“The National Association of the Deaf has filed a lawsuit against the Washington Redskins to get team officials to offer closed-captioning for the deaf and hearing-impaired at FedEx Field.” The lawsuit cites the Americans with Disabilities Act. (Hamil R. Harris, “Hearing-Impaired Fans Sue for Access to Closed-Captioning”, Washington Post, Sept. 20). Related: Feb. 19 and Aug. 1, 2000 (movie theaters); Mar. 9-11, 2001 (comedy club, sign interpreters)
Deaf sue to force closed-captioning of Redskin football
“The National Association of the Deaf has filed a lawsuit against the Washington Redskins to get team officials to offer closed-captioning for the deaf and hearing-impaired at FedEx Field.” The lawsuit cites the Americans with Disabilities Act. (Hamil R. Harris, “Hearing-Impaired Fans Sue for Access to Closed-Captioning”, Washington Post, Sept. 20). Related: Feb. 19 and […]
6 Comments
You’re deaf. You can’t see the plays, the little yards to go and down box or read the score and the clock?
I mean, they even have that little yellow line that shows you where the ball has to advance for first down.
I always thought that not hearing the inane chatter of the commentaters would be an advantage.
I think the suit is dmanding closed-captioning at the actual, physical field itself, not on TV.
Which is silly, unless they are going to dmand it at every play, every movie theather, every restaurtant, tc, as well.
Oh, [expletive]! I hope that doesn’t give them any ideas!
Yes, on rereading is seems you are right, they are talking about providing text based translations of the verbal announcements.
My confusion was that they referred to this as closed-captioning. This specifically refers to the presentation of captioning on television that is not present on the video portion of the display; it is present as data on a sideband and the TV user can direct the television to display or not display the information on the screen.
Clearly, they don’t know what they are talking about, because any captioning at the stadium on the big screens would not be ‘closed’ and viewable only to those who wanted it, rather it would be open captioned.
The first thing these disabled people and their lawyers need is a clue; they should figure out what they are asking for and present their request to the stadium management in a clear and underastandable manner. If rebuffed, then perhaps they should consider legal action, but only after they figure out what remedy they are asking for.
If I remember right—during a Super Bowl at Reliant Stadium (Houston), I remember seeing a scoreboard/message board behind the goalposts at each end, that was “writing out” what was being said, I assume, by either the TV or the radio play-by-play teams, similar to closed-captioning. Is that what is being asked for at FedEx Field?
“Is that what is being asked for at FedEx Field?”
No, it’s what’s being DEMANDED, with suit already filed.