Kimberly Erskine, PhD

Writer. Marketer. Doctor. Deaf and Loud.

Subtitles and Closed Captioning Aren’t Just For The Hearing Impaired

Smurfs-Caption-For-Hearing-Impaired

 

Image Credits: BlueBuddies.com 

Have you clicked on the language or special features section of a DVD menu lately? If so then you may have noticed under the languages next to the English option it says in parenthesis “for the hearing impaired” or “for the hard of hearing”. I’ve been picking up on this more and more lately. I honestly don’t remember the last time I watched a movie where it listed the English subtitles/caption as just “English” and not “English for the hearing impaired” or “English For The Hard of Hearing”.

This is really beginning to bother me. Yes, I am hearing impaired. From a legal standpoint, I am deaf since I have a hearing loss of greater than 90 db. I rely on subtitles/captioning to hear movies/TV and ALWAYS use that option when watching DVDs. If a DVD doesn’t have that option I don’t watch it. I can hear the sounds coming from the TV without captioning/subtitles, but I can’t make out what the characters are saying without it. It’s all just noise.

Dark-Knight-English-Hearing-Impaired

Image Credits: CollectionDx.com 

However, I don’t think I’m alone in my use of subtitles/closed captioning. Sure, it’s targeted at and a miracle for those belonging to the deaf/hearing impaired community, but we’re not the only ones that use it. What about those who are from a different country and have a hard time understanding what the characters are saying without seeing the text? Or maybe from another standpoint, what about those who may be unable to play sound for whatever reason (perhaps broken speakers, or maybe they are in an area where someone is on the phone or has another reason for needing the sound off) and they still want to follow through with the show?

 

 

Captions-Not-Just-For-Hearing-Impaired

Image Credits: Abercap.com 

To see “English for the hearing impaired” or “English for the hard of hearing’ listed on the DVD menu almost seems offensive. I mean, there’s an option for Spanish and sometimes even French or Portugal subtitles/captioning but they don’t say “for the hearing impaired” or “for the hard of hearing” next to them. No, they just simply state the language. 

caption-for-hard-of-hearing

Image Credits: HitchCockWiki

Do we really need to have those words next to it? Do we really need to point out in the DVD menu that this feature is targeted for deaf/hard of hearing? No, it’s all completely unnecessary and by writing that it almost seems like DVD makers are saying “Hey, look we have hearing impaired/hard of hearing viewers who are different. Let’s tell the world that they are different and not the same”. That doesn’t seem fair to me. 

deaf-are-same-as-hearing

 

Image Credits: Zazzle.com

My grandfather wasn’t hearing impaired at all; never wore hearing aids. We didn’t have our hearing loss/abilities in common then, but we did both share a mutual love for closed captioning services. He liked to use the feature because sometimes it seems like characters/tv personalities are mumbling and/or aren’t speaking clearly and it’s hard to understand what they are saying. With the captioning you can read the words you may not be able to understand or hear — something everyone, regardless of hearing level, can come to appreciate.

closed-caption-official-logo

 

Image Credits: BathroomReader.com

So DVD makers, here’s my plea to you to stop adding the “for the hearing impaired” or “for the hard of hearing” next to your English option for subtitles/captioning on the DVD features menu. We know we have choices and that we can choose to turn the subtitles on or off and we all have different reasons for choosing this feature regardless or how well we can or can’t hear. Save yourself the time and effort and don’t bother to include those words.

Captioning-for-everyone-menu

Image Credits: DVDActive.com 

kimerskine

, , , , , , , , ,

9 responses to “Subtitles and Closed Captioning Aren’t Just For The Hearing Impaired”

  1. iheartsubtitles Avatar
    iheartsubtitles

    You raise an interesting point. I don’t think the TV & movie distribution business means to cause offense. There is actually a fundamental difference between Subtitles described as “English” and Subtitles described as “English for the hearing impaired” or “English for the deaf and hard of hearing” on a DVD menu. Some DVDs actually list both as being available. So what is the difference?

    The difference is that “English” subtitles will only translate the spoken word (even if the original audio is in English. If you were to watch a French spoken movie and select English subtitles – only the dialogue would be translated from French to English via the subtitles). In exactly the same way as the translation subtitles, Spanish, French etc.

    The subtitles described as English For The Hearing Impaired will also include descriptions of other audio messages – such as music, action noises [phone rings] [screams] etc. This extra information which is designed for those with a hearing loss is not included when subtitles are just described as “English subtitles”

    I do agree that of course these subtitles can be used by *anyone* so perhaps the naming is unfortunate but what else should they be called do you think to distinguish from straight dialogue translation subtitles?

    Reply
    1. kimerskine Avatar
      kimerskine

      Thank you so much for your comment! I never realized the difference before now. Kind of neat now to think how so much goes into the subtitles. I always thought they were all the same, just different names/preference. If the subtitles are strictly for dialogue maybe they could put (dialogue) next to the English option and (descriptive) next to the ones that have subtitles for every sound. That way it would apply to everyone and I think it also helps to define it/describe the differences (I didn’t even realize they were different — I’m sure a lot of people don’t notice either).

      Reply
  2. iheartsubtitles Avatar
    iheartsubtitles

    The current naming is one that is recognized throughout the industry so I don’t see it changing any time soon. But perhaps there needs to be more education to the public about what the difference is. Glad to be of help, and now you know so tell everyone else 🙂 Maybe you could do a follow up blog post for your readers?

    Reply
    1. kimerskine Avatar
      kimerskine

      That sounds like a fantastic idea. Thanks for the suggestion!

      Reply
  3. katharine Avatar
    katharine

    Hi! I just wanted to say, you are definitely correct in your argument that subtitles and closed captions are not only for the hard of hearing or deaf person. I experienced a brain injury almost 4 years ago now. It left me with a level of disability that no one else would even notice if I didn’t tell them about it. I can hold conversations with people, and listen in class, but its hard. In order to remember for any length of time what is being said to me, I either need to repeat what they are saying over again to myself in my head, or write everything down. When I watch TV or a movie, its nice to not have to actively think so hard about whats being said, so I ALWAYS used subtitles or closed captions. Honestly, I’ve even had to, for the most part, stop watching regular television. Sometimes the closed captions just are plain bad, and its been surprising. A whole entire show may just have a jumble of words like someone slamming a keyboard, or responses are cut out and parts of conversations are missed, or the big black background and the white letters cuts out important information. I mean, I’ve found it nearly impossible to watch a news show for example. I’ve found myself relying on netflix and hulu plus, both companies do a pretty good job of providing subtitles for shows. So, sorry, went off on a tangent a bit there but I just wanted to say your post is appreciated 🙂

    Reply
    1. kimerskine Avatar
      kimerskine

      Thank you so much for your comment! I agree sometimes the live captioning really isn’t good at all. I don’t watch much tv these days sinceI don’t have cable and work all the time. I just use DVD’s for the most part. Their captioning’s not bad but there are a few of them that didn’t have the option for captioning and I can’t watch them at all. News can be pretty horrendous with captioning because like you said, it tends to get all jumbled up. It’s easier for me to just follow news online than try to watch and decode all of that lol.

      Reply
    2. iheartsubtitles Avatar
      iheartsubtitles

      Which country are you from? the errors you describe sound very much like those often associated with live captioning of live channels – such as the news. This is due to the way they are produced and sometimes it can be due to your TV reception. Check out my blog and #subtitlefail! TV for more info 🙂

      Reply
      1. kimerskine Avatar
        kimerskine

        I’m from the US. I never knew tv reception had anything to do with it. I use an antenna since I don’t have cable so I imagine that would greatly impact the caption quality.

  4. Will Avatar
    Will

    Hi, I live in New York City and have been having thoughts about how there is not consideration for people with hearing impediments when it comes to DVD Movies and documentaries. What is ADA for (America Diable Act)? Is this only for people in wheelchairs and walking disabilities?

    I wish for all technological development to benefit and to promote full and unrestricted participation for all persons with disabilities, including the hearing impaired.

    Reply

Leave a comment