BOO!!!! 58% Polled Against Football Captioning Decision
As of few hours ago over 400 votes have been cast. The results were:
38% YES
58% NO
2% NO OPINION
Of course when I first heard this, my first response was pfffttthhh. I went to Washington Post poll center and voted YES. I was disappointed to find the comment section closed as I couldn’t leave my 2 cent.
It’s very easy for hearing people to say no, as long as they still can benefit aurally. Wanna bet how quickly they will change their mind if they lose their hearing? Funny because a lot of hearing people do benefit from the closed captioning, like if there are loud cheerings or jeers.
Thank goodness the judge interpreted ADA correctly.. that we all have equal access as our hearing peers.
Please do go to that site and cast your votes. Your voting will make a bigger difference as I just checked the results now. Out of 435 votes they are:
43% YES
54% NO
2% NO OPINION
Redskins Ordered To Continue Captions – washingtonpost.com
A few people have reported trouble with the link to the poll. If you are one of them, try using this Tiny URL created by our friend Bob MacPherson: http://tinyurl.com/429a48.
Hat Tip To Cheryl Heppner of NVRC, our tireless advocate 
Update: Due to increasing publicity of this poll, more Deaf, HoH, and their friends have cast their votes, significantly changing the results. Please cast your vote and let the readers know how you feel about the judicial decision. The more yes the poll receive, the more these clueless hearing people will realize the value of this landmark decision.
POLL
Do agree with a judge’s ruling that FedEx Field must caption lyrics broadcast over its PA system?
- Yes
49%
- No
47%
- No opinion
2%
Created on Oct 2, 2008
Total Votes: 515
As of few hours ago over 400 votes have been cast. The results were:
38% YES
58% NO
2% NO OPINION
Of course when I first heard this, my first response was pfffttthhh. I went to Washington Post poll center and voted YES. I was disappointed to find the comment section closed as I couldn’t leave my 2 cent.
It’s very easy for hearing people to say no, as long as they still can benefit aurally. Wanna bet how quickly they will change their mind if they lose their hearing? Funny because a lot of hearing people do benefit from the closed captioning, like if there are loud cheerings or jeers.
Thank goodness the judge interpreted ADA correctly.. that we all have equal access as our hearing peers.
Please do go to that site and cast your votes. Your voting will make a bigger difference as I just checked the results now. Out of 435 votes they are:
43% YES
54% NO
2% NO OPINION
Redskins Ordered To Continue Captions – washingtonpost.com
A few people have reported trouble with the link to the poll. If you are one of them, try using this Tiny URL created by our friend Bob MacPherson: http://tinyurl.com/429a48.
Hat Tip To Cheryl Heppner of NVRC, our tireless advocate
Update: Due to increasing publicity of this poll, more Deaf, HoH, and their friends have cast their votes, significantly changing the results. Please cast your vote and let the readers know how you feel about the judicial decision. The more yes the poll receive, the more these clueless hearing people will realize the value of this landmark decision.
POLL
Do agree with a judge’s ruling that FedEx Field must caption lyrics broadcast over its PA system?
- Yes
49% - No
47% - No opinion
2%
Created on Oct 2, 2008
Total Votes: 515
October 8th, 2008 at 9:26 am
I’m hardcore football and I don’t really care about CC when I’m try to watch it.
I find is hassle when CC is block in certain area.
October 8th, 2008 at 11:12 am
Sam the Bright – its clear that you didn’t read the Washington Post article. Please refrain from pulling others down (crab theory) and let others who are more knowledge in this issue to comment.
I’m all for display of captions in the FedEx Stadium and I’ve voted Yes in the Washington Post article.
October 8th, 2008 at 11:21 am
Hi,
I completely agree, BOO!! It is ridiculous! I’m pretty sure that the stadium has wheelchair ramp or section, maybe the Washington Post should do a poll if there should be a wheelchair ramp or section.
I have this dream: Everyplace we go, all places will be completely accessible to ALL deaf people!
I don’t quite understand the other blogger who keeps saying that NAD does not do enough for deaf people, look they are David versus Golitah, they have won a big battle and I am so proud of NAD!!! I hope people who work at NAD will read this and give pats on their backs!! Go Go NAD!!
October 8th, 2008 at 11:40 am
Well, I do not have a problem if plainiff sued Redskins to provide captioning at football game. However, my issue is here is this, why NAD involved to help them win this case when it impacts minority few? Why can’t NAD focus on case that impact the majority?
I see favorism here by NAD
October 8th, 2008 at 11:53 am
rscott251 wrote:
“hohviolist: Here’s a thought. Watch the game at home. You should be grateful you were even able to go to the game. Here’s a second thought, the point of going to a game is to watch what’s on the field, not an oversized TV. Again, if thats what you are doing, go watch it at home. You are their voluntarily for entertainment purposes. The ADA was not intended for disabled people to have equal entertainment that is discretionary. By your and this judges failed logic, a music concert then should have to put up monitors and caption the songs. That is just stupid. That was never the intent of the ADA. There is a reason there is closed captioned vs. open captioned on television. This lawsuit was for open captioned, which was never the intent of the ADA. So take your little paternalistic rant and shove it.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/community/mypost/index.html?newspaperUserId=rscott251&plckUserId=rscott251
Wow, some people are quite ignorant.
October 8th, 2008 at 11:56 am
I left this comment at Karen’s blog, Deaf Mom: The majority of the hearing people who cannot access to the lyrics would then enjoy the captioning of these lyrics. It just shows that the captioning benefits a lot more people, not just those who cannot hear the announcements due to loud cheerings and jeerings.
Deaf Mommy, I share the same dream, not just for the Deaf people, but for everybody protected by ADA. These will also help other people in the long run, like elderly people, young children, people whose first language isn’t English, and so forth. How many hearing people cannot enjoy watching the televisions in the bars due to excessive noises in the background.
Banjo, I agree. There are many people who doesn’t understand the concept of full accessibility enjoyed by others being deprived to those, robbing them equal access. These people are resistant to new changes. However, in the long run, more people will appreciate the new changes as they see them benefiting others, not just the Deaf and HoH people.
October 8th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
YAY!! The latest poll is showing a big difference, completely reversing the results yesterday. Please Keep voting!
Do agree with a judge’s ruling that FedEx Field must caption lyrics broadcast over its PA system?
Yes 55%
No 42%
No opinion 2%
Total Votes: 631
October 8th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
After reading one columnist with the Washington Post last weekend. I somewhat agreed with his pontification about the absurdity of forced captionings of lyric songs on the FedEx big screen.
The Washington Redskins and Don Synder made a good point about how come didn’t the bars or nightclubs do not caption their lyrics on the tv screen.
Who (deaf) will watch lyrics on the tv screen while drinking at the watering hole or at the nightclub chatting with other deaf people?
I strongly feel that is pretty frivilous of Shane Feldman and the legal parties insist on the captioning of lyrics (songs), plz!
I know how the hearing people strongly feel about cluttering their big tv screens in public places with captions block certain area of the tv screen.
I really don’t give any hoots about the public accomodation at any sporting events since not every of us, deaf people could afford the season pass or arena tix.
I rather watch the non-professional sport events which they really play for enjoyment and physical fitness than the professional sport teams playing for $$$.
I am very amazed at many people groaning about paying their fair shares of taxes for excellent public school system and intrafrascture (good roads and bridges) while those people are much willing to pay chunks of their money to pay for exhoborant price of sporting events.
ADA law itself is pretty badly written by leaving it much vague and non-enforceable.
Didn’t all of you know that Senator John McCain had a big role in the creation of the ADA law? I already question McCain’s logical capabilitues after he done with the ADA law.
I never am a fan of Dan Synder, the money-grubbing and greedy and egostical owner of the Washington Redskins.
How interesting of Shane Feldman and David Synder being destined from very same branch of their own religion/racial identity!
RLM
October 8th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
This isn’t a sports thing, friends. Its a DEAF thing.
Where people take a stand on captioning for sports that cost $$$$ for a single ticket, that benefit will certainly spread to other events such as rallies for a political issue, rallies for a social cause, all movies, public access in many areas, and yes, captioning on TV at home.
How many times have we seen corporations try to duck their responsibilities under ADA? This is a very important example to shove in their face and make them understand that we are people, too.
October 8th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
Typical boo-ya! Just to show you how ignorant and selfish the general public can be. Telling us to stay home, tsk. No wonder we need laws. Yep, double standards when it comes to the deafened stage.
October 8th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
Thanks for the alert, MZ! I just voted yes. Shame on these hearing people who don’t give a damn about access for others. *shakes head*
They are too short-sighted to realize that this kind of thing will end up benefiting more than just us. Look at the curb access situation for instance. The wheelchairs screamed like hell for ramps on curbs. People opposed it back then.
But now, mothers with baby strollers, bicyclists, and rollerbladers are grateful for the ramps on the curbs!
October 8th, 2008 at 3:21 pm
I am deaf football fan and would vote against closed caption at the arena or stadium. Why? I prefer watch play games and read score board. Caption on the screen is a distraction! Give me a break and enjoy the game with sight not read caption all the time.
cheer.
October 8th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
I look forward to the day that all deaf and hard of hearing people can access the same things as people who can hear.
Thanks for your comment on my post!
October 8th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
I just voted yes!!! Im not a sportsfan, dont think I would ever step foot in the redskins stadium but this is a small step in the right direction.
A big victory for the NAD as they have so few of them!
October 8th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
Way to go, readers. It’s looking better and better as time passes.
The latest result:
Do agree with a judge’s ruling that FedEx Field must caption lyrics broadcast over its PA system?
Yes 61%
No 36%
No opinion 1%
Total Votes: 774
October 8th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
Hi,
First of all, I am all for closed captions. There always will be an arguments that if it was necessary or not. As you might already knew, large percentage of hearies read articles online than deafies so polls percentage may be offensive to us the deafies.
Don’t take poll numbers personally. I have seen how hearies react when I requested a closed captions enabled on TV when I was at my watering hole. They usually turn it off after I leave.
Some of us need to understand what ADA is, it don’t mean every establishments have to accommodate to deafies, like in watering hole or restaurant. There is a fine print or loop holes you know. The pressing issue for me today, is to have closed caption on every DVD. There are too many Documentary that I wanted but it don’t have a CC. It seems like they don’t want us to be too educated!
Lausawfish
October 8th, 2008 at 10:48 pm
The survey means absolutely nothing. It’s not how laws are made, and it’s not how they are enforced. What should be cheered is the Judge had the wisdom to make sure that everyone has access. A Washington Post stupid survey means nothing. It’s not worth the time and energy that everyone is expending on it. Congrats to the 3 plaintiffs and the NAD who saw this through to the end!
October 9th, 2008 at 1:11 am
If the Redskins do have captions then all the other NFL stadiums should! Go Cowboys even though I was born in Washington DC
October 9th, 2008 at 8:24 am
Distraction? I don’t beleive you, scoreboard do distraction you? Naw, You don’t have to watch CC while you watch the games, you make the decision to look at CC or watch the game. I bet hearing people will be glad to read CC while they may have hard time listen what the PA system saying. Maybe anouncer speak too fast or fans screaming out of lung and other want to hear what they saying, or anouncer may be drunk and talk sluring. Who know. Hearing people have second chance to check out CC and catch up what’s gonna on. Oh yeah, maybe the anouncer for a lucky person who may won prize call name, Do deaf have chance to find if he or she are winner? Good idea to have CC.
October 9th, 2008 at 10:37 am
[...] Another blogger also blogged about the Poll numbers at Washington Post as well. Encouraging people to vote in favor of at the Polls, and pretty much saying that the more the numbers change (in the poll) in their favor, that it would somehow turn the public’s opinion on this matter. [...]
October 28th, 2008 at 6:15 am
Msg for DeafPundit . Thanks! {seesmic_video:{“url_thumbnail”:{“value”:”http://t.seesmic.com/thumbnail/Dd2t3r2MDm_th1.jpg”}”title”:{“value”:”Msg for DeafPundit . Thanks! ”}”videoUri”:{“value”:”http://www.seesmic.com/video/okPnjiBwio”}}}