Hypocrisy when it comes to captioning vs transcript in videos?

This has been an ongoing hypocrisy for quite awhile when it comes to signed videos that do not provide any subtitles or captions but instead provide transcripts for those who do not know sign language. For years culturally deaf people have complained loudly how videos they watched were never captioned such as TV shows and movies over cable and the internet, including YouTube videos. But that has been changing slowly (or quickly depending on your perspective) while captioning and easy to use subtitling technology catches up. But imagine instead of subtitles or captions you have a transcript for each video. Why not just provide a transcript instead?

Well, it's not quite the same thing since it provides an obvious disconnect between the viewers and those in the videos because other visual cues and emotions would be entirely lost.  So, it makes good business sense is to provide captions/subtitles along with the signing in a video. This allows non-signing viewers a certain connect with signers seen in a video. It is just not those who do not know sign language but those who may be weak in sign language and having captions helps. It also makes good common sense to include captions in videos since that will help reach a wider audience regardless of who the viewing audience is.

But the hypocrisy continues. Some bray saying that putting captions in a signing video "pollutes" it. If that is their logic for an excuse then putting captions in a speaking video also "pollutes" it. Laughable on both sides.

So, if you are running a deaf/hh business or an organization and have the means and wherewithal to include captions to your videos then please do it. If you believe in communication access and inclusion your business or organization ought to be including captions/subtitles in their videos otherwise you and your organization or business  just end up as a bunch of hypocritical people with a stupid excuse not to provide captions/subtitles but tosses out a transcript instead. If you do that, then please do not complain again about the lack of captions or subtitles in movies, TV shows, news shows, internet videos, and on YouTube.  In fact, you would have no right to complain because your organization or business refuses to provide captions/subtitles in their own videos. In fact, by refusing to do so you've become just like....them.

Equal Access – When a Village Agrees

The one single issue unanimously agreed upon without hesitation by those who helped found Deaf Village was that submitted video blogs (“vlogs”) are required to be subtitled/captioned or included with transcripts to go with them. Currently there are a few people outside of Deaf Village who are having a bit of a conniption fit over Guideline #5. However, this was a decision that came from a diverse group of Deaf, deaf, hard of hearing and hearing people from a variety of background and life experiences. This was a decision that naturally made sense because greater communication access to video blogs (or any online videos for that matter) whether signed, cued speech or spoken would reach more people and increase inclusivity. This requirement is no more of an eye-brow raiser than the requirement for television shows or movies to be captioned just so the viewing audience can feel more “included” like any others. It just makes good common sense that videos need to have that kind of access. Not doing so merely shuts out those who do not know sign language, cued speech or unable to hear or understand clearly the spoken words in a video blog. The greater majority of the population with hearing loss does not know signing or even cued speech but rather English as their major language of use in the United States (even elsewhere, too). It’s better to grant communication access to the majority of the 30 million people with hearing loss than to exclude them along with the rest of the hearing population by doing an ASL-only video blog with no captioning/subtitling or transcripts. And it's just not a deaf thing either when it comes to captioning since hearing people benefit from it as well like those learning the English language. Deaf Village’s goal is about inclusivity rather than to practice total exclusiveness. And thus by allowing video blogs with captions/subtitles or transcripts the readers, whether deaf, hard of hearing or hearing, will have the opportunity to understand what was said.

It is NOT Deaf Village’s responsibility to provide captioning/subtitling or transcript services to video bloggers in order to ensure that their videos are accessible to the rest of the population. Deaf Village is in the aggregator business. After all, the onus falls on the vlogger to decide whether it's important to provide subtitles or transcripts for their online videos or not. And they should be mindful of their own demands from others (e.g. movies, tv shows, online shows, video blogs, YouTube videos, etc) on requiring/wanting/wishing that videos be subtitled/captioned or included a transcript at the very least. The irony of seeing people complain about Deaf Village’s guideline concerning subtitling or transcript requirement is that for years a certain group of people with hearing loss complained the loudest about how no captioning/subtitles were available over the internet when it came to online videos. Deaf Village now has that opportunity to help ensure that video blogs come with captioning/subtitling or transcripts.

Should a technology down the road come up with a software that can convert sign language into printed text automatically as easily as the spoken words into text then the issue of captioning/subtitling or transcript requirement wouldn’t be such an “issue.” But for right now those who submit videos online are asked to proactively make sure that their internet videos are captioned/subtitled or come with transcripts at the very least before Deaf Village accepts them. Doing so would allow deaf, hard of hearing and hearing people contribute and interact more fully in an accessible “village.”

Currently YouTube offers a way to add subtitles for your submitted videos. Overstream.net also allows subtitling capability for online videos. Laptops often contain software that allow subtitling such as Windows Movie Maker.

Regardless on how videos are prepared, the responsibility lies with each person to ensure that their own submitted videos be captioned/subtitled or included with a transcript at the very least. Lest he or she become a hypocrite by demanding all videos be captioned.

The idea of “inclusivity” simply opens more doors to those who want to participate and understand, in this case, what each vlogger has to say. For those who are serious about equal access themselves need to be proactive in what they believe in when it comes to captioning needs. This is about the assurances on providing an accessible service to the greatest number of people and not about a single communication ideology that promotes exclusiveness to the greater number of people. If one is serious on reaching out to the greater number of people then one should also seriously consider on taking the time and effort to add subtitles or transcripts to their own video blogs or online videos.

Deaf Pagan said it well,

“I’ve always been taught that it is not enough to just sit around and complain when there’s a problem. If you’re not willing to be a part of the solution, then you’re only contributing to being a part of the problem.”

After all, when I make my own online videos I make sure I take the time and effort to include subtitles to all of my videos whenever I speak. Hopefully others will take to task this same philosophy when it comes to signing, using cued speech or by using one's voice by speaking.

UPDATE: Deaf Village's requirement that submission of vlogs be captioned/subtitled or included transcripts is not intended to create "apathy towards ASL" or "drive ASL vloggers away" but rather to create greater inclusiveness *FOR ALL*. Not all can sign or understand sign very well and having, especially, a subtitled video can help create a continued interest for those who want to learn sign language someday. Or cued speech. Or whatever. It's the message that people want to hear, watch or read about. But if your target audience is a Deaf one then you don't have to worry about subtitling or adding a transcript to your vlogs. Or if you want your message to be heard by reaching out to a greater number of people then include subtitle or transcript to your vlog. But if you want Deaf Village to accept your vlog then their guidelines must be met, which means a vlog need to have subtitle or a transcript. Otherwise, it'd be practicing greater exclusiveness to the rest of the population.