Neurodiversity, the Press and Responsible Reporting: Is the Media Made for Everyone?

The thing about the news is that it changes every day. It’d be weird if it didn’t – and most of us spend a fair portion of our adult lives just checking in on what’s going on in the world. Sometimes we do it as a distraction, to catch up on our favourite celebrities and gossip, and sometimes we do it to keep on top of situations that might concern us, such as conflicts, health news and legal updates. And it’s become even easier since the advent of the smartphone and computerised working and leisure time – the news is just two or three clicks away, even if it’s happening on the other side of the world. We’re fantastically connected now, and stories that happen mere minutes ago can be a part of our lives and it’s amazing to see just how much information there is out there.

…However we do live in an age where sometimes, due to the ways that the news marketplace works, wires can get crossed when it comes to the communication of ideas. The cinematic value of a story can sometimes get tangled up with factual reporting on what’s happening, because it makes a better piece of content or because it looks more attractive visually on the page – and that’s nothing new; it’s been happening since long before the advent of the printed press. And it doesn’t really look like that much of a problem on the surface. Sometimes it’s even funny, or exciting, or extra interesting – but there are other times where it can have some fairly widespread negative consequences, too, especially when it comes to people who learn, think and feel differently.

Let’s take a few examples.

Somebody with dyslexia might struggle with the facts and information in an article, especially now that the ‘long read’ article seems to be seeing somewhat of a renaissance in Western press. Articles that are incredibly involved and contain lots of technical information in paragraph form can be problematic for readers with low literacy and literacy differences. And this can be a big issue when we consider the most important things we’d encounter in the media, like public health notices, or updates on support schemes or financial matters. Some similar problems could occur if a reader has ADD/ADHD too – the long, in-depth article might pose a problem for them when it comes to concentration, and information may be missed.

Somebody suffering from stress-related illness or an anxiety disorder might find it overwhelming and difficult to read news stories that overly catastrophise, or infer stakes are higher than they are in actuality to construct a more cinematic narrative for the article. We see this a lot in articles about current events, international policy, and health matters- especially in the wake of the pandemic. Another way that this can become problematic is by headline hooking - a headline is created that grabs the attention, but doesn't necessarily tell you all the facts about the story and gives a different impression of an article's content. There's a huge difference between 'THE NEW KILLER VARIANT' and 'Scientists identify new variant of concern' even if they refer to the same story... but one of those titles garners more attention and clicks than the other. To somebody with anxiety or stress-related problems, headlines like this can easily trigger a negative mental response.

And although it can manifest in vastly different ways in different people, somebody with autism might find that they’re encountering difficulties with communication and inferential thinking when it comes to what they read in the media. This means that they may take headlines and stories at face value, whereas somebody who does not have autism may be more equipped in breaking down the language we expect to see in the press and thinking about it with a more critical standpoint. Somebody with autism might also struggle with their literacy in a way similar (although not the same) to somebody with dyslexia, too. The news media posits that it exists to inform, and whilst there are business considerations to make when it comes to generating revenue, it’s a regrettable fact that when we look at the press in terms of how it exists for non-typical thinkers, many of the articles we read on a daily basis might actually be fairly problematic for millions of people.

What’s the answer?

Simply put, responsible reporting. This means that whilst stories that contain important information might be constructed linguistically however best the journalist or editor in question sees fit, there’s also a duty to make sure that the facts contained are…

• Pulled from reliable information sources. Somebody writing in The Lancet about a new strain of bacteria probably should be reported on, but that blog post your dad’s friend Gary wrote about how he ate out-of-date yoghurt one time and now he can see through time might warrant some more research sources to corroborate it.
• Presented in a way that doesn’t infer other ideas or consequences. This one’s of course subjective, but it’s important that the effort is made: MAN MAULED BY KILLER FELINE ON HOLIDAY isn’t exactly accurate when we’re talking about how your dad’s friend Gary got his ankle scratched by the hotel’s resident mouser when he went on a mini-break to Dorset in 2006.
• Worded in a way that everybody might reasonably understand them. This is tricky when so many people have different levels of literacy and different parameters of what they’re comfortable with, but again, a reasonable effort must be made. Moderate complex language and sentence structures, and provide audio options that can be paused and rewound, too. And make sure to bullet point things that can be bullet pointed, instead of listing them in a paragraph.
• Presented in a non-judgmental way. Most news sources do make a huge attempt to do this, however there are some that construct stories that unfairly represent people or groups of people. Think ‘Ever the textbook Leeds fan, Gary Jones blasted the council’s new bypass plans’ versus ‘Gary, who supports Leeds United Football Club, said that the council’s new bypass will add fifteen minutes onto his drive to the game.’
• Presented accessibly. The use of some fonts, busy backgrounds and text surrounds, banners, pop-ups and interactive elements can all have an impact on how somebody experiences an article, especially somebody with dyslexia. These things can interfere with text-to-speech technology or even just make the page too busy and uncomfortable to read from clearly. See the WCAG for more details on how to make accessible presentation a reality online.

We live in an age where we’re more engaged with news media than ever before- rather than a daily newspaper, instead we get live updates from across the globe beamed straight to the small screen in our pocket, making it almost impossible to detach.

To anybody who is struggling with what they might be encountering in the press, it’s always a great idea to discuss your concerns or what you’ve read with a friend, family member, professional or colleague- not only is a problem shared the first step to solving it, they might also be able to point you in the direction of some resources that work for you. There are a few key points to remember:

• Academic and technical publications tend to adopt less sensationalist reporting policies…
• But the language they use can be much more complex and technical too.
• Many news sites have dedicated video news sections now
• And a lot of these show full interviews, not just soundbytes, making it easier to get a feel for the full story
• Fact-checking websites are also handy when it comes to interrogating something you’ve read that sounds extra scary or dangerous
• And non-commercial news sites often have page designs far more optimised for screen readers as they’re free of in-text ads and promotions.

Many news sites are making leaps and bounds in these stakes, but some still rely on reporting structures that make things difficult for neurodiverse people or people with mental health conditions. Yet there are huge amounts of people in the world today who rely on these forms of information, and presenting them in a way that actively disadvantages such vast parts of the community isn’t responsible reporting.

Catastrophising and cluttering isn’t a harmless way of generating more interest in an article page. It can actively have an impact on the lives of the hundreds of thousands of people who use those news sources every day. Sometimes, the news is not good- sometimes there are terrible things happening in the world, sometimes there are threats to public health and safety that the public need to be aware of, and it’s the media’s role to inform and explain the good, the bad, and the ugly. Where the problems arise are in the window-dressing, the presentation (both informational and visual), and in the manner that information and its sources are represented.

We’re more informed than ever before, but we need to make sure that information is factual, comfortable and accessible for everybody, too.