Discourse, Deficit and Identity: Aboriginality, the Race Paradigm and the Language of Representation in Contemporary Australia

Abstract

Deficit discourse is expressed in a mode of language that consistently frames Aboriginal identity in a narrative of deficiency. It is interwoven with notions of ‘authenticity’, which in turn adhere to models of identity still embedded within the race paradigm, suffering from all of its constraints but perniciously benefiting from all of its tenacity. Recent work shows that deficit discourse surrounding Aboriginality is intricately entwined within and across different sites of representation, policy and expression, and is active both within and outside Indigenous Australia. It thus appears to exhibit all the characteristics of what Foucault has termed a discursive formation, and its analysis requires a multi-disciplinary approach. Developing research overseas on the prevalence and social impact of deficit discourse indicates a significant link between discourse surrounding indigeneity and outcomes for indigenous peoples. However, while there is emerging work in this field in Aboriginal education, as well as a growing understanding of the social impact of related behaviours such as lateral violence, the influence of deficit discourse is significantly under-theorised and little understood in the Indigenous Australian context. This article will problematise the issues and explore theory and methods for change.

Mediatisation, Marginalisation and Disruption in Australian Indigenous Affairs

“…In what may appear a divergent finding from the extensive body of literature that shows Australian news media perpetuates racism and amplifies Indigenous failure in a discourse of deficit and negativity (Fforde et al, 2013;Hokowhitu, 2013;Meadows, 2001), our research demonstrates that constitutional recognition was generally framed as a 'positive' news story. News reporting framed recognition as an example of the nonIndigenous community's goodwill towards Indigenous people and readiness to amend a flaw in the founding document, rather than engaging with complex and challenging Indigenous demands, critique and dissent.…”

“…We acknowledge our status as nonIndigenous researchers working with the knowledge and innovation of Indigenous media practitioners. We see this article as contributing to our broader research paradigm that works with Indigenous researchers to challenge the colonial mindset and the prevailing discourse of deficit in Indigenous affairs (Fforde, Bamblett, Lovett, Gorringe, & Fogarty, 2013). In this article we emphasise Indigenous innovation in social media and use the mediatisation framework to focus attention, scrutiny, analysis and critique on non-Indigenous institutions and powerful elites.…”

Reassembling the Indigenous Public Sphere

“…Secondly, Hartley and McKee's approach discounts critical consideration of the legacies of colonial racism and its contemporary manifestations, as such legacies are apparently on the way to being overcome by modernity's inherent teleo-logic. It also discounts consideration of how political and (particularly) commercial influences might contribute to the reproduction of discourses of Indigeneity and Indigenous issues as inherently and inevitably problematic and intractable, in ways that limit rather than enable engagement with Indigenous voices (Fforde et al 2013, Brough 1999. Thirdly, the 'evolutionary' model proposed not only overrides the need to support arguments by reference to evidence, but also undermines the need for intervention, or political struggle.…”

Absolute cardiovascular disease risk and lipid‐lowering therapy among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians

“…Our team is well aware of the pathologising of indigeneity and the ongoing deficit discourse 2 . Rejecting deficit discourse does not mean pretending there are no challenges 3 .…”