Lonely older people as a problem in society – construction in Finnish media

Abstract

Loneliness is a prevalent stereotype of old age but there is a lack of studies of how it is represented in mass media. This study examines how the loneliness of older people is portrayed in mass media. The research material consists of 154 texts from the leading 50' magazines and daily newspapers in Finland. In the texts, loneliness was rarely seen solely as a lack of companionship and many negative attributes were connected to it. Among other things, loneliness was connected to the low status of older people in society, inhumane practices in elderly care, lack of meaning in life and neglect by relatives. Loneliness was also viewed as an inevitable part of ageing. However, many suggestions were made to alleviate loneliness. The extent of these suggestions varied from broad and collective actions to simple and perfunctory solutions.

Loneliness among older people as a social problem: the perspectives of medicine, religion and economy

“…When loneliness is better understood and conceptualised, it would be also easier to build effective programmes aimed to relieving loneliness. (Uotila, Lumme-Sandt and Saarenheimo 2010: 124) The insight from all of this research for a constructionist approach is not whether loneliness is a negative or positive experience but that there is variation in meaning and evaluation, particularly when different observers' viewpoints are taken into account. This is less trivial than the assumption that there is a wide variety of definitions, operationalisations and measurement scales (such as the de Jong Gierveld scale and the UCLA scale), since it points to the core structural characteristic of modern society.…”

“…Furthermore, the qualitative interview study by Stanley et al (2010) should be mentioned because it not only accounts for variation among older adults' experiences of loneliness, it also introduces what systems-theorists call ‘multiperspectivity’, illustrating differences between the descriptions given by older people themselves and those given by care personnel. The study that comes closest to what we here call a social problems perspective is the one by Uotila, Lumme-Sandt and Saarenheimo (2010), who explicitly analyse ‘loneliness among older people’ as a social construction. Although these authors do not draw on the constructionist approach of Spector and Kitsuse, etc.…”

“…Although these authors do not draw on the constructionist approach of Spector and Kitsuse, etc. , they emphasise how constructions of older people's loneliness as a social problem are contingent on social and cultural contexts, and how these constructions vary in terms of meanings, causes and consequences (Uotila, Lumme-Sandt and Saarenheimo 2010: 109). Their focus is on the mass media, which is treated as a forum for different social actors (and commentators) rather than as a constructor in its own right (Luhmann 2000 b ).…”

“…When loneliness is better understood and conceptualised, it would be also easier to build effective programmes aimed to relieving loneliness. (Uotila, Lumme-Sandt and Saarenheimo 2010: 124)…”

Inclusion/Exclusion as the Missing Link. A Luhmannian Analysis of Loneliness Among Older People

“…Since loneliness is not merely a bio‐medical or psychological problem, it is also necessary to study it as social phenomenon (Schirmer and Michailakis, ). In whatever way one conceptualizes it—for instance, emotional versus social loneliness (Liu and Rook, ; Weiss, )—irrespective of whether one operationalizes it as uni‐ or multidimensional (De Jong Gierveld, ; Daniel Russell, ), and irrespective of the different meaning attributed to it (Graneheim and Lundman, ; Karnick, ; Schirmer and Michailakis, ; Stanley et al ., ; Uotila et al ., ), loneliness cannot be understood properly without taking into account the social world older people live in (Victor et al ., ). After all, the issue of concern is loneliness within—not outside of—society; likewise conceptions of loneliness (whatever they might be) are produced within society, i.e.…”