The more I read about poverty and homelessness, the more it hits me just how bad things have gotten. For a long time, I kept a strict “no news” policy. My overactive imagination and anxiety make it impossible for me not to fixate on bad news until it consumes me. If I’m going to be homeless, I might as well keep up with the news, the way the homeless do, right? But, of course, I don’t take it as seriously as some—those who rely on half-hearted graffiti splattered across downtown for their daily headlines. Recently, though, I decided to lift the no-news ban. I figured it was necessary. I’ve tried to filter what I read, focusing mostly on political and social service-related issues about poverty and homelessness, with some other topics like government policy, mental health, substance abuse, and funding sprinkled in.
But even with this narrow focus, the surge of information I’ve been reading has reignited a social justice fury inside me. Even articles that seem to support poverty alleviation and compassionate social services still leave me with a bad taste in my mouth. It’s not the journalists’ fault—they’re just doing their jobs. It’s the people being interviewed, especially those with influence, like government officials and social service reps, who should be more thoughtful in how they communicate with the public.
The problem with poverty and homelessness is massive. It’s not just a provincial issue; it’s a global crisis. And I’m honestly scared for the future. It’s so overwhelming that sometimes I can’t even tell where one problem ends and another begins. What I’ve noticed lately is the influx of articles about homeless encampments. When I searched for “homeless” in my favorite news app, I assumed it would narrow things down. I was wrong. What came up was a long list of articles—Ottawa, San Francisco, Saskatchewan, Buenos Aires—different approaches, different governments, different opinions, different levels of funding. But something about each article stood out, and not in a good way.
Though the specifics vary, the portrayal of homelessness remains disturbingly consistent. It’s not just what’s written about the homeless, but how it’s written. Maybe I’m jaded, but it feels like I’m hearing the news through the voice of a newscaster with a deeply ingrained, negative view of the homeless. Or maybe it’s just the tone of the quotes from “leaders”—the disdain and antipathy that seem to come through, even in their attempts to be neutral. Even news that advocates for increased services and compassion leaves me feeling alienated. It’s insulting. It’s scary. And it makes me feel like society’s negative viewpoint on us is being reinforced every time these articles are published.
Take the article I read about the eviction of a homeless encampment in New Orleans in October 2024. The encampment, home to about 75 people, was dismantled due to the upcoming Taylor Swift concert. The government officials said it was for “safety concerns,” due to the event. Sure, safety. Because it’s totally fine to uproot a group of people who already have nothing, right? Those people were forced to move their belongings—little as they were—because of a concert. And let’s talk about the fact that Taylor Swift’s concert made $200 million in ticket sales alone from that New Orleans stop. Now, I don’t blame Taylor directly—she’s not responsible for the systemic issues at play. But here’s the math: It costs about $4,000 to $7,000 to house one person in Louisiana. So, to house all 75 people in that tent city would’ve cost between $300,000 and $525,000. At one percent of her concert revenue, Taylor could’ve housed not just that tent city, but three more. One percent. That’s it.
I’m actually surprised she didn’t at least offer that one percent to help. After all, she already gave $5 million in bonuses to her tour bus drivers. It’s not her problem, but it feels wrong that she didn’t at least try to be part of the solution. But the deeper issue here isn’t just the content of these articles; it’s the subtle messages embedded in the language. Even in articles that seem supportive, there’s a hidden agenda. Take this quote, for instance: “Only the most dangerous blocks, where homeless regularly walk across busy streets, are being shut down,” said a government spokesperson. The casual use of “homeless” , not even THE homeless. Lacking to even acknowledge them as people struck me hard. It’s subtle, but that’s how programming works. The language reinforces the idea that homeless people are less than human.
It’s not just about what’s said, but how it’s said. The fact that no one in these articles took the time to address whose safety they were actually concerned with—whose safety was at risk—is a glaring oversight. These types of statements, the lack of accurate representation, shape public attitudes and perpetuate stigma. Stereotyping only deepens the divide and leads to misinformed policies that only make the problem worse. It’s no surprise we have inadequate support systems when society continues to misunderstand and unfairly judge people experiencing homelessness.
I wish that, for once, the media would take a more honest and compassionate approach. It’s not just about the facts; it’s about how we treat each other. Until that changes, we’ll keep spinning in circles, perpetuating the same cycle of neglect and misunderstanding.
Add comment
Comments