-
Singaporean media narratives appear to have shifted from viewing deafness mainly through charity, medical, audist, and “overcoming disability” lenses toward gradual recognition of deaf people as a linguistic and cultural minority.
-
Despite this progress, stereotypes and audist attitudes persist.
-
Sign languages are increasingly acknowledged but are still often framed as accessibility tools rather than full natural languages central to deaf identity and SgSL communities.
-
These portrayals influence public attitudes and expectations hearing people have of deaf people and sign languages.
-
Hearing people and speaking and hearing abilities are often framed as "normal" while deaf people and use of sign languages are not. Language discrimination exists.
Snapshot of the Findings
Research Question 3
3. How might these recurring media portrayals shape public attitudes toward deaf and hard-of-hearing people and sign languages in Singapore?
-
These portrayals influence public attitudes and expectations hearing people have of deaf people and sign languages.
-
It shapes whether deaf people are seen as recipients of help, needing to adopt hearing cultural norms such as oralism in order to be included, exceptional achievers, or equal citizens and sign language users.
-
-
Hearing people and speaking and hearing abilities are often framed as "normal" while deaf people and use of sign languages are not.
-
Deaf people are "othered" and seen as different which reflects bias and audist assumptions. Consequently, this can lead to discrimination of deaf and hard-of-hearing people in society. Language discrimination is prevalent as signed languages are portrayed as inferior to spoken languages.
-
Research Question 2
-
Despite greater recognition of deaf people as a linguistic and cultural minority and use of SgSL reflecting deaf cultural identity, stereotypes and audist ideologies persist.
-
Deaf people are often portrayed as inspirational, dependent on benevolent acts of kindness from hearing people, or included symbolically rather than represented as ordinary people with agency and expertise. Outdated terms like "normal", "deaf mute" or "hearing impaired" still persist till now.
2. What narratives are recurring in Singapore's media coverage of deaf people and sign language(s)?
Research Question 1
1. How have media representations of deaf identities and sign languages in Singapore changed between 1945 to 2025?
-
Singaporean media narratives appear to have shifted from viewing deafness mainly through charity, medical, audist, and “overcoming disability” lenses toward gradual recognition of deaf people as a linguistic and cultural community.
Snapshot of the Findings