Refusing to subtitle your own videos

One of the lamest excuses for a deaf or hard of hearing person to say regarding their own videos is the refusal to subtitle their own videos (whether it's voice or signing) until a good majority of videos in YouTube gets captioned or subtitled by their own authors. The funny thing is that the best way to spread awareness is to include subtitles in your own videos. Doing that tells other people that you are for inclusiveness for those who cannot hear, understand the spoken words or understand signs. Recently today, on the John Tracy Clinic Facebook page it had a historical JTC video in it that was up but had no captions or subtitles to it. I responded by saying there's no captions. A quick reply was given saying they don't have the resource or time to add subtitles. I then wrote a quick response that was respectful in nature.

I caption my videos I put on my blog by listening to it. I need anywhere from an hour to three hours of my own time depending on the length of the video whether it's my own personal video or something else. I use Overstream (or physically add the captions for my own videos), for example, http://kokonutpundits.blogspot.com/2010/10/matt-hamill-post-fight-video-interview.html, a video I captioned last year. And my video tribute to JTC (http://kokonutpundits.blogspot.com/2010/09/video-tribute-to-john-tracy-clinic.html ).

Yet I'm hard of hearing (moderate-severe) and I took the time to do this by myself because my main audience are mostly deaf and hard of hearing. I know what it's like to be left out, so why would I do that to them even though I can understand the spoken words?

It'd be better to have video captioned first and have it ready to go rather than doing it later. Otherwise, it'd give the appearance of not caring first for people with hearing loss their consideration when it comes to accessibility. It'd be better to caption first in light of the organization's connection and name. Not doing so only serve an ironic reminder on the lack of inclusion.

Let's not use excuses and include everyone whenever a video first comes out by JTC using whatever medium format (e.g. Facebook, JTC website, YouTube, etc.).

Respectfully yours. Mike

Needless to say that video on JTC Facebook disappeared 10 minutes later. I hope they understood my  message on making sure any videos put out are to be captioned. Not to be mean but just showing them the futility in trying to use the "no time" or "no resource" excuse when it comes to adding subtitles to a video. It's very easy nowadays. Nothing complex about it all. All I had to do was prove to them that including subtitles in a video does not take a whole lot of time and resources. I used my own subtitled videos as examples to prove my very point! They relented and removed the video and the comments that went with it.

I include captions/subtitles to my spoken videos but in videos where I signed in a video called "Professionalism or name calling? knowing full well I'd have an audience that do not know sign language. This includes hearing parents of deaf/hh babies! Regardless, this is the surest way to reach the widest number of people out there in YouTube land. Barry Sewell finally saw that light last year and began including captions to all of his signed videos with his first Open Letter to NAD and the Community on June 9, 2010. He has been one of the most prolific signing vloggers out there and among the very, very few who include captions. Adding subtitles to his videos are a guarantee that his videos can be watched by both signers and non-signers alike.  Barry Sewell now has a huge edge over those who refuses to include subtitles to their own signing videos. If one thinks about it, 99.9% of the U.S. population does not know sign language. By including English subtitles to a signed video will ensure a capability of a captioned video to reach a majority of the U.S. population because it then becomes completely watchable.

If you have the means and capability to include subtitles or captions you should do so. Using the excuse as a reason to not include subtitles because you're waiting for the rest of the English speaking population to include their subtitles becomes a very lame one. It simply becomes a cop out excuse and a way to conveniently avoid doing any additional legwork for your signed videos and that you purposely discriminate because of a stupid ideology.  For Barry and I, we don't think of it as doing extra legwork but rather the huge opportunity and potential to reach a much larger and wider non-signing population which amounts to potentially several tens of millions of people in the U.S. alone not counting many more countries outside of the U.S. who know the English language. Remember, I said "potential" and not that the figure I gave is the actual number people will watch. I encourage those who sign in their own videos who have the capability and the means to include subtitles to consider that opportunity. Inclusiveness goes both ways. Let's not be selfish about it and let stupidity be your answer. 

But to focus on a very, very, very small segment of the Deaf community which amounts to potentially some 600,000 (maybe less or more) Deaf people, your non-subtitled signing videos would only reach a fraction of that 600,000 number because about half of those people are adults or older teens who can watch, and then you have an even smaller number of people who even bother or have an interest going onto the internet to watch YouTube videos or even visit DVTV (which btw continues to thrive despite a miserably failed boycott against it) and watch those signed videos.

All in all you have a potential Deaf audience of maybe 50,000 to 100,000 vs a potential audience if you include English subtitles to your signing videos will go up to perhaps several tens of millions of English speaking audience that actively use the internet.  I'm just guessing on the potential side of things but assuredly the number is much, much larger on the English speaking/listening side than the signing side. No one can dispute that one bit.

So, which signing message do you think will have a better chance of getting out to the wider audience? A signed video with no subtitless, or a signed video with subtitles?  Waiting for the hearing population to do the subtitles first is a losing proposition because those that do include English subtitles to their own signing videos have the distinct political advantage and leading edge over those who do not subtitle their videos in getting the word out.  And it is those people whose words are the ones that get out to the general population...and not the signed videos with no subtitles. They will be the ones forever relegated to the eyes of a very small population of Deaf people. And will forever fall on, literally, deaf ears in the hearing population because they do not understand a signed video.

Captioned: Marlee Matlin interview on "The Talk" show

Captioning courtesy of Kokonut Pundit.

I spent three hours of my time to get this ready by listening to it on YouTube, writing it down, accessing Overstream.net, editing, and adding captions to it. It is a laborious process but it can be done. If I can do it as a one person effort I'm sure others can, too, whether if videos are done in spoken English or sign language. Travesty is when organizations, small or large, that target the deaf and hard of hearing population won't do their captioning. It'd be even worse among the signing organizations or companies who won't even put in an ounce of effort to include captioning for their signing videos. It wouldn't be just a travesty but plain hypocritical of them to behave like that. No excuse in this day and age when communication access is important over the internet for people with hearing loss. None. No excuse for organizations no matter how small or large to not caption their videos with the intention to reach a deaf and hard of hearing audience. Otherwise these organizations would simply be the selfish ones.


Enjoy the interview.

Do I support the Closed Captioning bill HR 3101?

NAD has the latest information regarding on trying to get Congress to pass a Closed Captioning bill this April 15 (HR 3101 -Twenty-first Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2009 ) though it does not contain language to enforce YouTube or iPad.

There was a bill before HR 3101 and that is the H.R. 6320: Twenty-first Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2008. That bill never became law and died in Congress. Congress moves slowly in passing laws while technology moves even faster and is based on demands, marketing potential, improving technology in the computer chip and programming sector, and a greater understanding of the need for closed captioning by corporate and public entities. Since the introduction of H.R. 6320 technology on closed captioning, especially over the internet, technology moved ahead with its own self-propelling captioning initiatives along with people who are passionate about closed captioning in getting it pushed out into the public mainstream.

Google adds real time automatic closed captioning although not perfect it's a start and they recognize the need and marketing potential as well. Google sets the stage and worldwide example on the importance of investing in captioning of videos whether on television or internet. And that speech recognition technology has now gone mainstream, this will only continue to improve to the point where all videos will automatically transcribed and include closed captioning. This is fast becoming a reality. Law or no law.

Hulu adds captioning to their movies and television shows. The list continues to grow.

Blackberry phones are beginning to have Closed Captioning capability to view videos on your smart phones' screen which is definitely smaller than a 13-inch screen television screen. So does the iPhone.

Captioning is available on digital television as opposed to analog television where a 13-inch screen exempts it from any captioning requirement. A digital television is different set of technology that includes captioning where it continues to improve.

The Television Decoder Circuitry Act of 1990 (“TDCA”) requires, generally, that television receivers contain circuitry to decode and display closed captioning. Specifically, the TDCA requires that “apparatus designed to receive television pictures broadcast simultaneously with sound be equipped with built-in decoder circuitry designed to display closed-captioned television transmissions when such apparatus is manufactured in the United States or imported for use in the United States, and its television picture screen is 13 inches or greater in size.”

The Federal Communication Commission\'s Digital TV (DTV) proceeding incorporated an industry approved transmission standard for DTV into
its rules. The standard included a data stream reserved for closed captioning information. However, specific instructions for implementing closed captioning services for digital television were not included. The Electronics Industries Alliance (EIA), a trade organization representing the U.S. high technology community, has since adopted a standard, EIA-708 (High Definition Closed Captioning for purposes of this document), that provides guidelines for encoder and decoder manufacturers as well as caption providers to implement closed captioning services with DTV technology. In a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in its DTV proceeding, the FTC proposed to adopt a minimum set of technical standards for closed caption decoder circuitry for digital television receivers in accordance with Section 9 of the EIA-708 standard and to require the inclusion of such decoder circuitry in DTV receivers.

Simultaneous closed captioning companies in finding a niche market that exploit closed captioning needs.

Closed captioning included in DVR via TiVo.

ETV is metadata that cable providers recently began integrating into their broadcasts, and the TiVo patent will allow the company to sync both this as well as closed caption information and display it in an interactive method. This includes closed captioning text, a menu or digital video and sound effects. TiVo also promises more advanced uses thanks to this type of technology, such as marking sections of a program they find particularly interesting and then sharing them with friends who also have a TiVo DVR.

Prior to the patent award on February 9th, TiVo already offered ways for customers to view closed caption data, and viewers can also subscribe to a show or order more product information when watching a commercial.

ABC takes the lead on internet captioning.

HTML5 captioning effort with demo videos of an earlier HTML5 version.




What I've listed so far is just an short example of things to come in the world of closed captioning (or subtitling). Let the market forces send a message to corporate and public entities on providing closed captioning on digital tv, smart phones, and online videos over the internet. The trend is clear and that technology is increasingly making it easier, such as YouTube's automatic captioning service, for companies and businesses to include captioning in their videos, whatever the format.

I have mixed feelings about getting the government involved to force companies to comply, especially when technology continues to leap frog ahead with the embedding of closed captioning as a standard practice. Let the market dictate this direction at this point in time. Consider where we were 2 to 4 years ago for online captioning opportunities. There were essentially none. Currently, the trend in captioning is clearly picking up. It's a matter of time till captioning is done as part of any video programming since advertising and marketing pressures will help ensure that. And that social awareness and consciousness will be another factor in pushing closed captioning to the top of their collective consciousness. Bottom line? It's coming and without the need for government intervention to make closed captioning mandatory for all online videos. Technology moves faster than the government could in trying to pass a bill. And that's encouraging.

Forcing the hand or not?

I want to make a clarification to “Earofmyheart.com” or “LZupp” over at YouTube (see transcript of her video at her blogsite) concerning the supposed “forcing” of people into doing what they do not want to do. In this case, it’d be the Deaf Village’s guideline requiring that all videos or vlogs submitted need to be captioned, subtitled or at the very least include a transcript. No one is being forced against his or her will when it comes to having a text version for a submitted video. Either the person shares a similar philosophy or goal as Deaf Village or he does not. A person has a choice on whether he wants his video to be accessible to more people over the internet or he does not. And if so, then the person will take the time to ensure that access to the rest of the deaf, hh and hearing population be made possible to those who may know little or do not know signing or the visual communication. This text requirement also extends to those who speak in their videos as well since not all deaf, hh or hearing understand or hear every spoken word. Also, not all videos are made the same and thus quality differs. Deaf Village wants to ensure and guarantee those who do visit DV will know that linked videos will either have captions, subtitles or transcripts.

A Message from the Late Deafened and Deaf/HH Community

Update: Correct video version.

Free Translation and Captioning Service for ASL Vloggers?

Here are some interesting questions on the equal access issue of signed video bloggings if you were given the opportunity to use a free service to translate and caption (or transcript) for your ASL video blogs. Would you take it if done free so other non-signers may be able to access your ASL vlogs?

Would you accept free ASL translation and captioning service for your ASL vlogs?
	Yes
	No
pollcode.com free polls

Would you accept free ASL translation and transcripting service for your ASL vlogs?
	Yes
	No
pollcode.com free polls

Adversity and...the audacity of hope?

Location: Dog Canyon on the Sacramento Mountains in New Mexico near Alamogordo.

Here's another deaf guy named Stephen Hopson of Adversity University who prefers to use his voice in his (first ever) video blog, too. He's also a motivator and a professional speaker who travels alot doing speaking engangements. Check out his first video blog post of him speaking and him thanking me in his blog on helping him get started with the subtitling idea. Thanks to my captioned video blogs of me speaking that intrigued him about me. One thing for sure, people like me and Stephen Hopson are not afraid to use our voice to speak in front of a video camera or a crowd of people.

Adversity, we all face them at one time or another. For deaf and hard of hearing people, their adversity is hearing loss. The ability to speak and/or listen shouldn't be about the "audacity of hope" on achieving those things. Not with technology we have today and better educational understanding when it comes to early intervention for a deaf child or baby on developing better listening and speaking skills. Those things should be expected as achievable and very reachable goals and not some mundane "audacity of hope" kind of thing we're hearing about today. Maybe 40 years ago but certainly not today. And even less so 10, 20 and 30 years down the road when technology and, especially so, biotechnology will continue to change the landscape for those with hearing loss.

UPDATE: See an updated or a "redacted" version of "adversity" here.

Japanese Sign Language

I remember during the summer of 1989 during Deaf Way at Gallaudet University when I was staying in a dormitory I met a young Japanese man whose name I have long forgotten. Like all other foreigners who came to Deaf Way communicated mostly by means of gesturing. Between me and the young Japanese guy we gestured some, showed each other pictures and then he gave me his business card (how typical!) with his home address in Japan. But I have not bothered to contact him all this time nor do I have his business card. Though I do have a picture of him somewhere in my house. And because of that I Googled up some Japanese Sign Language videos to check on a few things first.

Here are two interesting videos of a Japanese woman signing in Japanese Sign Language (JSL).



Did you get it? Any of you? Did you understand what she was saying? Speaking and/or the signing part? I seriously doubt any of you did at least not context-wise on what she was saying aside from recognizing one or two signs like 'writing" and "cold". I'm sure she had something important to say to her viewers out there but since there were no subtitles in this one you wouldn't know, right? Felt a bit left out and wished you could understand her? Yeah, kind of like the people who watch vlogs in ASL wouldn't know either. Not knowing if ASL vloggers had something important to say or discuss, or maybe just a bunch of juvenile gibberish and hand waving.

The next video below is subtitled in both English and Japanese. But since most of you readers in here wouldn't know what she was saying and I'd say that the English subtitle along with JSL is a godsend rather than seen as "distracting." At least with the English subtitle you could gather what each of the Japanese signs may mean.

Arrigato!



Now, with subtitles people from other countries can learn sign language from other each other. Without subtitles embedded with sign language videos, how can people learn another language? Since vlogs from the United States are one of the most watched vlogs over the internet because English is an internationally used language, spoken or in print. Another reason to include subtitles in vlogs just like putting them in helps the Deaf-Blind people understand vlogs in ASL.

Access or no access, that is the question.

In terms of better access, would you like to see ASL vlogs be subtitled?
	Yes!
	No!
	I am not sure
pollcode.com free polls

See "No Subtitles for Patty" and "The Advantages of Subtitles on Vlogs."

Subtitled vlogs can be done in any written language format such as English, Spanish, French and so on. Depending on where you are and the audience you are targeting, the idea is about communication access for those who know little or no sign language. Sign language could be in ASL, BSL, Italian Sign Language, Swedish Sign Language, PSE, SEE and so on.

No Subtitles for Patty

References made in my video blog:

Patty - The DeafBlind's Musing and The Expatriate.
Seek Geo - a Deaf vlogger who signs and use subtitles for his videos.