The political advertisement, “Grace,” created by Priorities USA, is a pro-Clinton advertisement that features a disabled child. The video includes Donald Trump mocking a disabled reporter, and what the disabled child’s parents have to say on the incident. I chose to focus on this advertisement, because while watching it, I thought of questions such as “Why are the parents speaking for the child?” and “What kind of reaction were they trying to evoke by using the child?” I will be focusing on how the child is portrayed in the advertisement, and why they made the choices they did in making the video. Additionally, I will be focusing on the larger conversation of sympathy vs. pity. The central question I seek to answer in my paper is, “How is Grace
…show more content…
One of the myths highlighted, is the myth of, “Disability as Object of Pity and/or Charity.” This myth is described as “People with disabilities are represented as sad and impotent, a problem that can be solved via charity” (Dolmage 35). This is relevant to the video because while the video does not clearly fit the model, it can still bring up the argument of whether or not the video is trying to evoke pity out of the viewer. It’s not an accurate representation of the model in the sense that it mostly does a good job of making Grace out to be a normal child who deserves the respect of everyone, including Donald Trump. However, we can still question whether they chose to use Grace to gain the viewers’ sympathy. I think in both of the advertisements that Priorities USA created, they definitely try to get the viewers to sympathize with the disabled community through the use of the disabled children. What we have to ask is if they effectively do this without potentially exploiting the …show more content…
This is particularly interesting considering that the advertisement was criticizing Donald Trump for mocking a disabled reporter, an adult. This brings in the argument of whether using a child vs. an adult elicits a different reaction. I understand from the viewpoint of the director/ creator of the video, it makes for a better contrast to compare Donald Trump to a young child. However, I think that’s one clear indication of another example of where the advertisement goes wrong. In my research, I have found that in media, people typically choose to use children as opposed to adults because they are much easier to pity. Disabled adults are seen as something society tends to steer away from, while a disabled child is someone we want to help and keep safe. Evan Kemp, a writer for the New York Times writes about this in his piece titled, “Aiding the Disabled: No Pity, Please.” One point he makes is pitying children teaches them from a young age that they can’t live independently for the rest of their lives (Kemp). All this stresses that media should focus more on the fact that disabled people don’t lead any less fulfilling lives than able-bodied people. They should work to break down this stereotype as opposed to playing on this trope to garner as much money as they can in fundraising events such as the
One of the myths highlighted, is the myth of, “Disability as Object of Pity and/or Charity.” This myth is described as “People with disabilities are represented as sad and impotent, a problem that can be solved via charity” (Dolmage 35). This is relevant to the video because while the video does not clearly fit the model, it can still bring up the argument of whether or not the video is trying to evoke pity out of the viewer. It’s not an accurate representation of the model in the sense that it mostly does a good job of making Grace out to be a normal child who deserves the respect of everyone, including Donald Trump. However, we can still question whether they chose to use Grace to gain the viewers’ sympathy. I think in both of the advertisements that Priorities USA created, they definitely try to get the viewers to sympathize with the disabled community through the use of the disabled children. What we have to ask is if they effectively do this without potentially exploiting the …show more content…
This is particularly interesting considering that the advertisement was criticizing Donald Trump for mocking a disabled reporter, an adult. This brings in the argument of whether using a child vs. an adult elicits a different reaction. I understand from the viewpoint of the director/ creator of the video, it makes for a better contrast to compare Donald Trump to a young child. However, I think that’s one clear indication of another example of where the advertisement goes wrong. In my research, I have found that in media, people typically choose to use children as opposed to adults because they are much easier to pity. Disabled adults are seen as something society tends to steer away from, while a disabled child is someone we want to help and keep safe. Evan Kemp, a writer for the New York Times writes about this in his piece titled, “Aiding the Disabled: No Pity, Please.” One point he makes is pitying children teaches them from a young age that they can’t live independently for the rest of their lives (Kemp). All this stresses that media should focus more on the fact that disabled people don’t lead any less fulfilling lives than able-bodied people. They should work to break down this stereotype as opposed to playing on this trope to garner as much money as they can in fundraising events such as the