Framing the Paralympic Games: A Mixed-Methods Analysis of Spanish Media Coverage of the Beijing 2008 and London 2012 Paralympic Games

In recent years, there has been an increased emergence of studies focusing on the media coverage of the Paralympic Games. Until recently, studies have predominately used quantitative content analyses that, although providing useful interrogation of observational patterns, limits the understanding of and appreciation for the contexts that may have shaped the production of information. By focusing exclusively on the ‘what’ and on the ‘how much’ it is difficult to reveal the ‘why’ and to identify the underlying motives of any changes. This paper recognizes the nuances of the editorial decision-making process by using a mixed methods approach; employing quantitative and qualitative data drawn from a case study focusing on the Spanish media coverage of the 2008 and 2012 Paralympic Games. An initial content analysis of all news published in Spain’s twelve highest-circulation newspapers during Beijing 2008 and London 2012 Paralympic Games was undertaken. Subsequently, 15 semi-structured interviews were conducted with journalists that were also sent to these two iterations of the Paralympic Games by Spanish media. Drawing on conceptualisations of media framing, the results highlight that the numerical data alone shed insufficient light on the complexity of the news-making process. The semi-structured interviews brought to light issues such as editorial management buoyed by commercial imperatives, and organisational interjection in journalists’ narratives and authorship, that also contoured coverage and content. In addition to further debate about the complexities of media coverage of Paralympic sport, the study also underscores the utility of incorporating and combining qualitative and quantitative methodologies within sport media and communication research

Disorders of Consciousness and Disability Law

In 2018, the American Academy of Neurology, the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine, and the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research published a systematic evidence-based review and an associated practice guideline for improved assessment, treatment, and rehabilitation of patients with disorders of consciousness. Patients with disorders of consciousness include individuals in the vegetative and minimally conscious states, as well as others with covert consciousness and cognitive motor dissociation. These landmark publications (concurrently published in Neurology and Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation) supplant the 1994 New England Journal of Medicine Multi-Society Task Force report on the vegetative state and the 2002 criteria establishing minimally conscious states. The guideline re-designates the permanent vegetative state as chronic. In our article, we consider the legal and ethical implications of the practice guideline for clinical practice and explain the vulnerability of these patients who suffer from high rates of misdiagnosis, inadequate medical surveillance, undertreatment of pain, inadequate rehabilitation, and segregation in chronic care. We argue that these deficiencies in medical care are inconsistent with our growing appreciation of the dynamic nature of these brain states and an emerging standard of care as articulated by the national guideline. These deficiencies also violate domestic and international disability law. To substantiate this latter claim, we apply disability law to this population, focusing on key Americans with Disabilities Act mandates, the relevance of the 1999 Supreme Court, Olmstead v. L.C., and the utility of Olmstead enforcement actions to integrate the care of these individuals into the medical mainstream

Politics of dissensus in geographies of architecture: Testing equality at Ed Roberts Campus, Berkeley

This paper evokes the writings of Jacques Rancière to propose a concept of politics for geographies of architecture that is attentive to the polemical conditions under which more equal ways of composing built environments emerge. Discussing Ed Roberts Campus, a building designed and operated by the disability community in Berkeley, California, the paper argues for a politics of architecture that does not entail conflicts over power or identity, but revolves around a testing of materials that alters the bodily circumstances built form offers for collective inhabitation. Such testing sets in motion an uncertain process where a building undergoes constant destabilisation by new claimants who verify and expand its equality. The paper then counterpoises this disruptive politics to institutional practices in order to investigate how its fragile after‐effects might be sustained