Digital revolution excludes closed captioning

Article here. Excerpt:

In the rush to create new products and make television programming available anytime, anywhere, the need for closed captioning is being overlooked.

The major broadcast networks have launched state-of-the-art online video players -- that do not include captions.

Apple has revolutionized TV viewing by making shows available for download on iTunes -- without captions.

The television industry is spending billions to deliver spectacular high-definition signals -- but viewing captions on HD programming is a Byzantine process that has frustrated many viewers.

"With the move toward hi-def, and the explosive growth in video on the Internet, it's like we're starting all over again," said Mike Kaplan, who serves on the steering committee of the Hearing Loss Association of Los Angeles. "Since 1993, closed captions have been built into every TV set larger than 13 inches. So why in 2007, with the latest and greatest technology at our fingers, is it getting harder and harder to view captions?"

The lack of closed captioning on new media doesn't only close out deaf and hard-of-hearing viewers. According to a BBC study, 80 percent of households that use captions are watching the subtitles to learn the language or to follow a program in a noisy place.

With network ratings hitting record lows, the failure to extend closed captioning to the digital world ironically makes TV shows less accessible for some at a time when programming is more widely available than ever.

Although the Federal Communications Commission requires captions for broadcast and cable content, the rules do not cover Internet streaming or digital downloads. That makes extending closed captioning to those media more a matter of corporate responsibility than regulation.

The FCC rules do cover high-definition and video-on-demand delivery, but experts complain that, between companies not complying with regulations and a lack of consumer awareness, many viewers still feel chained to their traditional analog sets.

On the issue of cost:

The sluggish network response might suggest adding captions is technologically difficult or expensive. But experts on both sides of the issue agree that's not the case.

Broadcasters have spent millions developing elaborate online games and interactive elements to engage fans, while the price of converting televised caption text for the Web is only about $200 per episode. Once a software system is in place, that cost tends to decrease further.

Perpetually cash-strapped PBS has managed to add captions to many of its shows online.

"All the tools exist to do it. It's just a matter of time and money to make it happen," said Tom Apone, who works with Mr. Goldberg at the Media Access Group and helped develop caption software for PBS. "It's pretty straightforward and not terribly expensive."

The whole article is well-worth a read.

With a family member who has increasingly poor hearing, this is an issue that effects my family life. The best chance for sharing some video entertainment is dvds, but caption availability is spotty at best, and does not appear to effect new dvd releases of classic films.

With cost not the apparent reason for lack of accessibility, and public need not enough on its own, this seems another situation only massive litigation can cure.