Search

Journalistic self-regulation recommends respect to the weak and disadvantaged people. In our quantitative analysis, journalists show themselves sensitive to disadvantaged groups. However, they disagree about the most appropriate treatment. The results of in-depth interviews reflect the same lack of consensus among journalists about the role the media should take to disadvantaged groups: a) giving visibility to certain disadvantaged; b) Certain economic benefits campaigns; c) Media are businesses. The disadvantaged are not their cause. Citizens see no objection to explicit certain attributes of the protagonists of the news, especially those related to age or gender. According to the results of the bivariate analysis, women and those who are more critical to journalistic ethics are less in favour to explicit certain attributes related to sexual orientation, ethnicity or nationality. In all other cases there are no significant differences. In focus groups, citizens perceive that, in general, minorities are distorted in the news. For all participants, disadvantaged groups, only have significance in the media on negative events. Youth and adults from Madrid consider that the media exploit the events associated with these groups to feed the curiosity and increase the audience. The more educated adults claim that the use of euphemisms can not change stereotypes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]