Prof. Charles Xavier

A relative pointed out journalists are fond of saying, for example, Lady Gaga is “confined to a wheelchair,” as reported recently in the Huffington Post (UK).

But a wheelchair is far from confining for most folks with disabilities.

We need a prod about how our everyday talk reveals underlying prejudices.

Not all Dutch uncles are stingy and most blondes aren’t dumb.

This week I spoke about message framing at the Crime Victim Law Conference in Portland.

One participant bristled at the way a news-writer said a woman was assaulted by a masked man.

What’s wrong with that, I asked.

Journalists should instead report, “A masked man assaulted a woman.”

She said the re-wording focusses on the perpetrator rather than the victim.

It is a subtle difference, she admitted. In one case, your attention turns to the person who committed a crime.

In the other example, you focus on the woman as the subject of a crime.

Does it make a difference?

Hard to know without concrete evidence to show wording alone influences how we think.

Still, my colleague David Ritchie and I contend that some phrases slip past our cognitive scrutiny.

And when messages slip under our radar, we pay little heed.

The result? We don’t question a phrase like “confined to a wheelchair.”

And we should question the grammar.

Picture of Prof. Charles Xavier from Marvel Comics at http://www.just-marvel-x-men.com/image-files/marvel-encyclopedia-prof-x-1-50k.jpg