From Representation to Participation: Ethical Pathways in Reporting on Vulnerable Populations

By Sigrid Wang

When reporting on people with developmental disabilities, journalists often face a complex ethical challenge. Years of social and structural exclusion have left many unable to make their voices heard. However, when opportunities to speak arise, their voices are often easily mediated by others who decide what should be said and how it should be shown. Even when these stories are told with good intentions, they can unintentionally reproduce dependence, pity or loss of agency. Therefore, ensuring dignity and informed consent is not just about following procedure but about recognizing people as capable decision makers in how their stories are represented. 

Media participation can be a powerful way to promote empowerment [2]. In reporting, empowerment means more than letting someone appear in a story, it means giving them real control over how their story is told. From a Foucauldian view, power is not something people own but something that exists in relationships, which is constantly exercised and negotiated [4]. In journalism, this power lies in how reporters ask questions and frame narratives. When used responsibly, this process can help people with developmental disabilities regain a sense of agency, confidence and self-understanding [3]. However, the same process can also do harm if journalists exercise that power without reflection. All the choices about what to include or exclude to publish shape how a person is seen by the public. If these decisions are made without the participant’s understanding or consent, the reporting can end up taking their voice away rather than amplifying it. In such cases, journalists unintentionally take over the narrative authority of interviewees to decide how their story should be told.

While empowerment is valuable for everyone, it becomes especially critical for vulnerable populations. They are often reported not because of their voices but because their lives illustrate broader social problems. Community structure theory shows that media visibility often arises from structural vulnerability rather than agency [7]. In other words, they are made visible through the lens of social issues like poverty, exclusion or disability rather than through their own perspectives. For people with developmental disabilities, such framing can unintentionally reinforce dependence or pity, keeping them within a cycle of representation without participation.

Additionally, in reporting situations, journalists often occupy a position of power . This imbalance does not only come from professional expertise but also from the symbolic authority carried by the title of the media. For vulnerable populations, beyond not fully understanding the implications of interviews or photography, they may also hesitate to express disagreement simply because of the relations of power in society involved [3]. Out of respect or fear, many choose to comply rather than to refuse.

Empowerment depends not only on individual transformation but also on a socially open environment that invites participation [6]. In the context of reporting, this means creating interview settings where participants can actively shape their involvement. Journalists should clearly explain the purpose of the story, ensuring consent is informed. Participants should also be allowed to skip sensitive topics. 

On a broader level, Almeida and Serra arise that empowerment functions across the individual, community, and structural dimensions [1]. Translating this into journalism requires redistributing narrative power through collaboration. Reporters can invite interviewees to review drafts, discuss images, or suggest titles to make them be the co-authors of their own representation. This practice aligns with ethical principles of freedom, equality and justice, ensuring that stories are not only about the marginalized but also shaped with them.

However, if empowerment lacks critical reflection, it can easily reproduce hierarchies it seeks to dismantle. Even when journalists amplify marginalized voices, empowerment remains superficial if the story continues to be framed by dominant perspectives that define valuable voices. As the critical theory put forward by Dvořák, participatory advocacy must refrain from asserting opinions on the ideal way of life or offering extensive advice, as doing so infringes upon the agency of those directly affected. Critical theory thus calls for journalists to resist the impulse to define what a good life or happiness should look like for others [5]. In the context of developmental disabilities, this awareness becomes crucial. Journalists often intend to help or educate the public, yet in doing so may unintentionally impose their own moral frameworks upon interviewees. 

To ensure empowerment does not become a new form of symbolic control, self-reflection should be systematically embedded in the reporting process. At the individual level, journalists can maintain a short reflexive log after each interview, noting moments of discomfort, bias, or interpretive uncertainty. At the collective level, newsrooms can organize peer review or ethical debrief sessions after working with vulnerable groups, creating a shared space to discuss language choices, consent and narrative framing. Finally, at the institutional level, media organizations can adopt practical tools such as reflexive checklists before publication where teams assess whether the story reinforces stereotypes and aligns with participants’ consent. Establishing these reflexive structures not only prevents performative empowerment but also embeds the values of freedom, equality and social justice into the newsroom’s everyday routines.

Therefore, reporting on vulnerable populations should not be seen merely as an ethical obligation but as a dialogic process of shared authorship. True empowerment arises when journalists move beyond speaking for others and instead create the conditions for people to speak with them. Through informed consent, collaborative storytelling and ongoing self-reflection, journalism can evolve into a practice that restores both dignity and agency.

References

[1] Almeida, Helena & Serra, Pedro Vaz (2016). The architecture of participation in transformative social intervention processes. The 4th International Virtual Conference on Advanced Scientific Results (SCIECONF2016), June 6 - 10, 2016 (www.scieconf.com, Slovakia), pp. 119-122.

[2] Carpentier N (2016) Beyond the ladder of participation: an analytical toolkit for the critical analysis of participatory media processes. Javnost-The Public 23(1): 70–88.

[3] Cavalieri IC, Almeida HN (2018) Power, empowerment and social participation-the building of a conceptual model. European Journal of Social Science Education and Research 5(1): 174–185.

[4] Dreyfus HL, Rabinow P (1983) Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics. 2nd edition. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

[5] Dvořák, V. (2025). But whose harm? Towards the ethics of participatory advocacy journalism with unhoused populations. Journalism (London, England), 26(1), 169–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849241228093

[6] Ornelas, José. (1997). Psicologia comunitária: Origens, fundamentos e áreas de intervenção. Análise Psicológica, 3(15) – setembro, pp. 375-388.

[7] Pollock J. C. (2020). How media empower the vulnerable: Using community structure theory to analyze relationships between demographics and health reporting. International journal of nursing sciences, 7(Suppl 1), S16–S18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnss.2020.05.007