The Two Faces of AIDS

Stories on HIV and AIDS in the newspapers this last month make it seem as though South Africa is facing two rather different epidemics.

The first makes ordinary people its victims: a teenager heading a household who is concerned about his younger brothers; an ailing boy who wants a bicycle with a bell; a young singer that supports 200 orphans with her income. This kind of epidemic is fought by activists and ordinary people — some infected themselves, others simply affected. It wreaks households, unties families, destroys communities, steals precious years between mothers and children, strains relationships between siblings, pulls apart spouses and lovers, brings worry, takes lives.

The second epidemic prefers the company of doctors, scientists and politicians. It is all very complicated. Discussions around the issue are laden with technical terms: ARVs, CD4 counts, PMTCT, the National Strategic Plan, TB vaccines, and recently, H1N1. Ordinary people cannot fight this epidemic. Only large organizations and experts are up to the challenge: ministers and governments, the South African National AIDS Council, health MECs, hospital DGs and MDs, the WHO and other NGOs. And above all, it is a very, very expensive affair.

Whilst this illustration may slightly embellish the difference between the two types of HIV and AIDS stories that dominate the media, it is hardly an exaggeration. The social/humanitarian stories are kept distinctly separate from the biomedical/political ones. The AIDS epidemic is one (albeit complex) story, yet it is told as two.

This distinction is artificial and misleading. Portraying the epidemic as an exclusively political and biomedical issue estranges it from the experiences of ordinary people at a time when a much-needed sense of urgency could have been gained from showing how these issues relate to individuals and communities.

On the other hand, failing to consider the biomedical and political context of the epidemic in human-interest stories creates the impression that “ordinary people” are politically powerless and ignorant of the science of HIV and AIDS.

The media alone should not be held accountable for this dichotomy. Activists and politicians have a crucial role to play in portraying the epidemic more holistically. The news this month has shown that activists, like Thembi Nbubane and Annie Lennox, are experts at politicizing the personal; whilst politicians (even Julius Malema) can show that political issues can be personal.

Effectively, these groups straddle the line between the biomedical or political and social or humanitarian sides of the epidemic. Their positions offer unique opportunities to show how interlinked these issues really are. If activists and politicians are mindful to tell the full story of HIV and AIDS, media coverage of the epidemic might me more comprehensive. Perhaps then, when the true pervasiveness of the epidemic becomes apparent, the urgency of addressing it will hit home.

Melissa Meyer is a researcher at the HIV/AIDS and the Media Project.