It is nice to know that I am not alone in noticing and hating the fact that AMC intentionally censors the closed captions for their hit television shows.
Look at journalist and author Joe Clark's take on the issue below. I really enjoy reading his entire article, Response to FCC Public Notice on closed captioning rules (from Joe Clark Accessibility, Design, Writing, 2010). He discusses the problems with captioning and how we should fix these problems. Included are some standards proposed for closed captioning. One of them states,
Here is an excerpt about his thoughts on AMC censoring the captions (Please note that I somewhat censored the language used below):
Look at journalist and author Joe Clark's take on the issue below. I really enjoy reading his entire article, Response to FCC Public Notice on closed captioning rules (from Joe Clark Accessibility, Design, Writing, 2010). He discusses the problems with captioning and how we should fix these problems. Included are some standards proposed for closed captioning. One of them states,
- Do not censor.
- Do not alter a transcript, or refuse to transcribe, because you object; or you know that someone else objects; or you imagine or predict someone might object to the original.
- If a later edit (e.g., for syndication) removes pejoratives from audio, edit captions only then. Do not pre-censor captioning in anticipation of a cleaned-up audio edit.
Here is an excerpt about his thoughts on AMC censoring the captions (Please note that I somewhat censored the language used below):
- I blame the broadcaster, AMC, for this, because the same thing happened with its other shows, like Breaking Bad and The Walking Dead.
- AMC is also guilty of a new low it can call its own: Forcing captioners to pre-censor dialogue. Even pejoratives as benign as sh--, goddamn, and balls are replaced, wholly or partially, with asterisks. But AMC’s hack-job captioner is so clueless about its own medium it does not understand that * requires special handling in captioning (it’s in the extended character set at
[12,28]).
Again, I’m not the only one who noticed.
Now, why did they do it? To cheap out, of course. Eventually there will be a syndication edit with cleaned-up audio, and somebody at AMC decided that even the puny 30% extra it would cost to recaption at that point was too much money to spend. Meanwhile, how much do those coveted advertising spots on Mad Men go for?
The lesson here is that NBC isn’t the only broadcaster that schemes and plots all year to wring its captioning budget dry. It’s just easier to shaft the deaf. -
(e
While people are aware of captioning issues, we should also be campaigning for a voice in the new standards for digital movies.
ReplyDeleteThe new digital standards should require *all* digital movies to be open captioned (or is the term "SDH?). Once the general public is used to open captions, it will simply be a part of life. I'm sure some people complained about the switch to wide-screen decades ago. Filmmakers and movie theaters might even see the return of some of the 30+ age customers they have steadily lost. Many of my friends and acquaintances with seemingly typical hearing complain of difficulty following dialog in movies. (This might also be due to the theater's sound system not being set up correctly.)
To repeat, the standard for digital movies is open captions all the time, no other option.
David
"people complained about the switch to wide-screen decades ago"
ReplyDeleteIn the mid to late 80's, a friend of mine introduced me to those, and on a 4:6 TV, I hated them and those black bars. It wasn't until 5 to 7 years later I began to appreciate them.
It would not be difficult to just offer two variations of digital movies, and little extra cost, for an optional SDH version. They could simply use the SDH from their blu-ray on a second copy of the digital.
Oh a side, chuckle worthy, note, when I see a non Blu-ray of a modern movie, anyone else notice SDH is becoming more common there as well? ☺
David, could not agree with you more!
ReplyDelete