The President’s Corner
By Jim Jirak
I would like to begin my comments with a hot
button issue. It concerns the issue of
video description for television that The National Federation of the Blind is
so dead set against. And why? When some of their membership was asked,
they, not surprisingly, could not provide a legitimate answer. The Federation, and all entities that oppose
this issue, must be stopped! How dare
NFB claim to be the “voice of the blind” when so many of their membership favor
DVS? If you have access to E-mail, E-mail The Federation at nfb@nfb.org. You can also E-mail The National Association
of Broadcasters at nab@nab.org,
The National Cable Television Association at Webmaster@NCTA.com and The National Association
of Theater owners at NATO@CHQ.com. The below USA Today article, May 17,
illustrates the importance of this issue.
Groups challenge descriptive services for blind
Narrator tells visual action
By Paul Davidson
WASHINGTON -- Kathy
Blackburn, who is blind, expected the climax of The West Wing's season finale
to reward her season of faithful viewing. Instead, the White House drama left
her frustrated.
In the final scene, a
reporter asks President Bartlet if he'll run again, resolving a storyline
building for weeks. The answer, though, was not spoken: Bartlet simply stuffs
his hands in his pockets and smiles. That gesture, an earlier scene revealed,
meant, ''Yes.''
''I knew something
had to have happened,'' says Blackburn, 51, of Austin, Texas. ''It was quite
annoying. This was the finale.''
Such problems
prompted the Federal Communications Commission last year to require
broadcasters to offer the nation's 8 million to 12 million visually impaired
people the equivalent of closed-captioning for the deaf. Called descriptive
video service (DVS), it allows a user to turn on a second audio track in which
a narrator describes visual action. TVs made since 1993 have the capability,
also sometimes used for Spanish language dubbing. The feature also was expected to be used by sighted people doing
other things, similarly to how people use closed captioning in a bar or gym.
But recently, the
National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), the Motion Picture Association of
America (MPAA) and the National Cable and Telecommunications Association
challenged the order in court. The groups say the FCC exceeded its authority,
and by compelling speech, violated the First Amendment. They also say the order
would cost too much and delay production.
With the case before
a U.S. Court of Appeals here that has been loath to shackle businesses, video
description's opponents ''have a better than average shot'' of overturning the
order, says George Reed-Dellinger of Washington Analysis.
''It's outrageous,''
says Jeff Chester of the Center for Media Education.
Noting that the
government gave broadcasters $70 billion worth of spectrum for digital TV, he
says, ''The disability community is asking for something minor in return.''
Yet, the standoff is
not simple. It pits two associations for the blind against each other and
forces FCC Chairman Michael Powell to defend a position he opposed as
commissioner. And it raises such questions
as: Should an artist have to change his or her message? Should government
mandate a service that, while enhancing quality of life, is not essential?
Video description of
a few movies and TV shows began around 1990, on the premise that much of the
meaning is in visual cues that the blind miss.
''It equalizes the
playing field,'' says Charles Crawford of the American Council of the Blind.
''You can enjoy TV like anyone else rather than trying to guess what you saw.''
Some libraries offer
described videos; some movie theaters provide headsets.
WGBH, a public TV
station in Boston, pioneered descriptive video service and now supplies it to
169 PBS stations for programs such as Masterpiece Theatre. The only commercial DVS is on cable's Turner
Classic Movies, which has described about 200 titles, including The Wizard of
Oz.
Crawford has urged
major networks to voluntarily offer DVS for years. Their refusal helped spur
the FCC's action. Under the measure,
network affiliates in major markets would have to offer 4 hours a week of prime
time or children's shows by June 2002.
Cable and satellite operators would have a similar requirement for top
networks. Live news, sports and talk shows are exempt. And rapid-fire dialogue
discourages DVS use for situation comedies.
WGBH produces video
description for about $4,400 per program hour, a pittance, Crawford says. WGBH
estimates that it would cost local stations $5,000 to $25,000 to be able to
handle the extra audio channel.
In an FCC filing, the
NAB estimates upgrade costs for at least one network to be as high as $1.6
million. WGBH's Larry Golderberger contends it could be much lower and notes
that some networks already have equipment in place to provide Spanish-language
service.
The MPAA, meanwhile,
told the FCC that DVS, ''would push programs' release dates back
substantially.''
Another concern is
government meddling. ''You would be establishing a precedent that the FCC could
establish a programming requirement when it thought it was a good idea,'' says
Robert Corn-Revere, an attorney representing all three plaintiffs.
While lack of access
to phones can be ''life threatening'' and limit full participation in society,
requiring video description is ''analogous to a mandate that radio transcripts
be made available to the hearing impaired,'' the NAB says.
The National
Federation of the Blind agrees. ''Society needs to focus on things that really
help us move ahead, such as jobs and Braille for blind kids, not that satisfy
our needs for entertainment,'' says the NFB's Curtis Chong.
But Kathy Blackburn's
husband, Audley, also blind, disagrees: ‘‘why should I be a second-class
citizen in any part of this culture, whether it's entertainment or jobs?''
The TV industry's
core legal argument is that Congress, in the Telecommunications Act, ordered
the FCC only to issue a report on DVS. By contrast, it told the agency to order
closed-captioning. In dissenting on the DVS vote, Powell, then a commissioner,
echoed that view.
Former FCC chairman
William Kennard, who championed the new rules, counters: ‘‘it's pretty clear the FCC has the
authority to require DVS under its broad'' authority to promote the public
interest.
Hollywood's arguments
also cite the First Amendment. The mandate, Corn-Revere says, requires ''whole
new scripts.'' He adds, ‘‘you can't force people to utter words.''
Indeed, putting the
visual into words forces creators to ''utter a message, however worthy, which
they do not wish to convey,'' the MPAA says.
''There are an
infinite number of descriptions, choice of timing, voice inflection. There's no
universal way to capture precisely'' the artist's message, says MPAA's Rich
Taylor.
Counters Audley Blackburn: ''I suggest they're
compromising their artwork now by not making information available to all the audience.''
Turning
my thoughts to the ACB national convention this past July in Des Moines, Iowa,
Nebraska once again made noise letting ACB know small affiliates do make a
difference. And what better way to
start the actual millennium? First,
as last year in Louisville, technological history was a reality. All proceedings, including the banquet, were
heard live on ACBRADIO.ORG. And as last
year, during portions of the general sessions, listeners were able to take part
in the question and answer periods following several presenters. Questions were e-mailed to
CONVENTION@ACBRADIO.ORG and read to the presenters for their verbal response to
the convention as well as the listener on the Internet.
Second,
what do Steve Speicher and former football legend Tom Osborne have in
common? They were both elected to their
respective offices by a wide margin.
Having sought the elected position of first-vice president, Steve Speicher
handily defeated Sanford, Sandy, Alexander of Kansas by an 8 to 1 ratio. Congratulations, Steve! There is no question the membership made the
right choice. And who says the “N” in
Nebraska doesn’t stand for knowledge?
Third,
the second annual “small fry” affiliate caucus took place. Based on the success of the experiment in Louisville,
It was the wishes of some that Nebraska should once again host this event.
With
thanks to now first-vice president Steve Speicher posting the announcement on
ACB-Leadership prior to Des Moines inviting smaller affiliates to join us, we
outgrew a hotel room and were given space in the convention center. With various states represented including
Nevada, Oregon and South Dakota and Nebraska, we had nearly twenty-five in
attendance. WOW! Nebraska, without question, is definitely
making noise. And even though my
presidency is up in April, it is hoped the next president continues the proven
successful trend in the Nebraska sponsored “small fry” affiliate caucus next
summer in Houston.
Fourth,
I want to take a moment of personal privilege to thank ACBN for its fund
raising efforts in sending our newest, and youngest, member to her first
national convention. While you will be
hearing of her experiences later, Anne found the convention informative,
beneficial and fun. She is definitely
an asset to Nebraska as well as ACB.
Fifth,
as a result of a recently adopted constitutional amendment, dues, beginning
2003, will increase by $2. This means
membership dues will increase from $8 to $10.
As this does not take affect until 2003, start saving your pennies now
and don’t be caught off guard.
Before
I conclude, one of the hardest things about being president is the ability not
to get emotionally involved in a controversial issue and let your opinion be
known. Like George W. Busch, the
president conducts the business letting Congress, or in ACBN’s case, the
membership, direct the policy agenda.
The upside, however, is the freedom by the president to make his opinion
known in forums such as this without retribution. At least, that’s my hope.
Since
the board of commissioners recommended cutting $20,000 from their generic funds
for support of Radio Talking Book, there has been a great deal of concern. Why is RTB being singled out? Why not cut funding from Newsline? If you cut one service, why not a flat
across the board cut? What is the
Federation up to? Do they want to rid
Nebraskan’s of RTB and force everyone to use Newsline? If the commission is having budgetary issues
as they claim is the justification for cutting RTB’s funds, why simply not go
back to the Unicameral for more money?
The
answer to these questions is simple.
The commission went back to the Unicameral earlier in the legislative
session for more funding and LB 352, which created the commission, was almost
repealed. Had this happened, services
for the blind would have worsened, not improved. Additionally, the commission is still trying to adjust
financially from the decrease in funding they once had under HHS. Like newlyweds adjusting to a new marriage,
it’s unfair to expect things to be status quo during the adjustment
process. As a taxpayer, I do not want
my taxes increased. Do you?
The
real issue, however, comes down to today’s ever changing society. Radio Talking Book has outlived its
usefulness. Think about it. Newsline has the news 24-hours daily. It’s there when you want it. Unlike Radio Talking Book, if you are not
available at 10:00a.m or 6:00p.m for the newspaper then you’ve missed the
news. And in today’s need-to-know-now
society Radio Talking Book cannot compete.
Should taxpayers invest hard earned resources on a Ford Edsel, (RTB), or
a vehicle with Onstar, (Newsline)? An
XT? Or a Pentium 3 processor? If the decision were mine to make, RTB’s
funding would have been reduced long ago.
This issue isn’t over yet. As
John Fullerton needs to supply the commission with further funding specifics, a
definite decision will be made at their next meeting.
And finally, Five
years after performing a marriage ceremony, Father Ralph found himself in the
small town of the couple of whom he first married. Having been given specific directions to the small cottage, he
excused himself from the vehicle upon his arrival and found the woman waiting
by the window.
Once inside, he
noticed her depressed state and asked what the nature of the concern was. After it was explained to father that she
and her husband had been trying for several years to have children with no
success, he advised he would be visiting the Holy city and would light a candle
at the Vatican for her.
Upon his return
nearly five years later, he noticed children scattered about, 8 or so. When Father asked where the husband was the
woman replied, “We finally saved enough money to send him to Rome to blow out
the candle.”
Until
next time, be good to one another.