Journalistic folklore and scholars blame media for complicity in concealing presidential infirmity, while popular writers state that presidential health is coming under ever closer scrutiny. Little evidence exists to support either perspective. To address the lack of evidence, this research examined Time magazine coverage of presidential illness and disability for presidents Roosevelt through Bush. Surprisingly, media interest in presidential health has waned rather than waxed as time progressed, but the information being provided may be more explicit than it was earlier in this century. Coverage reassures the nation of the president's health more than it reveals uncertainty about prognoses, especially for those presidents who underwent major health risks while in office.
Journalists are remarkably unsuspicious of presidents' physiological fitness to serve.
This paper is a summary of two aspects of a larger study that analyzes how disability publications may help forge group identity for people with disabilities. It also describes the editors' perceptions of coverage of disability issues. In addition, a random subset of 12 editors were interviewed about disability related concepts and coverage issues.