This study analyses the remaking of dementia as a social and cultural phenomenon in the public media discourse in a welfare state Norway. A content analysis was carried out of articles on dementia published in Norwegian paper media from 1995 to 2015. The study combined the tools from quantitative corpus analyses and qualitative critical discourse analyses, making it possible to detect and interpret diachronic changes in the dementia discourse. Although the main focus in Norwegian dementia discourse has changed from the disease to the personhood, the agents defining what it means to live well with dementia continued to be predominantly institutional: non-governmental organisations, municipalities, health-care institutions and politicians. An analysis of the uses of the politically incorrect Norwegian term for dementia, ‘senility’, revealed that this term offered an alternative to the institutionalised dementia discourse and functioned as an unconventional and therapeutic-free space where older people and persons with dementia could use humour to subvert these norms and power relations.

We studied how older people describe others with cognitive impairment. Forty-two focus groups represented African Americans, American Indians, Chinese Americans, Latinos, Vietnamese Americans, and Whites other than Latinos (Whites) (N = 396, ages 50+), in nine locations in the United States of America. Axial coding connected categories and identified themes. The constant comparison method compared themes across ethnic groups. African Americans, American Indians and Whites emphasised memory loss. African Americans, American Indians, Latinos and Whites stressed withdrawal, isolation and repetitive speech. African Americans, American Indians, Vietnamese Americans and Whites emphasised ‘slow thinking’. Only Whites described mood swings and personality changes. Many participants attributed dementia to stress. Terms describing others with dementia included ‘Alzheimer's’, ‘dementia’, ‘senile’ and ‘crazy’. Euphemisms were common (‘senior moment’, ‘old timer's disease’). Responses focused on memory, with limited mention of other cognitive functions. Differences among ethnic groups in descriptions of cognitive health and cognitive impairment underscore the need to tailor public health messages about cognitive health to ways that people construe its loss, and to their interest in maintaining it, so that messages and terms used are familiar, understandable and relevant to the groups for which they are designed. Health promotion efforts should develop ethnically sensitive ways to address the widely held misperception that even serious cognitive impairment is a normal characteristic of ageing and also to address stigma associated with cognitive impairment.