Comments on: YouTube wants you to tell on publishers without closed captions

By: Barbara Schroeder

Barbara Schroeder — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 03:41:37 +0000

Did YouTube offer closed captioning for online coverage of the presidential debates?

By: orangedeafies

orangedeafies — Wed, 10 Oct 2012 15:19:17 +0000

The new FCC rules on captioning has shortcomings that is upsetting a lot of deaf people. Everyone is trying to piece together why this happened. I will give you two pieces of the puzzle that created the disappointing result on captioning that we need so badly. Firstly, we have a deaf person who is the head of the FCC Disability Rights Office. That deaf person is the famous Greg Hlibok. Greg Hlibok was one of the deaf militant leaders who forced Gallaudet University to accept a deaf president. Remember the “Deaf President Now!” protesting in March 1988? And with him being one of those leaders of the traditional capital “D” deaf militants who despised the use of English like in captioning as a communication method for the deaf, one doesnt have to be a rocket scientist to figure out the direction of the FCC Disability Rights Office is heading under Hlibok’s leadership. Secondly as an exacerbation, a high profile captioning advocate was recently found to have orchestrated a secret cyberbullying campaign against a deaf advocate that lasted six years. Doing so, she breached public trust and casted a blackeye on all captioning advocates. Look at http://wp.me/p1Sx9N-1hF and this captioning advocate only deceived the hearing impaired while others could see through her mask and thus contributed to this disappointment. NOW, I gave you two pieces of the puzzle. You can find the rest when you do your own research.

By: Maryann Obara

Maryann Obara — Tue, 09 Oct 2012 22:18:51 +0000

Captioning is a good thing…..do not waste a good thing that can be enjoyed by all

By: Audrey

Audrey — Tue, 09 Oct 2012 19:45:32 +0000

I think this is wonderful! Good for you You Tube

By: Claude Almansi

Claude Almansi — Tue, 09 Oct 2012 09:05:39 +0000

@Sandeep: the Wikipedia model you suggest is precisely the one offered by Amara: an Amara captioning/subtitling page is created by streaming the original video, which can be hosted on YouTube or on other video platforms. When the captions/subtitles are completed, they can be downloaded and added to the original video, if its platform supports closed captions. In the case of YouTube-hosted videos, Amara captions can also, in some cases, be automatically added to the original (but I’m not sure how that works).

@ san diego fiber installer: YouTube already has procedures for flagging illegal content or that violates their TOU (porn, violence etc).
Re copyright, only the right holders can complain about violations of their own copyright, but YouTube facilitates the identification of possible violations via its audio and video recognition software, which notifies both the right holder and the uploader of a match with copyrighted content. In case of false positives, the uploaders can contest this, explaining why they are entitled to use this content. I’ve done that successfully e.g. for a traditional folk song performed by amateurs, where the software had found a match with a copyrighted professional performance. More info in http://www.youtube.com/copyright_school – or in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InzDjH1-9Ns , the original video, if you prefer to read the transcript generated by the captions rather than watch the video.

By: ls

ls — Tue, 09 Oct 2012 08:02:04 +0000

Good article – and so much more work to do! Join citizen advocates to ensure all Internet accessible via quality captioning for all – add your voice, we need you! Find http:://ccacaptioning, jnd let’s move forward. When the law was first envisioned, the full importance, even then,, of online communications not fully understood by some. Time to voice good complaints, and add energy for full access for mega-millions.

By: san diego fiber installer

san diego fiber installer — Tue, 09 Oct 2012 07:49:30 +0000

They could also do this for suspected illegally uploaded content, but of course they would never do that because all of the music videos,movies, etc would all be removed and youtube would suddenly be a lot less interesting…

By: Sandeep

Sandeep — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 23:43:47 +0000

Why not use the wikipedia model and allow users/viewers to create and police the captions?