|
Disability is often expressed visually through an image of a wheelchair. How can journalists move beyond this default to be more inclusive?
Neas: A person in a wheelchair has become the default visual for disability, and it narrows what audiences think disability looks like. It can also erase huge parts of the disability community, and misses the reality that disability shows up in many ways.
Instead of opting for the same trope, think broader: people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, autistic people, people who are hard of hearing or visually impaired, people with mental health disabilities, people with chronic illness, and people with many other disabilities.
When newsrooms rely on one representation, audiences start to see disability as a single category instead of a broad, normal, everyday human experience. The result is coverage that unintentionally “others” people, rather than showing diverse disabled people as classmates, colleagues, parents, neighbors, and community members.
When telling disability stories visually, what should photo editors and producers look for, and what should they avoid?
Neas: Look for images that show disabled people as full participants in real life. This can be a student in class, a worker on the job, a family at the park, a person using captioning or
Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC), or someone navigating a space that is built well (or built poorly). If you wouldn’t run the image to illustrate a story about a non-disabled person, it’s probably not the right image here either.
Avoid images that turn disability into a symbol rather than a person — for example faceless close-ups of a wheelchair, hands on crutches, or hospital scenes when health care isn’t the story. Avoid photos that infantilize adults, focus on pity, or frame someone as a prop for someone else’s narrative.
And whenever possible, if you’re not relying on stock imagery, make sure the person understands how the image will be used. Consent matters, especially for children or anyone photographed in a vulnerable moment.
When it comes to accessibility, can you describe setting standards for captions or transcripts?
Neas: Captions should always be a default. They’re a basic access tool for many people with disabilities, and also how a lot of people watch video now — including plenty of people without disabilities. When captions are missing or sloppy, you’re making the reporting harder to use.
Transcripts should also be standard for video. They make your reporting searchable and usable in more settings, and they help people who can’t watch the full clip. Keep transcripts faithful to what was said, label speakers, and include only the non-speech moments that add meaning, like laughter or applause.
Why does alt text matter, and what should it include?
Neas: Alt text is a crucial part of accessibility, and it helps more people than many newsrooms realize. Yes, it’s essential for visually impaired people who use screen readers. But it also supports people with disabilities that can make reading on-screen harder, including some people with cerebral palsy. Good alt text can reduce friction and make sure readers still get the key information the image is meant to convey. (Go deeper: See additional tips for improving accessibility.)
It matters for newsrooms, too. Accurate, factual alt text helps more people access your reporting, which broadens your audience and strengthens trust.
Alt text should be accurate and factual. Describe what’s happening and who’s in the photo. Mention disability only when it’s relevant and visible in the image, and skip editorial language like “brave,” “suffering,” or “inspiring.”
Go deeper: See our previous advice on language and framing.
| 
