inc.
Mark Prasuhn
Vision TV

Industry-related Organizations

Stephen Waddell
Alliance of Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA)
Claire Samson
APFTQ
Guy Mayson
Canadian Film and Television Producers Association
Lise Lachapelle
L’Association des réalisateurs et réalisatrices due Québec
Terry Scott
Radio and Television News Directors Association
Anne-Marie Desroches
Union des Artistes
Barb Farwell
Writers Guild of Canada

Employees/Performers

Leesa Levinson, ACTRA Toronto
David Onley, Citytv

Government

Lindsay Glassco, Amanda Scott
Social Development Canada, Office for Disability Issues

Top

Appendix C: Summary Report of the Stakeholder Forum

CAB Stakeholder Forum on The Presence, Portrayal and Participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming

July 15, 2005 – Marriott Eaton Centre, Toronto

Introduction

CONNECTUS Consulting Inc. (CONNECTUS) is pleased to present the Canadian Association of Broadcasters (CAB) with our Summary Report on the Stakeholder Forum held Friday, July 15, 2005 in Toronto.
The Stakeholder Forum is one of three core components comprising a qualitative research study on The Presence, Portrayal and Participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming. The other components are (i) a review of international and national Best Practices in the realm of broadcasting and persons with disabilities and (ii) consultations through detailed interviews with over 40 disability NGOs, broadcasting companies and related organizations.
We proposed the Stakeholder Forum as a day-long exchange of ideas and perspectives among representatives from the disability community, broadcasters and other organizations, such as related industry groups. We view the Forum as a strong alternative to holding separate focus groups across the country, and as an event that would centre on ideas about tools and initiatives for broadcasters in an inclusive, facilitated environment of discussion.
Our Report is organized as follows:

Objectives of the Stakeholder Forum
Perspectives on Opportunities
Perspectives on Issues and Barriers
Perspectives on Tools and Initiatives
Other Ideas Raised
Impact on the Research Study

Individual representatives from twenty organizations and companies took part in the table discussion, while an additional 16 people from the disability community, broadcasting companies and government attended as observers. A list of Forum participants and observers is attached to this Report.

Top

Objectives of the Stakeholder Forum

With input from the CAB Steering Committee and Outreach Committee⁸, the objectives of the Forum were identified as follows:

Test preliminary research findings, as derived from Best Practices research and consultations to date;
Solicit ideas for Broadcaster Toolkit; and
Increase dialogue between various stakeholder groups.

With additional input from the CAB Committees, the Desired Outcomes of the Forum were identified as:

Prioritization of issues, barriers, opportunities;
Recommendations for addressing/resolving issues, opportunities, barriers; and
Suggestions for measures of success.

Sarah Crawford, Chair of the CAB Steering Committee, chaired the Forum. Preliminary research findings were presented by Richard Cavanagh, Project Lead and Nancy Steele, Project Associate for CONNECTUS. Lil Krstic, Senior Consultant to the project and a Partner with CONNECTUS, facilitated the Forum.

Top

Perspectives on Opportunities

During the presentation on preliminary research findings, opportunities that potentially arise from greater inclusiveness of persons with disabilities within broadcasting were identified and discussed. These included:

Increasing audiences: attracting a market of persons with disabilities and their friends and families
Competitive edge achieved by tapping into creative potential of all diversity groups
Accommodations that benefit all employees (e.g. automatic doors)
Changing attitudes: the broadcasting industry is viewed as embodying attitudinal barriers, but is seen as a potential agent of change that can shape social attitudes.

Further discussion on opportunities did not take place during the course of the Forum.

Top

Perspectives on Issues and Barriers

Following presentations on preliminary research findings, Forum participants discussed and then prioritized key issues and barriers respecting presence, portrayal and participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming.
Four tiers of priority issues and barriers emerged from this exercise, and are arranged below by the order in which they were emphasized or focused upon by participants.

Top Tier

Appropriation of Voice
Appropriation of voice refers to (i) the performance of characters with disabilities by non-disabled performers and (ii) the creation of roles for characters with disabilities by non-disabled writers.
Participants pointed to the particular importance of role creation by non-disabled writers, where disability culture and the reality of living with a disability are viewed as inaccurately portrayed.

Second Tier

Sensitivity issues in news programming, including use of inappropriate language and lack of understanding about disability issues
Near-complete absence of persons with disabilities on-screen (total for all programming genres)
Lack of support from education sector for on-screen professions
Myths carry into portrayals, i.e. widely held misinformation about persons with disabilities are reproduced through characterizations and/or storylines
Lack of support from education sector for on-screen professions
Myths carry into portrayals, i.e. widely held misinformation about persons with disabilities are reproduced through characterizations and/or storylines
Lack of employees with disabilities in newsrooms
Few on-screen role models (in dramatic programming) influences a lack of interest in performing at an early age

Participants were inclined to view a lack of on-screen presence and subsequent lack of role models as important issues. Related barriers were identified in a similar fashion, including a lack of initiative on the part of the education system, and the generalized attitudes and myths about persons with disabilities that find their way into on-screen characterization.

Third Tier

Stereotyping (in general)
Lack of outreach/communication between the disability community and the broadcasting industry
Accommodation issues (e.g. employers overestimating the costs involved in accommodation)
Inaccessibility of the broadcasting industry (e.g. a perception on the part of young people with disabilities that the industry is large, complex and difficult to gain entry into)

Fourth Tier

Lack of knowledge about available jobs
The view that employees would be a burden, not an asset
Multiple barriers (e.g. disability combined with accent)
Beauty/Image (i.e. the perception that the physical appearance of persons with disabilities, and/or their use of assistive devices, reduce opportunities for on-screen presence)
Reluctance (among employees to disclose disabilities, among employers to sanction or fire)

Several issues were identified from consultations and presented to Forum participants, but did not receive any further discussion:

Resistance from the production sector or program creators to use of persons with disabilities in programming and a lack of research on part of production sector (see also a reference to this in our Comment below)
Lack of coverage of disability issues in news programming
Characteristics of broadcasting industry as a barrier to employment (see also the section of this Report on Other Ideas Raised below)
Older buildings owned/used by broadcasters presenting physical barriers
The myth that physical or emotional disability equates with an intellectual deficiency

Top

Comment

The evidence compiled at the Stakeholder Forum points to a very deep concern on the part of participants about portrayal issues, including appropriation of voice and stereotyping in dramatic programming, and sensitivity of language and depiction in news programming. This unequivocally supports the findings from the consultations process.
With respect to other portrayal issues, the single departure from evidence gathered through consultations concerns the role of beauty and image. While many respondents perceived a disadvantage to on-screen presence owing to physical appearance and/or use of assistive devices, this factor received far less emphasis among Forum participants and was actually viewed as irrelevant by several disability NGOs around the table.
A range of factors emerged with respect to participation in the industry, in a very similar fashion to the consultations. A number of issues and barriers were identified, including lack of role models, lack of support from the education sector, and accommodation-related concerns.
We also note a basic contradiction that emerged in the Forum discussions, with respect to the role of the production sector in the presence, portrayal and participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming. While “appropriation of voice” – especially in the creation of roles by writers – emerged as a critical issue, “resistance from the production sector” was not viewed as a fundamental issue or barrier.
Clearly, the creation of inaccurate roles/characters can be attributed at least in part to production sector activities or practices. The fact that participants did not make this link may be due to a lack of understanding about production sector operations in general.

Top

Perspectives on Tools and Initiatives

The second part of the Forum focused on discussion and prioritization of potential tools and initiatives that broadcasters might consider in advancing the inclusion of persons with disabilities in the industry. The session was open to any and all suggestions derived through brainstorming, with an understanding that subsequently the CAB Steering Committee would consult with the CAB Outreach Committee to determine the most viable initiatives for broadcasters.
Participants were divided into four breakout groups (three English-language and one French-language) to brainstorm and then report back. Based on emphasis and focus of discussion, four tiers of preferred tools/initiatives were identified from this exercise. Overall, perspectives on potential tools/initiatives were more widely spread across a number of proposals.

Top Tier

Develop guidelines and industry standards
Potential roles for the CAB: creation of a central hub or clearinghouse to identify resources/experts/create a Canadian equivalent to the Media Access Office⁹
Scriptwriters to work with persons with disabilities for correct portrayal
Ensure persons with disabilities are involved in the decision-making process through employment

Guidelines and industry standards were raised in most breakout groups as initiatives that could be developed through a cooperative effort by all stakeholders.

Second Tier

Get the advertising industry more involved in this research/process for greater inclusion in advertising
Find a way to better inform employers about the abilities of persons with disabilities

Third Tier

Measures targeting performers with disabilities, including training opportunities, casting calls and other initiatives to increase the talent pool
Use internships/mentorships
Measures to sensitize program creators/industry/public

Fourth Tier

Create series of on-air vignettes to be used for public education purposes
Broadcasters to refrain from working with educational institutions that have not maximized accommodation
CAB to create an “accommodation fund”, i.e. a centralized pool of resources from which broadcasters could draw for accommodation measures
Create accessible inventory of jobs
Place a list of consumer-driven disability NGOs (i.e. those run by and for persons with disabilities, as opposed to service organizations) on the CAB website

In addition to the above noted tools/initiatives, participants identified a number of potential strategies:

Advance anti-ableism education (this would be equivalent to anti-racism education, i.e. “ableism” is discriminatory behaviour toward persons with disabilities)
Increase number of persons with disabilities on screen, use as a catalyst for broader change
Strategy to address attitudinal change and measure progress
Adapt international Best Practices (don’t reinvent the wheel)

Top

Comment

The discussion of tools and initiatives at the Forum identified some differences with consultations to date. For example, the development of standards or guidelines has not been raised with any frequency during the course of consultations, but received the highest weighting at the Forum.
Conversely, while education-related initiatives have received significant attention in the consultations, Forum participants did not view roles for the education sector as priority initiatives.
In addition, while appropriation of voice was ranked as the number one issue, increasing the number of persons with disabilities on-screen was rated highly as a strategy or tool. This may be due to the assumption that a commitment to increasing presence is a necessary starting point.
There is general agreement throughout the course of the research – almost as a fundamental starting point – that the broadcasting industry can play a significant role in changing public attitudes about persons with disabilities.

Top

Other Ideas Raised/Observations Noted

The following provides a summary of ideas/perspectives that were raised in the course of the Forum, either in discussion around the table, reporting from breakout groups, or in offline conversations during the day:

Barriers for persons with disabilities are systemic, and discrimination is widespread. For example, editorial decisions in news gathering are guided by commercial principles. It may not be the journalist that is insensitive so much as it is the entire system that is insensitive.

The world of disabilities is extremely complex, and developing tools or initiatives in partnership with the disability community must be done carefully. One-stop shopping initiatives such as Strategic Employment Solutions may not be the best approach to developing and implementing “Best Practices”. A number of participants indicated that it is extremely difficult for any single organization to manage initiatives or programs across all disabilities. However, there was strong support for a Best Practices development strategy that would use a network of organizations.

Radio broadcasting should at some point be included in research on presence, portrayal and participation of persons with disabilities in the broadcasting industry.

Research on commercial advertising should also be carried out, and measures taken to advance presence, portrayal and participation of persons with disabilities.

A delegation of disability NGOs should make the industry more aware of their issues, in part through separate discussions with broadcasting industry CEOs and senior executives.

Broadcasters need to make use of consumer-driven disability NGOs (i.e. those organizations run by and for persons with disabilities) in the development and delivery of tools, programs or initiatives.

Although “characteristics of the broadcasting industry” – e.g. multi-location, high pressure, fast paced – was not weighted as an issue/barrier by participants, it was referenced in several offline discussions as potentially problematic for persons with disabilities and their ability to cope with certain industry jobs. This also supports a finding from the consultations.

Background performers with disabilities should be included with greater frequency in programming production.

There are disagreements within and between organizations, and between individual participants with respect to appropriation of voice, in terms of whether characters with disabilities should be portrayed solely by performers with disabilities. The range of individual perspectives included:
- Able-bodied performers should never portray characters with disabilities as they are fundamentally unable to accurately convey life with a disability;
- “Doctors do not play television doctors, police officers do not play television police officers”; therefore, characters with disabilities can be portrayed by any skilled actor;
- However, a man does not play a woman in a role, unless that’s what the role calls for.
- Finally, acting is a profession, and the best professionals should be assigned roles, whether those people have disabilities or not, for any role. At the same time, performers with disabilities should have the opportunity to play any role.

There is further disagreement within and between organizations and between individual participants on the correct terminology to apply in referencing persons with disabilities. One perspective argues that reference to a disability should be a secondary reference (e.g. “a Canadian who is Deaf”) while another perspective argues that referencing a disability should be front and centre in terminology (e.g. “a Deaf Canadian”).

Broadcasters are one part of a larger, connected industry; full engagement of all industry partners – especially the independent production sector – is needed to effect change.

Several measures of progress/success are in place now, including annual reporting by broadcasters to the CRTC on their diversity plans and activities. The CAB Outreach Committee will be taking recommendations about measures of progress under advisement as they continue to work on this project.

Comment on Measures of Success

"Suggestions for measures of success” was identified as a desired outcome of the Forum. However, there was a stated desire on the part of participants to spend more time discussing tools and initiatives. Therefore, the discussion on measures of success was delegated to the CAB Steering Committee that will seek advice and feedback from the Outreach Committee.

Top

Conclusion: Impact on the Study

The CAB Stakeholder Forum provided a wealth of information that will make a significant contribution to the Study as a whole. To a large extent, evidence from the Forum supports and validates evidence derived throughout the research process to date. In other instances, the Forum discussion will guide the drafting of the Research Report in terms of how we will emphasize certain findings or priority issues and barriers, and will expand the contents of a potential toolkit for broadcasters.
The Stakeholder Forum proved to be a valuable and important addition to the qualitative range of research undertaken for this Study. While certain groups such as production organizations, French-language disability NGOs and a small number of English-language NGOs declined or were unable to attend the Forum, those in attendance were unanimous in their praise of and satisfaction with the session.
Consequently, we believe the Stakeholder Forum surpassed its promise and purpose, and the CONNECTUS team would like to extend its thanks to Susan Wheeler of the CAB, members of the JSIC Steering Committee, members of the Outreach Committee and all those who took the time to participate in this important event.

Richard Cavanagh , Project Lead
Lil Krstic, Senior Consultant and Forum Facilitator

July 19, 2005

Top

CAB Stakeholder Forum on the Presence, Portrayal and Participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming

List of Participants and Observers

Participants – Disability Non-government Organizations

Jihan Abbas – Canadian Association of Independent Living Centres
Richard Lavigne – Confédération des organismes de personnes handicapées du Québec
Gary Malkowski – Canadian Hearing Society
Constance McNight – National Network for Mental Health
Teresa Penafiel – Association multiethnique pour l'intégration des personnes handicapées
John Rae – Council of Canadians with Disabilities
Rachael Ross – National Educational Association of Disabled Students
Jim Sanders – Canadian National Institute for the Blind
Rob Sleath – Advocates for Sight Impaired Consumers
Diane Sullivan –Learning Disabilities Association of Canada
Devon Wilkins – Alliance for Equality of Blind Canadians
Paul Young – People First of Canada

Participants – Broadcaster and Related Industry Representatives

Sarah Crawford – CHUM Limited and Chair, CAB Steering Cttee
Jean-Pierre Laurendeau – Canal D
Leesa Levinson – ACTRA
Don Peuramaki – Fireweed Media Productions
Terry Scott – RTNDA
Fiona Sterling – Bell Globemedia Inc.
Bonita Siegel – Corus Entertainment Inc.
Renato Zane – OMNI Television Inc.

Observers – Disability Non-government Organizations

Shelley Rattai – People First of Canada
Chloe Serradori – Confédération des personnes handicapées du Québec

Observers – Outreach Committee

Gavin Lumsden – Rogers Television
Janus Raudkivi – Journalist
Enza Ronaldi – Accessibility Advisory Council of Ontario
Patrick Tanguay – Canadian Space Agency

Observers – CAB Members

Kent Brown – APTN
Kim Carter – Alliance Atlantis
Melanie Farrell – OMNI
Mary Kramolc – CHUM Limited
Jon Medline – Global Television Network
Mark Prasuhn – VisionTV
Ruth Schreier – CORUS Entertainment Inc.

Observers – Other

Marie-Claude Mentor – CRTC
Martine Vallée – CRTC
Amanda Scott – Office for Disability Issues

Project Managers

Richard Cavanagh , CONNECTUS Consulting
Lil Krstic, CONNECTUS Consulting
Nancy Steele, CONNECTUS Consulting
Susan Wheeler , Canadian Association of Broadcasters

ASL Interpreters

Cindy Carey
Laura Henry
Leslie Roach

French Interpreters

Wendy Greene
André Moreau
Barbara Reynolds-Debruyne

Top

Appendix D: Other Issues Raised

Respondents in one-on-one consultations and participants in the Stakeholder Forum identified a number of issues about the presence, portrayal and participation of persons with disabilities that were beyond the scope of this research.

Assistive Technologies Used by Persons with Disabilities for Television Viewing

The research team received a number of comments about barriers to the participation of persons with sensory disabilities as consumers of television programming. These comments included:

A need for more programming with associated described video. This was identified by a number of Blind respondents as the number one issue for the Blind community.

A need for more sensitivity with respect to Blind viewers of news and information programming. Many Blind respondents identified the need for more voice-overs for financial data, weather information and sports scores/tickers.

A need for 100 percent closed captioning and Deaf respondents identified more accurate captioning as an important issue.

Deaf respondents also cited the general lack of simultaneous sign-language interpretation during newscasts as a something that broadcasters might consider addressing.

A number of participants identified the need for broadcasters and television receiver manufacturers to work closely together in the development of assistive devices.

Top

Advertising

While advertising content respecting the presence, portrayal and participation of persons with disabilities was beyond the scope of the study, a number of Study participants identified issues and concerns, including:

Poorly conceived or disparaging portrayals.

A lack of presence of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming commercials.

A need for more research on commercial advertising and persons with disabilities.

A need to engage regulatory agencies overseeing Canadian commercial advertising with the concerns of the disability community.

Radio

While the focus of this Study was on television, a number of Study participants expressed their interest in seeing the development of research and/or initiatives by commercial radio pertaining to inclusion of persons with disabilities in that industry. Among the comments received:

The type of work performed by commercial radio employees is ideal for persons with many types of disabilities, e.g. chase producers, voice-overs, writing, on-air talent and other types of jobs.

Radio studios – especially older ones – tend to be cramped in physical design, and require a certain amount of redesign to accommodate wheelchairs.

The CRTC

The CRTC, although recognized as a major supporter of diversity and a driving force in this research initiative, was criticized by a number of respondents for failing to include persons with disabilities in the original Public Notice on Cultural Diversity.

The CRTC was also criticized for a perceived lack of consultation with the disability community, especially with French-language disability NGOs.

The CRTC’s website was the focus of comments by two blind participants as difficult to navigate and not blind-friendly, raising questions as to whether the Commission’s website meets international standards for access.

Public Broadcasting

While the CBC was applauded for programming initiatives such as Moving On, a number of participants criticized the CBC/SRC for a perceived lack of persons with disabilities on-screen. Most participants identified cultural diversity on CBC as far stronger than the inclusion of persons with disabilities on-screen, and most of these were vocal about the obligation of the CBC as the “national public broadcaster” to do a much better job.

Top

The Research Team

Richard Cavanagh was Project Lead for the Study and authored the Final Report. He has extensive past experience in research and analysis in public/social policy, communications and media studies, and authored the 2004 Report of the Task Force for Cultural Diversity on Television.
Mr. Cavanagh holds an M.A. in Sociology from Queen’s University, and a PhD in Social Sciences from Carleton University.
Lil Krstic was Senior Consultant for the Study. Ms. Krstic is a widely recognized leader in strategic planning and executive facilitation, and was our team’s lead expert on disability issues. Ms. Krstic developed and facilitated the CAB Stakeholder Forum that formed a core part of the Study.
Ms. Krstic holds a B.Comm from the University of Alberta.
Nancy Steele was Associate Consultant for the Study. With extensive experience in disability issues and qualitative research, Ms. Steele conducted a number of consultations and led our event planning for the CAB Stakeholder Forum.
Ms. Steele holds a B.A. from Carleton University and a B.Ed. from McGill University.
CONNECTUS Consulting Inc.
5261 Driscoll Drive
Manotick , Ontario
K4M 1E9
Tel: (613) 692-8154
Fax: (613) 692-3705
connectus.richard@sympatico.ca
connectus.lil@sympatico.ca

¹ Adapted from Participation and Activity Limitation Survey, 2001; www.sdc.gc.ca provides the entire report. The survey is to be replicated and updated following the 2006 national census.
² The data in this section is adapted from “Advancing the Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities 2004 – Main Report”, available at http://www.sdc.gc.ca/en/gateways/nav/top_nav/program/odi.shtml.
³ From “Advancing the Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities 2004 – Main Report” as cited in Footnote 2, and from a consultation with the Office of Disability Issues, Social Development Canada.
⁴This section is based on (i) findings from the consultations undertaken for this Study, (ii) “Advancing the Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities 2004” as noted in Footnote 3, and (iii) the CAB Action Plan to Examine Issues Concerning the Presence, Portrayal and Participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming Programming (August 2004).
⁵As reported by Women in Film and Television in “Frame Work: Employment in Canadian Screen-based Media, A National Profile” (WIFT: 2004).
⁶ The Media Access Office is described in Appendix A on Best Practices. It is part of the California Governor’s Committee on Employment for Persons with Disabilities (Inc.) and is funded by the state’s Employment Development Department and by a not-for-profit “Friends of the Committee” corporation that engages in traditional types of fundraising activities.
⁷ Initiatives by Canadian broadcasters are included in their corporate diversity plans and reported in their annual returns to the CRTC.
⁸ The CAB Steering Committee is a Sub-committee of the Joint Societal Issues Committee, and is directing the Study on behalf of the CAB membership. The CAB Outreach Committee is an external group comprised of persons with disabilities, many of whom have direct experience in broadcasting and production. The Outreach Committee was formed prior to the Forum and will be reviewing subsequent Research Reports and providing feedback and advice to the CAB Steering Committee.
⁹ The Media Access Office is part of the California Governor's Committee on Employment for Persons with Disabilities (Inc.) and is funded by the state's Employment Development Department and by a not-for-profit "Friends of the Committee" corporation that engages in traditional types of fundraising activities.
http://www.cab-acr.ca/english/research/05/sub_sep1605_research.htm

--------------------

The worse discrimination of First Nations women was / is by First nations and Inuit Men.... always was...... always will be.... until they clean their own houses... Canadians cannot help..... check the immense level of abuse.... of women and girls.... it's heartbreaking...... and old ways take 4 ever 2 change..... LIKE SHANIA TWAIN USED 2 SAY.... THE GOVERNMENT TREATED US LIKE TRASH.... BUT OUR OWN MEN WERE THE ONES WHO ABUSED US.... and equality cannot and will not happen until First Nations women stand up and fight.....

‘All I wanted to do was work.’ Sexism cost Millbrook woman fishery jobs: ruling

FRANCIS CAMPBELL Truro Bureau
Published May 6, 2015 - 7:06am
Last Updated May 6, 2015 - 2:55pm

Stacey Marshall-Tabor sits with her children Lesha, 9, and Craig Jr., 12, at the family's kitchen table in Millbrook on Wednesday. (FRANCIS CAMPBELL / Truro Bureau)

MILLBROOK — A Millbrook First Nation woman has won her eight-year battle to prove discrimination denied her work in the band fishery.

“It’s sad that it came down to this after all these years because all I wanted was a job,” Stacey Marshall-Tabor, 43, said of the April 29 ruling by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.

“All I wanted to do was work, to feed my kids and give them a good life.”

But years of discrimination kept work and the good life out of reach for Marshall-Tabor. The tribunal found she was continually denied jobs on fishing boats and the men who were hired instead often lacked her experience and qualifications.

“I was humiliated, my spirit was broken,” Marshall-Tabor said. “I was disgusted with how I was treated. I was in disbelief that this was happening in our day and age.”

Marshall-Tabor had completed a Master Limited captain’s training course and went to work for the band in 2000 as a lobster boat deckhand, according to the ruling.

In 2007, she said she was hired to work as a deckhand on a lobster boat captained by her husband, Craig Tabor.

Marshall-Tabor said there were complaints and discrepancies about the maintenance of the boat, the catches and the price.

“On Jan. 8, 2008, I went to chief and council and asked for a licence and they blatantly told me no because I wasn’t certified.”

But Marshall-Tabor argues that she was more than qualified, with multiple years of experience along with training courses that included marine emergency duties, fast rescue craft and a simulator course for navigating ships.

“I was the one who went through all the training,” she said. “I was the one who was away from my family, prior to children. I did the time. It was my time to give back to my children and they (the band) denied me.”

The band argued that Marshall-Tabor had had never formally applied for a licence, but added that her application had been considered. The First Nation said it chose a man who had better qualifications and had an expert prepare a report to support that decision.

The tribunal found that the band hadn’t properly conveyed Marshall-Tabor’s qualifications to the expert and that she was never truly considered for the captain’s licence because she was a woman.

“The Millbrook lawyer called me a renegade fisher,” Marshall-Tabor said. “I was practising my native right, my 1752 Treaty right and they called me a renegade fisher.”

And the derogatory remarks didn’t end there.

The tribunal decision points to systemic discrimination against women in the band fishery, manifested in comments from band administrator Alex Cope, who twice told Marshall-Tabour that “the only place for women’s breasts on a boat was on the bow as a figurehead.”

Another official told her she ought to be home with her children.

Marshall-Tabor said she took her case to Truro lawyer Gary Richard and they launched the human rights complaint in 2008. The victory, she said, is for her children, Craig Jr., 12 and Lesha, 9, and for native women.

“I knew I couldn’t back down because I’m not suffering alone. I wanted to be in the fisheries so bad because it is my passion and I fought for what I wanted. I wanted to fight for the women of our community. I wanted to fight for my Treaty right to be able to fish and make a moderate livelihood whether it be with the fishery program or on my own. But it was just hurdle after hurdle.”

Mi’kmaq women are strong, she said, but “they need to work and fishery is part of our culture.”

Marshall-Tabor, a cousin of the late activist Donald Marshall Jr., credited Craig Tabor, Richard and witnesses Loretta Bernard and Clara Gloade, who recently passed away, for helping make the ruling happen.

“Msit no’kmaq,” she said of the Mi’kmaq phrase meaning all my relations.

Richard, too, said the case turned on strong witness testimony.

“We had the benefit of Stacey and Craig and some really strong women from the community, all of whom gave remarkably compelling evidence that the tribunal recognized,” Richard said. “We presented the evidence but it was the witnesses who really told the story.”

Cope could not be reached for comment and Millbrook Chief Bob Gloade said he would need more time to look at the decision before commenting.

Richard said the tribunal has provided an opportunity for both sides to negotiate a settlement,” which would obviously be monetary damages for the losses suffered but also structural mechanisms put in place under the supervision of the commission to ensure that the problems that Stacey faced, she will no longer face and nor will other women of the Millbrook fishery.”

The drawn-out process had taken a toll on Marshall-Tabor, including a broken marriage and contributing to stress that has left her unable to work full time over the past two years.

Still, she’d love to get back into the fishery.

“It is my passion,” she said. “I want to be back on the water, that’s where I’m at peace. I fought for myself and I have to keep on going for my children.”

http://thechronicleherald.ca/novascotia/1284821-%E2%80%98all-i-wanted-to-do-was-work.%E2%80%99-sexism-cost-millbrook-woman-fishery-jobs-ruling

-----------------

So many folks had 2 work 2 put food on the table and never got the 'luxury' of going 2 school... and way 2 many never finished..... u all make us so proud.... grassroots matters in our Canada.... disabled, 4gotten, ignored..... u matter.... u still matter

The Register/Advertiser-

Kentville event goes the extra mile for literacy

Ashley Thompson- Published on May 10, 2015

Published on May 10, 2015

Valley Community Learning Association supporters marched throughout downtown Kentville May 9 as part of the organization’s annual Literacy Mile fundraiser.

Ashley Thompson

KENTVILLE – Amanda Farris knows firsthand how life changing literacy training can be.

She turned to the Valley Community Learning Association (VCLA) for help reaching a life goal she’s had in mind for years.
“They’ve been helping me get my GED and I’ve been making great strides,” said Farris, taking a break from the activities underway at the VCLA’s 11th annual Literacy Mile fundraising event.
She works one-on-one with her tutor, Angie Carreira, to prepare for the GED final.
“Angie has been helping me every step of the way,” she said.
The adult learner registered for VCLA’s programs along with her mother, Pauline Farris. Pauline Farris wanted help with reading, writing and spelling.
“I’m coming along pretty good so far, I think,” she said, looking to her tutor for confirmation.”
“Absolutely,”Carreira responds. “I can see improvements every time I see them.”
The Literacy Mile, hosted May 9 at the VCLA’s headquarters in Kentville, is about raising awareness of the programs offered by the learning association, and bringing in extra dollars to ensure the non-profit organization continues to fulfill its mandate.
Executive director Peter Gillisestimates that VCLA generally works with more than 300 learners from the counties of Kings and Annapolis on a yearly basis.
“We really try to work individually with people on whatever their learning needs are,” said Gillis, who noted that many of the learners come to them with specific achievements in mind.
VCLA offers free instruction in a number of areas, including: GED, literacy, family and health literacy, English as an additional language, numeracy, computer literacy, trades-related upgrades and youth programs.
The organization boasts a long list of success stories that will only continue to grow as more new learners walk through the door.
“My advice is that they try their best to come here and give it a shot because this is a good place,” said Amanda Farris.

http://www.kingscountynews.ca/News/Local/2015-05-10/article-4141830/Kentville-event-goes-the-extra-mile-for-literacy/1?hootPostID=02d8b97facabb46bef28bc70cfa0c874

-----------------

comment:

Worked many years with provincial -Ontario and Nova Scotia municipalities, provincial and federal government in lowest demoninator.... with often the most work and responsibilities... and you know our teams often ran errands and just didn't bother with expense claims... they were cumbersome and often it was more about getting the job done.... so the petty and picky extravaganza about getting every little $$$$ out of Canadians is truly ugly on the bad side of serving with dignity and pride.

and Second.... why media hacks.... why are media bubblheads chosen 2 b the face of Canada's peoples????? why???? what the f**k have they ever done 2 serve the every day folks of our Canada witht honest decent credentials....??? u don't see them digging sewers like Laureen Harper in Albera do u?? etc.

EASTERN PASSAGES: Senate rules aren't the issue

Published on May 01, 2015

It's been bothering me for weeks now. In Ottawa, when I was covering the first week of Sen. Mike Duffy's trial, it was easy to get sucked into the flow of the case, especially the dulcet flow of defence lawyer Donald Bayne's persuasive argument.

That argument can be summed up in a few words: the Senate's rules were so lax that it was next to impossible for Duffy to know that what he was doing was wrong.

That same debate is continuing this week, as lawyers prepare to argue over the admissibility of a Senate report that points out weaknesses in Senate rules.

But when you get away from it for a while, you realize that, ethically, all Bayne is doing is helping Duffy hide himself in process.

The argument, of course, is that Duffy couldn't break any rules if the rules didn't exist.

Fine.

But lost in all this is a far simpler question: it's not whether or not Duffy could take travel money while living at his Ottawa home.

It's a question of whether he should have.

Believe me, that concept is at risk of being completely lost in the criminal trial.

Certainly, if there are no clear rules to say that you shouldn't claim travel benefits while you live full-time in the Ottawa home you've lived in for years, you probably won't go to jail for doing exactly that.

It's harder to believe, unless you are completely awash in a sense of personal entitlement, that you wouldn't have some qualms about taking travel money for not travelling.

Imagine if you lived your life under the adage "What would Duffy do?"

You could, for example, make an interesting argument about those change dishes that you sometimes see near cash registers (the ones that used to say "need a penny, take a penny," back when there were pennies).

You could walk into a store, empty a dish of change into your pocket, and move on to the next store.

If someone tried to arrest you for theft, you could argue, pretty simply, that you needed the change, and had been invited to take it by the "Need change?" sign. That certainly doesn't mean you should do that, though.

There's a very real danger, should he be acquitted, that people might say "It's not Mike Duffy who is at fault, it's the lax Senate rules."

No, no, it's not just the rules. And we shouldn't forget it.

It's still very much Mike Duffy who made choices about what, and how much, to take.

One thing that the trial has made abundantly clear so far is that he would take virtually anything that wasn't specifically nailed down. Another thing that's emerging from the trial is that there are probably plenty more senators who have been making expense decisions based on what they could get away with, rather than on what any sensible person would decide they should have done.

Making a choice shouldn't depend on what you think you can get away with.

Russell Wangersky is TC Media's Atlantic Regional columnist. He can be reached at russell.wangersky@tc.tc; his column appears on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays in TC Media's daily papers.

http://www.journalpioneer.com/Opinion/Columnists/2015-05-01/article-4132187/EASTERN-PASSAGES%3A-Senate-rules-arent-the-issue/1

---------------

Survey: Nearly 40% of N.S. residents volunteer

Published May 7, 2015 - 4:45pm

A recent survey found that almost 40 per cent of Nova Scotians volunteer their time.

Nova Scotians are most likely to volunteer three times a week (25 per cent), more than any other province, says a news release detailing the results of a survey conducted for Post Shreddies.

Among other results:

•Compared with other provinces, Nova Scotia and Manitoba residents are most likely to say that giving back is important to them (97 per cent).

•Nova Scotians are most likely to volunteer for food banks (50 per cent) and sports teams (25 per cent).

•Nova Scotians are also more likely than those in other provinces to volunteer their time to help an elderly parent (32 per cent) or an ill family member (12 per cent).

•More than those in any other province, Nova Scotians feel it’s important to help people who have helped them (48 per cent) and because they don’t like to see people struggle (52 per cent).

The homegrown cereal brand has begun its third annual Search for Goodness in Canadian communities. Nominations can be submitted till May 10 at searchforgoodness.ca.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/artslife/1285205-survey-nearly-40-of-n.s.-residents-volunteer

-------------

IT'S ALL ABOUT CANADIAN $$$$ 4 KHADR....

http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/omar-khadrs-millions-2/

While so much attention remains focused on Khadr’s quest for freedom, the next legal battle is quietly ramping up: the fight for financial damages. And like everything else about this unprecedented case—the subject of such fierce, vitriolic debate—the process will polarize Khadr’s fellow citizens that much more. For many, the mere thought of him receiving even a dime of taxpayer money is, well, torture.

At the heart of the looming litigation is a $10-million lawsuit filed back in 2004, alleging numerous Charter breaches at the hands of Canadian officials who flew to Cuba to grill the Toronto-born teen in the early days of his detention. At first glance, the statement of claim appeared destined to fail. Khadr was in American custody, not Canadian, so how could his Charter rights have possibly been breached? But one decade and two Supreme Court decisions later, the suit suddenly seems unbeatable. Twice already, the country’s highest court has scolded Ottawa for stomping on Khadr’s constitutional rights.

http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/omar-khadrs-millions-2/

In 2006, a Utah court granted a default judgment—worth a whopping US$102.6 million—in favour of Speer’s widow and another soldier, Sgt. 1st Class Layne Morris, who lost his right eye during that fateful firefight. The judge concluded that Ahmed Khadr was a “long-time member” of bin Laden’s terror network who “encouraged his sons to join al-Qaeda and to carry out its work.”

Nearly eight years later, Speer and Morris have not received a penny. But if Omar Khadr ever wins his lawsuit, the pair’s lawyers are ready to come to Canada and attempt to enforce their U.S. judgment. “First and foremost, it’s about keeping funds out of the hands of terrorists,” says Morris, now retired. “All the evidence is that Omar Khadr is a committed, dedicated jihadist, so to simply hand him a cheque for $10-million is really just turning that money over to al-Qaeda. There is no good that can come from that.”

In this case, 11 years on, nothing good has.

http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/omar-khadrs-millions-2/

--------------------

NEWS

Blinded U.S. soldier blasts Obama for Omar Khadr’s transfer from Guantanamo

http://o.canada.com/news/blinded-u-s-soldier-blasts-obama-for-omar-khadrs-transfer-from-guantanamo

Omar Khadr is seen in Guantanamo Bay\'s Camp 4 in October 2010.

Omar Khadr is seen in Guantanamo Bay's Camp 4 in October 2010.

PHOTO: COLIN PERKEL/THE CANADIAN PRESS

NEWS

Blinded U.S. soldier blasts Obama for Omar Khadr’s transfer from Guantanamo

TORONTO — The transfer of Omar Khadr to Canada from Guantanamo Bay has infuriated a former American soldier partly blinded in the firefight in which the badly wounded Canadian teenager was captured.

The move has also prompted hundreds of Canadians to open their wallets on behalf of the family of the U.S. soldier Khadr pleaded guilty to killing during the July 2002 battle in Afghanistan.

In an interview with The Canadian Press, former sergeant Layne Morris denounced Khadr, 26, as a “horrific security risk,” and blasted the American government.

“My frustration is with the Obama administration and their continued refusal to accept the will of the American people: that these most dangerous of the most dangerous detainees be kept in Guantanamo Bay,” Morris said from West Valley, Utah, where he is deputy city manager.

“I don’t think (Khadr) is done with radical Islam. I don’t think he’s done with the jihad.”

Morris, 50, was hit by shrapnel and lost the sight in one eye during the attack on the compound in which Khadr, then 15 years old, was found near death in the rubble and Delta Force soldier, Sgt. Chris Speer, was left mortally wounded.

In October 2010, Khadr pleaded guilty before a military commission to five war crimes, including murder for throwing the grenade that killed Speer. In return, he was given a further eight years behind bars but allowed to return to Canada last Saturday to serve out the sentence.

Morris’s anger is palpable.

“This is a young man that despite 10 years in Guantanamo and every attempt and opportunity to educate himself and prepare himself for life in a western society has done nothing,” said Morris, who found out from a Canadian reporter the transfer had taken place.

“He went in with an eight-grade education, he’s come out with an eighth-grade education. Other than memorize the Qu’ran and be regarded as the ‘rock star’ of Guantanamo by the other inmates, all he’s done is prepare himself for further jihad.”

Many of those who have worked closely with Khadr over the years — American soldiers, mental-health experts and a succession of defence lawyers — paint a very different picture. It’s a portrait of someone smart and gentle who desperately wants to get on with a “normal” life and has been trying to upgrade his education.

For several years now, Khadr has been studying a curriculum developed for him by King’s University College in Edmonton.

Arlette Zinck, an English professor at the school, called Khadr a diligent student. She said he has done well on the curriculum built around 24 Canadian novels that are used as gateways to teach him other subjects such as math and physics.

“He’s worked hard in some pretty unusual and taxing circumstances (and) continues to show lots of aptitude,” Zinck said.

“He’s learned a lot and certainly been a very compliant and agreeable young man to work with.”

Khadr’s supporters see him as a child soldier and a victim of the war on terror who has been betrayed by his own family and the Canadian government, a view firmly rejected by Morris and many others.

To make that point, Hamish Marshall, a former Harper government strategist, set up an online fundraiser to help Speer’s widow, Tabitha, pay for the education of their children Tanner and Taryn.

“There’s been a lot of attention on Mr. Khadr’s rights and what’s been happening to him,” Marshall said from Vancouver.

“This is about remembering a real man who died.”

Marshall and campaign co-founder Ezra Levant — a fierce critic of Khadr and those who see him as victim — have not spoken to Tabitha Speer but said they were in touch with a law firm in Utah that will receive the money in trust for her.

Speer did not return a call seeking comment, so it’s unclear whether she wants or needs the money.

However, Don Winder, Speer’s lawyer, said Friday he had been in touch with her via email and she had agreed to accept the donations.

She had previously refused to take charity, he said from Salt Lake City.

“I was surprised, but Tabitha said yes,” Winder said.

“My assumption was that her kids are getting older, and as kids get older, things get more expensive.”

The fundraiser, which began Monday, has collected close to $30,000 from around 400 people, with average donations of about $70 to $80.

Daniel Koetsier, a Hamilton businessman, gave $300.

While he wanted to “make a bit of a statement” with his donation — against Khadr’s “sweetheart” deal and the notion he will be released at some point — Koetsier said he wanted to do something for Speer’s family.

“I think of that individual who lost his life. Nowhere do I hear about that. It’s all about the poor Khadr individual,” Koetsier said.

“If our Canadian citizen murdered someone, then maybe as a Canadian we can help at least educate this man’s children.”

14:30ET 05-10-12

http://o.canada.com/news/blinded-u-s-soldier-blasts-obama-for-omar-khadrs-transfer-from-guantanamo

WORDPRESS:

CANADA MILITARY NEWS- Bergdahl freed by Obama exchanged for 5 TALIBAN COMMANDERS- and 6 dead American soldiers trying 2 find Bergdahl- will be tried NOT 4 TREASON- just 4 desertion??? NATO- fix this or West dump United Nations pls.

https://nova0000scotia.wordpress.com/2015/03/25/canada-military-news-bergdahl-freed-by-obama-exchanged-for-5-taliban-commanders-and-6-dead-american-soldiers-trying-2-find-bergdahl-will-be-tried-not-4-treason-just-4-desertion-nato-fix-this/

----------------

now the heroes.... of our Canada

Our GG and Olympian Clara Hughes

Canada's Rick Hansen

-------------------

The relentless Terry Fox

Maclean’s archives: Terry Fox is now an icon. Back in 1980, he was just a kid trying to save the world from cancer

Ken MacQueen

September 14, 2013

(CP photo)

A feature from our archives — written by Ken MacQueen in April 2005.

It was 5 a.m., just west of Sudbury, and Terry Fox was having his first fight of the day. I’d yet to meet the guy, except for a friendly nod as he left his motel room for the Marathon of Hope van to take up his run where he’d stopped the day before. Terry’s pal Doug Alward, unsung hero of the run, warned me the night before not to talk to Fox first thing in the morning. Couldn’t agree more. No one has ever told me anything of value at 5 a.m.

The dispute stemmed from a combination of dark, fog and a skittish member of the Ontario Provincial Police. The officer had pulled escort duty and, understandably, he did not wish the increasingly famous Terry Fox to be winged by a semi-trailer on his watch. The discussion at the side of the Trans-Canada Highway did not go well. It was Aug. 6, 1980. Fox had taken about two days off since the run started in St. John’s, Nfld., on April 12. This cop was only the latest in a line of well-meaning meddlers — stretching back to Fox’s mom, Betty, in Port Coquitlam, B.C. — who’d told him at various times, for various reasons, he should not be running. They were right, of course. And they were wrong, too. In any event, they might as well have told him not to breathe. A second cruiser was called, and the procession headed west. “Bathed,” as I wrote for my employer, the Ottawa Citizen, “in the angry glow of flashing red lights.”

Fox, aged 22, had been a minor blip on the nation’s radar until he entered Ontario, until he stormed Ottawa(meeting Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, who knew nothing of the run), and, especially, until the Canadian Cancer Society pulled out the stops for his triumphal entry into Toronto and through southern Ontario. From a fundraising perspective, it was a master stroke. Fox won national media attention and public acclaim. Finally, the money rolled in. He nailed his initial goal of $1 million for cancer research, but by then he’d upped the ante to a preposterous $24 million — $1 for every Canadian. It was to be raised on his terms: corporate support was accepted; corporate exploitation was not. There were no logos on his clothes. He was even uncomfortable with the trademark three stripes on his running shoes. Southern Ontario added huge strain and hundreds of extra miles to his run. Betty suspects it destroyed his health. When I met him, he’d finally shaken loose, running west above the Great Lakes, headed home.

The media orgy had infused the Marathon of Hope in a golden glow, as though Fox was being borne cross-country on the shoulders of adoring Canadians. Not true. By northern Ontario, the run had reverted to form: mile after mile through brutal heat, ground out in Fox’s awkward, painful cadence. Look at the new dollar coin minted in his honour: that’s how it was — scrub pine, rock and road. Two hops, a swing of his artificial leg. Pounding the stump of his right thigh, over and over and over. “I think of one day at a time — it would be impossible to take it all at once,” he explained. Past this sign, that tree, this knot of school kids. “I set a thousand goals today,” he said one afternoon.

My photo of #TerryFox shot from inside his Marathon of Hope van west of Sudbury, wow 33 years ago. This is a hero. pic.twitter.com/E80E4YHhXu

— Ken MacQueen (@kmqyvr) September 14, 2013

I was the only reporter with him for my three days on the run, save for those from local radio and whistle-stop weeklies who’d attend his early evening rallies. Sometimes I’d ride in the camper with Bill Vigars, the rainmaker from the cancer society, or Fox’s brother Darrell, just 18, who was witty and wise beyond his years. They’d field questions from the public, and troll collection buckets past the open windows of passing vehicles. Other times I’d ride with Alward in the run’s Ford van, which smelled of sweat, rotting socks, and the remnants of restaurant doggy bags. Alward — serious and thoughtful, with a stubborn streak as defining as his friend’s — drove a mile, parked until Fox chugged by, then drove another.

I’d flown into Sudbury on a Tuesday. All was not well. Fox discovered the day before they’d actually passed the halfway mark on Sunday — 4,265 km, they’d figured — but hadn’t realized it because of an odometer error. He felt robbed of the lift of hitting the homeward stretch. It was the low point of the trip, he said, still smarting days later. Mileage had become all-consuming to Fox, to the puzzlement of his crew. The first day I was with them, he and Alward argued over how the day’s progress was calculated. Hurt and angry, the two friends rode back to the motel in separate vans. Such outbursts, I came to realize, were as transient and cleansing as Ontario thunderstorms. That evening they were together, happy and loose, at an arena rally in Espanola.

Fox was, as Alward fondly described him, “relentless.” On the hills, in the worst of the heat, and on the long empty stretches, he seemed to retreat inside himself. I look back at pictures I took then, and his eyes tell me nothing. I was just three years older than him and had, in fact, spent much of the previous year on the road, living in a van. That was all we had in common. My trip was a self-indulgent tour of Europe: traipsing through galleries and cathedrals, flopping on beaches, devouring books, idling with instant friends over carafes of cheap wine. Here was a guy, younger than me, busting his hump, trying to save the world from cancer.

I asked him, in every way I could think of, why he was doing this. His answers were always direct, but maddeningly unadorned by personal feelings or philosophy. He’d talk about the real heroes of this run, the people left behind in cancer wards. I’d ask about the physical toll of the run and he’d say it was nothing compared to those cancer wards. I asked about the increasing demands of his new celebrity, which he seemed to carry like a physical burden. “The only pressure that is really on me,” he said, “is pressure I put on myself.” But why, I wondered then and now. Why are you doing this to yourself?

“It was a stupid thing to want to do,” says Betty Fox, looking back 25 years at her son’s Marathon of Hope. “Really stupid.” She’s beside her husband, Rolly, in the living room of their home in Chilliwack, in B.C.’s Fraser Valley. The Foxes recently downsized and moved to this tidy and quiet adult-only community. There is no pretense to Betty Fox. It’s a mobile home, she says, in a trailer park. Between them on the couch is a cloth cozy holding a box of Kleenex. Some topics never get easier.

Terry would be 46 today. Perhaps he’d be married, like his brothers Fred and Darrell and his sister, Judith. Perhaps his children would join the portraits of the nine grandchildren the Foxes proudly display on a living room wall. Instead, he is forever young, running westward into the wind. Many of the mementoes of the journey are in storage now, but the Foxes keep Terry’s diary of the run at home. They also keep a glass gallon jug he filled at the edge of the Atlantic Ocean, and had hoped to dump in the Pacific. Half the water has evaporated and the cap is rusting.

Fox was 18 when he was diagnosed in March 1977 with a malignant tumour in his right knee. Doctors amputated much of the leg within days. “We were told he had a 20 to 50 per cent chance of survival,” Betty recalls. Some 2 1/2 years later, she was the first in the family he told of his plan to run across the country to raise funds to improve what he correctly concluded was the dismal state of Canadian cancer research. No, she said, reacting as a mother who’d come too close to losing her son. The two always had an open relationship, but he left that day angry and disappointed. Tempers cooled. They talked it out. “He said, ‘I thought you’d be one of the first persons to believe in me,’” Betty recalls with a sad smile. “And I wasn’t. I was the first person who let him down.”

The Foxes had every reason to worry: Terry’s health, highway traffic, vast distances, all to be handled by two 21-year-old guys in a van who had never been away from home. “No matter what you said,” Rolly says today, “you weren’t going to stop him.” By Nova Scotia, some of their fears proved right. Fox and Alward were barely speaking, drained by fatigue, poor returns and the enormity of the task. Betty and Rolly arrived to make peace. They decided the boys needed a buffer — someone fun, energetic, with a sweet nature. They needed Darrell Fox, then 17. “I think there was a concern,” he says now with a grin, “that if someone else didn’t join the entourage there might be a murder.”

Darrell started work at the Terry Fox Foundation 15 years ago, having finally come to terms with his brother’s death and his powerful legacy. Today, at 42, he is the national director of an organization that has raised a staggering $360 million worldwide for cancer research. The national office, recently moved to Chilliwack from Toronto, has just two employees.(There are about 22 others in provincial offices.)The carpet is frayed. Posters of the annual Terry Fox runs since his death in 1981 lean against the walls, waiting for someone with time to hang them.

Darrell missed his Grade 12 graduation, leaving school a month early to hook up with the run in New Brunswick. Betty, who’d wanted nothing to do with this crazy idea in the first place, had now given two sons to the road. “I cried and cried,” she says. “My 17-year-old kid is hugging me and saying, ‘Don’t worry, Mom, I’ll look after him.’ ” Twenty-five years later, he still is.

The run ended on Sept. 1, after 143 days and 5,373 km, outside Thunder Bay, with a diagnosis that the cancer had returned and spread. Did the guy I saw just weeks earlier — so drained and driven, so attuned to his body — already suspect something was wrong? Darrell, citing his brother’s growing impatience, thinks he did. “We were still 2,500 miles away,” he says. “He wanted to know to the foot how far we had gone. More importantly, how far he still had to go. When I look back at it, I kind of sense that maybe something within Terry was happening at the time that he was aware of, and was trying to block out.”

Betty, looking back, has reached some difficult conclusions. “It was supposed to happen,” she says. How else could someone with a prosthetic leg run the equivalent of a marathon a day, every day from spring through that crazy summer? How else could a young man, dead before his 23rd birthday, become a revered and enduring historical figure? How else can millions still be raised by the power of his name? “I believe he was supposed to get cancer. And do this run for cancer research,” she says, her hand straying to the Kleenex box. Then, in a quiet voice comes the hardest conclusion of all: “He wasn’t meant to . . . to live.”

I’ve often wondered why this country hasn’t produced more Terry Foxes. I don’t know, but maybe I figured it out, almost 24 years after I wrote his obituary on a dismal June day in 1981. It’s March 14 this year and I’m at the Simon Fraser University Theatre for the unveiling of the Terry Fox dollar, the first circulating coin, amazingly enough, to feature a Canadian. The Fox clan is here, dignitaries from the Royal Canadian Mint, and many of the people who, all those years ago, made the Marathon of Hope work. People who haven’t seen each other for decades are falling into each other’s arms.

I’m sitting with Doug Alward, who, in typical fashion, eschewed his rightful reserved seat at the front for the anonymity of the back row. Beside him is Fred Tinck, now a retired school principal, who was Terry and Doug’s high school running coach. Without Tinck, says Doug, Terry might never have become a runner. Without Alward, Darrell says, the Marathon of Hope would never have happened. Without Rick Hansen, who recruited Fox to his wheelchair basketball team just weeks after his amputation, would a still-ailing Fox have been fired by the same purpose?(Just as without Fox’s inspiration, Hansen might never have circled the globe in a wheelchair, raising, at last count, some $158 million for spinal cord research. What are the odds of two men colliding at a low point in their lives to such remarkable effect?)And, without Darrell, Betty and Rolly, few think the Fox legacy would burn as bright.

Why is Terry Fox a rarity? Because he was an exceptional guy with an uplifting story, and because — by inspiration, good luck or higher purpose — he was blessed with the proverbial village of support. Hansen calls his friend the instrument of a dream. “The vision behind it is so captivating it doesn’t always just depend on one individual.” Alward says, in all seriousness: “You know, he’s not dead, this is the strange thing. There’s a much higher purpose to his life than just physical life and death. It’s spiritual.”

The Foxes have rejected ideas, from blue jean companies to hamburger chains, that would have raised millions. Always, they ask, “What would Terry do?” And so they often say no, because the difficult thing is what Terry did. “The family,” says Vigars, the public relations man, “has kept it pure.”

Terry Fox was a relentless guy, blessed with a stubborn family and uncompromising friends, and that is the magic of this man. He ran into the wind, and they have followed. And maybe it’s true — as they all seem to believe in various ways — that he continues to blaze a trail as long and hard and true as the Trans-Canada Highway

http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/the-relentless-terry-fox/

-------------------

BEST COMMENT: jails are 55% of domestic cases and divorce at 55%.... big big red flags.why not teach healthy relationships... that's where the real problems exists...emotional being first then physical intimacy...we love our soap opera state though, people problems makes people money (lawyers, empire building in policing, etc...)

so, who wants to deal with the real problems...Grade 0-5 teach healthy interactions

Grade 5-10 teach healthy relationships We love teaching sex because media loves preaching sex. Emotional first then physical. Man o man, we're a messed up...

QUOTE:

TORONTO – The Ontario government has updated the province’s sexual-education curriculum, a move that been applauded by some and opposed by others. Here are five things to know about the new program:

What does the new curriculum look like?

It will teach students in Grade 1 the proper names for body parts. Grade 2 students will learn about the broad concept of consent by being told that no means no. Concepts of gender identity will be introduced in Grade 3, though the curriculum doesn’t get explicit and positions sexual orientation as one of the potential qualities that distinguish people from one another. Discussions about puberty move to Grade 4 from Grade 5, while education about intercourse will take place the following year. Masturbation and “gender expression” will be taught in Grade 6, while kids in Grades 7 and 8 will discuss contraception, anal and oral sex, preventing pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections. Students will also learn about online bullying and the dangers of sharing sexually explicit images electronically.

Five things about Ontario’s sex-ed curriculum

http://metronews.ca/news/canada/1358714/5-things-about-ontarios-sex-ed-curriculum/

================

1. Moncton man accused of luring up to 2,000 boys online | CTV ...

atlantic.ctvnews.ca/moncton-man-accused-of-luring-up-to-2-000-boys-online-1.2361518

4 days ago ... A 24-year-old Moncton man remains behind bars, accused of luring ... no username and allows people to chat with strangers all over the world.

----------------

BLOGGED:

Canada Military News- Canada's films and music and unique cultural landscape with 2 Offical Languages and over 200 cultures /and some Canada-French-American history of way back when /musical instruments of Canada/GETCHA CANADA ON FOLKS

http://nova0000scotia.blogspot.ca/2015/05/canada-military-news-canadas-films-and.html

----------------

UNITED NATIONS NEEDS 2 CLEAN UP THEIR HOUSE....

·

' Rape and sodomy': Leaked UN report details...

<www.sott.net/article/295869-Rape-and-sodomy-Leaked-UN...Cached>

A damning UN report about how French soldiers raped and sodomized ... UN report entitled Sexual Abuse on ... in the UN system over the years and ...

· ---

UN report on sexual violence during conflict...

<www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?Cr=sexual%2Bviolence&Cr1=Cached>

The United Nations Security Council today expressed its deep ... UN investigation into sexual abuse ... New UN report finds bulk of world’s rural ...

--------------

Child sexual abuse by UN peacekeepers - Wikipedia,...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse_by_UN_peacekeepersCached

Sexual abuse of female minors by personnel ... prepared for the present report, ... case where members of the UN peacekeeping force were accused ...

--------------

UN Troops Accused of Sex Crimes Worldwide

<www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/africa/item/8349-un...Cached>

“If only a dozen UN peacekeepers were punished for sexual abuse and rape, ... cases of sexual ... by United Nations peacekeepers in ...

-----------------

THE PETITION OMAR KHADR- on NOT coming back 2 our Canada... conveniently hidden... with thousands and thousands of names..... the election in 2015 will be very, very telling....

Stop-Terrorist-Omar-Khadr-from-Returning-to-Canada

Petition published by Shobhna Kapoor on Apr 12, 2012

4458 Signatures

Sunday, May 10, 2015

God bless our troops.... THANK U 4 SERVING

Why aren't more disabled people becoming politicians?

Party system

Disabled Prime Minister?

Women are turning to male escorts for sexual thrills ... - Metro

---------

The Presence, Portrayal and Participation of Persons with Disabilities on Television Programming

A Research Report Presented to the Canadian Association of Broadcasters

August 2005

Acknowledgements

Table of Contents

Executive Summary

Key Findings

Persons with Disabilities in Canada

Key Barriers to Participation and Activity

Presence of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming

Portrayal of Persons with Disabilities – Dramatic Programming

Portrayal of Persons with Disabilities – News Programming

Participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming

Considerations for a Broadcaster Toolkit

Best Practices

Part I: Introduction and Background

A) Introduction

B) Study Description and Methodologies

Part II: Persons with Disabilities in Canada

Population Overview

Key Indicators of Well-being 2

Key Barriers to Participation and Activity 4

Part III: Research Findings on Presence, Portrayal and Participation

A) Presence of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming

B) Portrayal of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming

Portrayal in Dramatic Programming

C) Participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming

Part IV: Considerations for a Broadcaster Toolkit

Considerations for Communication and Outreach

Considerations for Human Resource and Accommodation Initiatives by Broadcasters and/or Disability NGOs

Considerations for Initiatives Targeting Education Sector Partnerships

Considerations for Initiatives Targeting the Production Sector

Considerations for Programming Initiatives by Broadcasters

Additional Strategies Identified by Stakeholder Forum Participants

Bibliography

Appendix A: International and Canadian Best Practices

Initiatives in The United Kingdom

1) Broadcasting and Creative Industries Disability Network (BCIDN)

2) Broadcasting and Creative Industries Disability Network (BCIDN) Publications:

The Employer’s Forum on Disability

Other Initiatives of the Employers’ Forum:

Initiatives in the United States

1) The California Governor’s Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities

2) Tax Credits – State of California

3) California Business Leadership Network (CABLN)

4) Non-traditional Casting Project

5) CBS

6) SAG/AFTRA

Initiatives in Canada7

1)Alliance of Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA)

2) ACTRA Toronto

3) Famous Players Theatres

4) Greater Vancouver Business Leadership Network

Appendix B: Individuals/Organizations Consulted

Appendix C: Summary Report of the Stakeholder Forum

CAB Stakeholder Forum on The Presence, Portrayal and Participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming

July 15, 2005 – Marriott Eaton Centre, Toronto

Introduction

Objectives of the Stakeholder Forum

Perspectives on Opportunities

Perspectives on Issues and Barriers

Perspectives on Tools and Initiatives

Other Ideas Raised/Observations Noted

Conclusion: Impact on the Study

CAB Stakeholder Forum on the Presence, Portrayal and Participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming

List of Participants and Observers

Appendix D: Other Issues Raised

Assistive Technologies Used by Persons with Disabilities for Television Viewing

Advertising

Radio

The CRTC

Public Broadcasting

The Research Team

A Research Report Presented to the
Canadian Association of Broadcasters

Key Indicators of Well-being ²

Key Barriers to Participation and Activity ⁴

Initiatives in Canada⁷