Friday, September 15, 2006

  • More about FCC and Captioning

    FCC Captioning Waivers, Part 3
    By Cheryl Heppner
     
    Since alerting you to alarming language used in the FCC's granting  of closed captioning waivers to two TV programs, I have enjoyed reading copies of emails that were sent to the FCC Chairman, Commissioners, and Monica Desai, head of the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau.  I wish I could thank each of you personally for the time and thought you put into them.
     
    One thing I noticed was that many people were under the impression that TV closed captioning is covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act, when it's actually part of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
     
    Several representatives of national organizations serving individuals deaf and hard of hearing met yesterday to develop an action plan to address these concerns about the closed captioning waivers.  Lise Hamlin and I attended this meeting. You will be hearing more as things develop.
     
    Major setbacks like this decision by the FCC are the kind of thing that keep me awake at night.  In the wee hours of August 16, I started a list of the things that I find most upsetting.  So far my list has:
     
    There's no equality.  If you are one of the estimated 15% of Americans who watch TV by using an antenna, you're receiving your TV signal through public airwaves.  The right to use public airwaves brings with it responsiblity to serve the public.  What's even more unfair is the deal for people who get their TV programs by cable or satellite.  You're paying a charge each month for all the programs carried even though they're not required to be accessible to you.  There are already plenty of exemptions from captioning no matter whether you use antenna, cable or satellite. These include: programs on TV from 2-6 am local time, locally-produced and distributed non-news programs such as parades and school sports events, commercials of five minutes or less, instructional programs produced locally by public TV stations for use in grades K-12 or postsecondary schools, programs shown on new networks for the first four years the network is getting on its feet, public service announcements and promotional ads of less than 10 minutes, programs by providers with an annual gross revenue under $3 million.  And if you have a nice new digital TV, it's worse.  Digital TV captioning is still being phased in.
     
    It's bad for families.   Watching TV is often something that families enjoy doing together.  When a program doesn't have captions, it can limit choices for an entire family that has one member who depends on captioning.  Parents who need captions to follow programs can't monitor their children's viewing. Both of the two waivers announced this week, and the vast majority of programs requesting waivers, are from faith-based organizations.  But not having captions takes away a family's ability to worship together.  For some families in rural areas, or with a member with a health condition that prevents going to a place of worship, these programs could be their only option.  And to be really honest, it's always been hurtful to have faith-based organizations make these waiver requests.  It gives the impression that meeting the needs of people who are deaf and hard of hearing is not important, and that, of course, makes us feel the believe we're not important.
     
    Where's the history?  The National Association of the Deaf has tracked requests for captioning waivers, and Telecommunications for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing has also been doing some tracking.  Up until now, the FCC's decisions have appeared to be well-reasoned and researched.  Most waiver requests were denied.  This week, the decision in favor of the two entities requesting waivers suddenly introduced a whole new way of making determinations about who can get waivers.  We were given no warning, no public notice, no chance to weigh in.
     
    Now there's a pattern.  One reason why we reacted strongly to the news about the two waivers is that the FCC has recently appeared to be anti-consumer when it comes to captioning.  In addition to the acton on the two waivers and the "clarification" of August 7, 2006, which affected our ability to get visual information through captioning or other means, we still haven't seen action on the petition to address caption quality.  We've asked repeatedly for an easy way to make complaints about captioning and get them solved fast.  We've asked for more monitoring so our program providers don't need us to tell them about problems at all.  And there's a growing number of complaints related to digital TV captioning that need to be addressed.
     
    STILL TIME TO WRITE:
    Send your comments and personal stories to:
    FCC Chairman, Kevin Martin: 202-418-1000 (Voice)
     
    Chairman Martin and Commissioners:
     
    Head of the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau:
     
    SEE WHAT SOME OTHERS SAID TO FCC: 
     
    Just recently, I told friends how amazed I am that I can watch just about anything and count on it being captioned. These exemptions are a step backward and could have far-reaching effects. There's no excuse for programmers to request exemption when closed-captioning rules were put in place ten years ago -- plenty of time for them to get the little extra funding to caption their programs.
     -- Meryl, Texas

    What disappoints me most about these exemptions is that they are so often granted to religious stations and producers. Spiritual growth can be difficult for those of us with hearing loss. I'm a pharmacist with 6 years of college, but sometimes I feel that I have the spiritual development of a fifth grader. I go to worship services weekly, but (until getting a cochlear implant last year) didn't hear a word of the homily. Captioned religious shows have the potential to fill that void for many of us with hearing losses, but instead we are seemingly dismissed as not worthy of hearing the message I don't understand how the FCC can concur with this dismissal, and I'm very disappointed in you. Please, no more captioning exemptions!
    -- Dan, OH

    Just two days ago, I was watching "Fantastic Voyage" on the Sci-Fi channel with my family. I was surprised that this movie, made in 1966, was not captioned. This movie, though dated, does provide an imaginative glimpse into the human body. I was not able to participate and answer my daughter's questions because the movie was not captioned. I was surprised that a major broadcast, the Sci-Fi channel, was allowed to air this movie without captions. Was this so because your office had granted an exemption? How many other channels will I and millions of others now be excluded because of your decision?  Your decision will build resentment among millions of Americans. Please stop issuing waivers, and force broadcasters to comply with the Americans with Disability Act.
    -- Tom Hudspeth, Associate Pastor, TX

    It was mind-boggling to learn that the waivers were for religious programming.  I thought this Administration was pro-Christian!?   The waivers seem to say that the Administration does not mind if its citizens who are deaf, hard of hearing, or learning English are unable to understand religious programs on TV.  Please keep in mind that in rural areas, these groups are not always able to find a place of worship that meets their communication needs.  I would think you would be concerned that the Democrats would have a field day with this!

    -- Christy, VA

     

    These programs are aired over public broadcast spectrum, and programmers have an obligation to serve the “public interest, convenience and necessity.” The requirement does not apply to only the 90% of Americans with relatively normal hearing, but also to the 10% (30 million) with hearing loss.

    -- Larry, CA

    As a person with a late-onset hearing loss, and as an active member of the hearing loss community, I am shocked and outraged that the FCC could have POSSIBLY granted captioning exemptions to ANY programmer, no matter how ‘small’!!  Whatever were you thinking?!  When it has already been documented that there are nearly 32 million Americans who struggle with hearing loss, and that figure is projected to be 70 million by the year 2030, how can the FCC turn a blind eye to the real needs of the viewing public??
    -- Bonnie, VA

    I would like you to join my experience for the next 30 days.  Please turn the volume off on your own television every day between 2 AM and 6 AM.  Also please turn the volume off for the next 800 shows you watch and for half of the DVDs you watch.  After this trial period, if you still feel that it would be a hardship to caption for those people spending all that money to make shows and movies, continue to grant waivers, but if, after having experienced what I experience, you think that understanding and being included and informed is important, please don’t grant any waiver for longer than 6 months and don’t grant them without very compelling reasons.  Next, start issuing fines for programming that does not have a waiver and isn’t 100% captioned.  What good are captioning rules if there are more exceptions than rules themselves?
    -- Marjie, FL 

    It has been ten years now since the closed captioning rules were put in place. That is plenty of time for programmers to find funding and get set up to caption their programs. The decision sets a very bad precedent. A) It is counter to the regulations 
    -- Ira, OH

    We as a nation have had plenty of time to implement captioning.  Indeed, those who do caption could do better!  Nevertheless, granting large numbers of temporary and permanent exemptions is bad government!  You are making new rules without notice and not enforcing those on the books.  This FCC interpretation could have far reaching effects that go well beyond religious programming.  The government is to protect and facilitate the well being of its people.  Sometimes that involves helping profit and non-profit entities as well; but, for the good of the people.
    -- Rick, VA

    I have been hard of hearing all of my life and now hear with a cochlear implant.  I cannot enjoy broadcast television or DVD movies without captions.   In addition, I have been raised in a Christian home.  I speak from personal experience when I say that about 80-90% of the houses of worship in this country are not accessible to the hearing-impaired, and do not have captioning available in the sanctuary.  It follows then, that captioned television programs by Christian organizations are the last avenue by which we may draw more deaf and hard of hearing people to Christ.   Not to enforce captioning regulations is to deny our community equal access to programs that are available to persons with normal hearing.  These so-called Christian organizations had 10 years to plan for getting their programs captioned, including locating funds to provide for this service. 
    -- Wendy, MD

    ©2006 by Northern Virginia Resource Center for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Persons (NVRC), 3951 Pender Drive, Suite 130, Fairfax, VA 22030; www.nvrc.org   Items in this newsletter are provided for information purposes only; NVRC does not endorse products or services. You do not need permission to share this information, but please be sure to credit NVRC.  This news service is free of charge, but donations are greatly appreciated.  To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your email address, or report a problem receiving the news, send an email to cheppner@nvrc.org

     

  • Choose Identity

  • Give eProps (?)

  • New! You can now edit your comments for 15 minutes after submitting.

About this Entry

Who recommended?