27/01/2025 - The study revealed how only 5% of respondents believe there are enough resources and opportunities for deaf film and TV industry professionals

Last November, Erika Jones and Ellie Tomsett, with the support of the Sir Lenny Henry Centre for Media Diversity (LHC) at Birmingham City University, published a study titled "UNMUTED: Experiences of Deaf Film and TV Professionals in the UK Media Industry". The research represents one of the first in-depth insights into this specific topic. 

The report uses the term "deaf" as an umbrella term to reflect the full spectrum of people who are Deaf (the capital D signifying a person who is culturally deaf), deaf, partially deaf/partially hearing, deafened, Deafblind and hard of hearing. One of the main reasons the study was deemed necessary is the industry's tendency to treat disabled people as a homogenous group, failing to acknowledge the nuances of disability.

A previous report published by The Creative Diversity Network (CDN) in 2024 and titled "Diamond: The Seventh Cut" found that deaf individuals represent less than 1% of the UK’s broadcasting workforce. This figure is particularly concerning given that around 18% of working-age adults in the UK have some degree of deafness, ranging from mild hearing loss to profound deafness. 

The LHC study also highlights significant disparities, with Deaf professionals surveyed earning at least £13,000 (€15,400) less on average than their industry counterparts over the past year. Furthermore, only 5% of respondents believed there were adequate resources and opportunities for deaf professionals in the film and TV industry.

One survey respondent observed that the lack of opportunities could have significant long-term consequences, with 64% of respondents considering leaving the industry. “There are not enough opportunities for deaf professionals so the standard/professionalism amongst deaf professionals tends to be lower. This in turn creates a vicious circle as they are not as desirable as they could have been,” the study clarifies.

In detail, the main barriers preventing deaf professionals from accessing opportunities and resources were: communication access, skill and role gaps, restrictions and favouritism in deaf media, ghettoising in major broadcasters, inaccessible mainstream media and facing various facets of discrimination in the sector.

When it comes to communication access, the biggest problem involves having the right funds to provide an interpreter. The Access to Work grant, funded by the Department for Work and Pensions, covers this cost (86% of respondents reported using this grant). However, the financial support is capped, posing difficulties for those requiring higher levels of assistance. The second issue is the fear of being misinterpreted, as communication with colleagues is not direct but relies on a translator.

The problem of skill and role gaps is also pronounced. Over 70% of survey respondents were in editorial roles and under 10% identified themselves in technical, post production and production management roles. This gap is also evident at senior levels, as 14% of respondents held senior management positions, yet 67% of them owned their own production companies. Specifically, one respondent commented: “The industry was inaccessible for me, so I ended up building my own companies.”

Regarding discrimination, a staggering 98% of participants reported experiencing discrimination while working in the industry. 43% of respondents also said they have been bullied - verbally, emotionally, and physically. Tokenism - the superficial inclusion of individuals from marginalised communities to appear diverse and inclusive, without genuinely addressing their needs - is the most common form of discrimination, reported by 62% of participants. Ableism and audism are the second most common forms of discrimination (60%). The impact varies depending on communication preferences; for instance, 17% of oral respondents reported being bullied, compared to 50% of non-oral respondents. Intersectional discrimination is also present, with cases of sexism and racism occurring at higher rates than in the wider industry.

The full report is available here.