The rogue poster-children of universal design: closed captioning and audio description

Abstract

To abide by the tenants of universal design theory, the design of a product or service needs to not only consider the inclusion of as many potential users and uses as possible but also do so from conception. Control over the creation and adaption of the design should, therefore, fall under the purview of the original designer. Closed captioning has always been touted as an excellent example of an design or electronic curb-cut because it is a system designed for people who are deaf or hard of hearing, yet is used by many others for access to television in noisy environments such as gyms or pubs, or to learn a second language. Audio description is poised to have a similar image. In this paper, we will demonstrate how the processes and practices associated within closed captioning and audio description, in their current form, violate some of the main principles of universal design and are thus not such good examples of it. In addition, we will introduce an alternative process and set of practices through which directors of television, film and live events are able to take control of closed captioning and audio description by integrating them into the production process. In doing so, we will demonstrate that closed captioning and audio description are worthy of directorial attention and creative input rather than being tacked on at the very end of the process and usually to only meet regulatory or legislative mandates.

Universal design on stage: live audio description for theatrical performances

“…However, the user should be able to easily customize or adjust product or service features. Adaptability should be built into the design and give users choice in how they access it (Connell et al, 1997) In a previous paper, we redefined the primary user within the context of postproduction AD as the broadcaster (Udo & Fels, 2010b). When AD is offered for film or television, we argued that it is included only to satisfy legislative and/or governmental requirements.…”

“…We have explained that AD for television and film is most often provided by a third-party accessibility vendor and not overseen by the director or a member of the creative team (Udo & Fels, 2010b). Some broadcasters have an in-house team that audio-describes media; however, even in these scenarios, communication between the describer and the director is extremely rare.…”

“…Elsewhere, we have demonstrated how the processes and practices associated with the creation of AD and closed captioning (CC) for television and film violate many of the central tenets of universal design theory (Udo & Fels, 2010b). While there are ways in which conventional post-production AD and CC adhere to the tenets of universal design, we previously concluded that their status as the 'poster-children' of the design process is actually based more on a superficial examination of similarities rather than a complete and in-depth analysis.…”

“…We have previously argued that a director defines effective communication as the successful manipulation of cinematic conventions to elicit a specific emotional response within the viewer (Udo & Fels, 2010b). We noted that directors are well aware that successful communication in one medium may not translate into successful or effective communication in another, as each medium has strengths and weaknesses that can serve to help or hinder the communication of a specific kind of message.…”

Disabled People and the Post-2015 Development Goal Agenda through a Disability Studies Lens

“…Universal design is pushed by the disability community for some time [59][60][61][62][63][64][65][66] as a means to fix their "special" status and the "special" status of their problems by designing for more holistic needs in mind so one does not have to do it "special" for "the disabled". Universal design could be seen as one tool to mainstream disabled people concerns as well as making disability a cross-cutting topic.…”