Here's an interesting question for someone familiar with the ADA (attorney, not plaintiff):
Many, but far from all TV shows are closed captioned. Yet the FCC licenses these stations, part of the requirement being that they operate "in the public interest" So why aren't they ALL required to be closed captioned, including 50 year old re-runs? Isn't this the same as the plaintiffs wanting interpreters in ALL classes? Also, if you look carefully, there is usually a statement that says "closed captioning provided by______" , usually a sponsor. So why isn't the TV STATION required TO PAY FOR closed captioning, like the LLLC would be? Seems like the ability of the deaf to enjoy TV programming is restricted to shows with CC, so why aren't they suing for "equality"? Perhaps ASL interpreters could be provided in the most popular classes, and perhaps outside funding could be arranged for other classes as well.
|