[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by redwitch

Muncle, I totally disagree with you on this one. While VNN may have a legal exemption, I do believe they have a moral duty to provide closed captioning. Just because something is legal doesn't make it moral. In the comparative scheme of TV, the amoung of money to provide closed captioning would be a drop or two in the proverbial bucket for the Morses. The difference it could make to many who reside in TV would more than outweigh this cost. The fact is that many that reside here are hearing impaired and do rely on closed captioning to be able to participate in an activity most of us take for granted (watching and understanding television). This, to me, does make it a moral issue. If something can be done without true hardship on one and if that something becomes a true benefit to others, there is no excuse for not doing it and it is a moral responsibility to do what can be done.

Just because something is morally right doesn't mean it will happen. The choice is not ours. In this case, it is up to the owners, directors and managers of VNN. I hope they see that not providing closed captioning does harm many and can become an image nightmare for them. It is causing ill will and bad publicity, not just in Ocala but in TV itself.

Well said Redwitch. I LIKE it when a lot of bright people present their views without getting wild in here.