ORCID Profile
0000-0001-9560-2378
Current Organisation
Curtin University
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Research Topics
In Research Link Australia (RLA), "Research Topics" refer to ANZSRC FOR and SEO codes. These topics are either sourced from ANZSRC FOR and SEO codes listed in researchers' related grants or generated by a large language model (LLM) based on their publications.
Top 5 Research Topics
ANZSRC Field of Research (FoR)
Communication Technology and Digital Media Studies | Communication and Media Studies | Performing Arts and Creative Writing not elsewhere classified | Media Studies | Communication and Media Studies not elsewhere classified | Performing Arts and Creative Writing | Interactive Media | Film and Television
ANZSRC Socio-Economic Objective (SEO)
Ability and Disability | Cultural Understanding not elsewhere classified | Visual Communication | The Media | The Performing Arts (incl. Theatre and Dance) | The Creative Arts (incl. Graphics and Craft) | Communication not elsewhere classified |
Related Links
Publications
Disability and Social Media
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 10-11-2016
The Voice Australia (2012): Disability, social media and collective intelligence
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 09-05-2014
Disability in television crime drama: Transgression and access
Publisher: Intellect
Date: 10-2015
Abstract: Crime is one of the most persistent genres in recent television history. Disability is a narrative device often used in this genre to provide information and motivation for criminals, increase the vulnerability of victims and in some cases attribute almost superhuman powers of deduction to the lead investigators. As such, the most common analysis of these images relies on the identification and criticism of stereotypes. Yet as recent theorization in disability studies argues, focusing on negative stereotypes has seen research into disability and television stagnate. Proceeding from the argument that it is important to consider both representation and accessibility in any study of disability and television, research into Australian audiences with disabilities was held to discover what they thought about both the representation of disability on television and the potential for alternative modes of access. The crime drama emerged as a popular genre amongst people with disabilities. Responses to this question reveal impairments have a material impact on the kinds of television people with disability are able to enjoy watching. This is in contrast to prior research into disability and television, which identifies crime genres as a disabling representation of disability. These insights reveal that forms of storytelling are important and indeed acknowledged by the disability community, who seek out popular forms of television despite television’s traditional role in subordinating this group and excluding them from participating in the industry.
Three decades of misrecognition: defining people with disability in Australian higher education policy
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 07-07-2023
Boundary Crossers: How Providers Facilitate Ethnic Minority Families’ Access to Dementia Services
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 29-04-2022
Abstract: Providers who work closely with ethnic minority people with dementia and their families are pivotal in helping them access services. However, few studies have examined how these providers actually do this work. Using the concept of “boundary crossers,” this article investigates the strategies applied by these providers to facilitate access to dementia services for ethnic minority people with dementia and their families. Between 2017 and 2020, in-depth video-recorded interviews were conducted with 27 health, aged care, and community service providers working with ethnic minority people living with dementia across Australia. Interviews were conducted in one of seven languages and/or in English, then translated and transcribed verbatim into English. The data were analyzed thematically. Family and community stigma associated with dementia and extra-familial care were significant barriers to families engaging with services. To overcome these barriers, participants worked at the boundaries of culture and dementia, community and systems, strategically using English and other vernaculars, clinical and cultural terminology, building trust and rapport, and assisting with service navigation to improve access. Concurrently, they were cognizant of familial boundaries and were careful to provide services that were culturally appropriate without supplanting the families’ role. In negotiating cultural, social, and professional boundaries, providers undertake multidimensional and complex work that involves education, advocacy, negotiation, navigation, creativity, and emotional engagement. This work is largely undervalued but offers a model of care that facilitates social and community development as well as service integration across health, aged care, and social services.
Interdisciplinary Approaches to Disability
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 12-12-2018
Disability at the centre of digital inclusion: assessing a new moment in technology and rights
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 03-07-2019
Disability, Children, and the Invention of Digital Media
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 27-10-2020
Trauma and Disability in Mad Max
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Date: 2019
Smartphones, Disability and the Australian Experience of the COVID-19 Pandemic for People who are Blind and with Low Vision
Publisher: The Ohio State University Libraries
Date: 13-09-2021
Abstract: This paper offers insight into and analysis of the disparate and erse experiences of Australians with disability, at the intersections of technology and geography during the COVID-19 pandemic.Drawing on interviews with the blind and low vision community we identify a significant cross-generational uptake of smartphones. Participants demonstrate a reflexive and creative use of these devices when faced with reduced accessibility, and the significance of geography – not simply the distinctions between countries, but between urban and regional residents.These interviews are contextualised within a broader discussion of how Australians with disability responded to the pandemic via analysis of blogs, articles and social media. We focus on the voices and perspectives of disabled people, and that community's emphasis on in iduality and intradisability ersity.Lastly, we present an overview of the discussions being held around the role of contact tracing and apps, privacy, validity and vulnerability. This discourse is important for ensuring support for the disability community pre and post global health emergencies, but also a valuable exemplar for understanding the relationship between digital inclusion and social equality more broadly.
Mainstreaming accessible digital technologies in higher education: A human rights approach to disability inclusion
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 11-2021
Embracing learners with disability: Web 2.0, access and insight
Publisher: Swinburne University of Technology
Date: 08-05-2011
Access for everyone? Australia’s ‘streaming wars’ and consumers with disabilities
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 04-09-2017
It means inclusion: A creative approach to disability and telecommunications policy in Australia
Publisher: Swinburne University of Technology
Date: 21-05-2012
Who is working on it? Captioning Australian catch-up television and subscription video on demand
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 29-08-2017
Changing representations of disability in children’s toys as popular culture
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 07-12-2018
Disability and new media
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 11-05-2011
“Hero Behind the Curtain”: Multicultural workers in culturally diverse dementia care
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 12-2020
DOI: 10.1002/ALZ.047341
Roundtable on Disability and Advertising, Part II
Publisher: Project MUSE
Date: 2021
Non‐Normative Characters: Disability
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 15-05-2020
A series of lively impressions: Quality narration and the rise of audio description
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 04-07-2023
DOI: 10.1177/1329878X231183286
Abstract: This article investigates the multiple values of audio description (AD) across an increasingly discerning, broad and multi-platform audience of video consumers. While other accessibility features, such as closed captions, are an established aspect of accessible video consumption, AD has more recently emerged as a socially and culturally significant feature for audiences, both with and without vision-based disabilities. This article offers a review of historical accounts of AD and current discussions around both the quality and provision of AD for video. This discussion is presented alongside the findings from our three-way review of the accessibility of the video on demand landscape in Australia. We identify that AD is at a critical juncture, popularised by the rise in audio content and audience demands for personalised viewing options, thus becoming a mainstream entertainment issue as well as an accessibility issue.
Breakdown Is Built into It: A Politics of Resilience in a Disabling World
Publisher: Queensland University of Technology
Date: 28-08-2013
DOI: 10.5204/MCJ.707
Abstract: Resilience is an interdisciplinary concept that has been interrogated and investigated in a number of fields of research and practice including psychology, climate change, trauma studies, education and disaster planning. This paper considers its position within critical disability studies, popular understandings of disability and the emergence of a disability culture. Patrick Martin-Breen and J. Marty Anderies offer a colloquial definition of resilience as: Bouncing back after stress, enduring greater stress, and being less disturbed by a given amount of stress. … To be resilient is to withstand a large disturbance without, in the end, changing, disintegrating, or becoming permanently damaged to return to normal quickly and to distort less in the face of such stresses. (1182) Conversely, Glenn E. Richardson argues that resiliency is a ‘metatheory’ that can best be described as ‘growth or adaptation through disruption rather than to just recover or bounce back’ (1184). He argues that resiliency theory has progressed through several stages, from the recognition of characteristics of resilient in iduals to an appreciation of the support structures required beyond the level of the in idual. In her memoir Resilience, Ann Deveson describes resilience as a concept that people think they understand until they are called upon to define it. Deveson offers many definitions and ex les of resilience throughout her book, beginning with stories about disability, people with disability and their experiences of changing levels of social inclusion and exclusion (632). She paints an evocative picture of a young mother whose five year old son has cerebral palsy giving evidence before a Royal Commission into Human Relationships during a period of significant social change involving the deinstitutionalisation of people with disabilities: A few years earlier, this child with cerebral palsy would have been placed in an institution. His mother might not even have seen him. Now she had care of her child but the pendulum had swung in the opposite direction. (632) During the 1980s a number of large institutions caring for people with developmental impairments and psychiatric illnesses were closed in favour of community care (Clear 652). Although giving an appearance of endorsing equality of disabled people in the community, the ‘hidden agenda’ of this initiative was to cut public expenditure on social services (Ellis 163). As a result, an undue burden fell to women who became primary carers with little support such as the woman Deveson remembers. She questions where this young mother mustered such ‘magnificent resilience’ when she had such little support: When he was born, she had been discharged from the hospital with her baby, a feeding formula and a tiny pink plate for the child’s cleft palate. The only advice she received was to come back later to have the plate refitted. Her general practitioner prescribed her sedatives for depression, and she and her husband found their own way to the Royal Blind society by asking a blind man they saw outside a supermarket. She had only learned accidentally from one of the nurses that her baby was blind. ‘He’s mentally retarded too,’ the nurse had added, almost as an afterthought. (632) Thus Deveson’s consideration of resilience includes both an in idual’s response to what could be described as tragedy and the importance of social support and the drive to demand it. Despite her child’s impairment and the lack of community resources made available to her family to cope, this young woman was leading public discussion about the plight of people with disabilities and their families in the hopes the government would intervene to help improve the situation (Deveson 632). Indeed, when it comes to the experience of disability, resilience is implied and generally understood to mean an attribute of the in idual. However, as resilience theory has progressed, resilience can no longer be considered as existing exclusively within the domain of an in idual’s personal qualities. Environmental support structures are vital in fostering resilience (Wilkes). Despite resiliency theory moving on from the level of the in idual, popular discourses of resiliency as an in idual’s attribute continue to dominate disability. As such, some critical disability commentators have redefined resilience as a response to a disabling social world. My aim in this paper is to explore this discourse by engaging with ideas about disability and resilience that emerge in popular culture. Despite the changing social position of people with disabilities in the community, notions of resilience are often invoked to describe the experience of people with disability and attributes of successful (often considered ‘inspiring’) people with disability. I begin by offering a definition of resilience as it is bound up in notions of inspiration and usually applied to people with disabilities. The second part of the paper explores disability as a cultural signifier to comment on the ways in which disability offers cultural meanings that may work to reassure nondisabled people of their privileged position. Finally, the paper considers interpretations of disability as a personal tragedy before exploring the emergence of a disability culture that recognises the social and cultural oppression experienced by people with disabilities and reworks definitions of resilience as a response to that oppression. Defining Resilience: Good Outcomes in Spite of Serious Threats Disability is often invoked in stories about resilience. Gillian King, Elizabeth Brown, and Linda Smith argue that a clear link exists between resilience and feeling that life is meaningful. They argue that the experiences of people with disabilities can offer a template for how to develop resilience and cope with life changes (King, Brown and Smith 633). According to the Oxford English Dictionary Online, resilience is ‘the action or an act of rebounding or springing back’ (653). King et al add that several concepts are associated with resilience such as hardiness, a sense of coherence and learned optimism (633). Deveson, resilience ‘has come to mean an ability to confront adversity and still find hope and meaning in life’. She comments that it conjures up notions of heroism, endurance and determination (632). Each of these characteristics we might describe as inspirational. It is telling that both Deveson and King et al use people with disabilities as signifiers of resilience in practice. However, Katherine Runswick-Cole and Dan Goodley argue that this definition of resilience has not necessarily been useful to people with disabilities and instead recommend a definition of resilience that Deveson only alludes to. For Runswick-Cole and Goodley resilience can be located in social processes. They argue that a thorough investigation of resilience in the lives of people with disabilities considers the broader social and cultural restrictions placed on top of impairments rather than simply in idualising resilience as a character trait of people who can ‘overcome the odds’: An exploration of resilience in the lives of disabled people must, then, focus on what resources are available and who is accessing those resources. Crucially, in seeking to build resilience in the lives of disabled people, this can never simply be a matter of building in idual capacity or family support, it must also be a case of challenging social, attitudinal and structural barriers which increase adversity in the lives of disabled people. (634) This is an alternative approach to disability that sees ‘the problem’ located in social structures and inaccessible environments. This so-called social model of disability is based on principles of empowerment and argues that able-bodied mainstream society disables people who have impairments through an inaccessible built environment and the perpetuation of stereotypes and prejudicial attitudes. Disability Dustbins and Inspirational Cripples Arthur Frank, sociologist and author of The Wounded Storyteller, explains that ‘the human body, for all its resilience, is fragile breakdown is built into it. Bodily predictability, if not the exception, should be regarded as exceptional contingency ought to be accepted as normative’ (634). Frank argues that we do not want to admit that our bodies are unpredictable and could ‘break down’ at any moment. Those bodies that do break down therefore become representatives of many of the things [the able-bodied, normal world] most fear-tragedy, loss, dark and the unknown. Involuntarily we walk- or more often sit- in the valley of the shadow of death. Contact with us throws up in people's faces the fact of sickness and death in the world … A deformed and paralysed body attacks everyone's sense of well-being and invincibility. (Hunt 186) People with disabilities therefore become loaded cultural signifiers, as Tom Shakespeare argues in Cultural Representations of Disabled People: Dustbins for Disavowal: ‘it is non-disabled people’s embodiment which is the issue: disabled people remind non-disabled people of their own vulnerability’ (139). As a result, people with disabilities are culturally othered. Several disability theorists have argued that this makes the non-disabled feel better about themselves and their tenuous privileged position (Barnes Ellis Kumari C bell Oliver, Goggin and Newell Shakespeare). Disability, as a concept, is both everywhere and nowhere. Generally considered a medical experience or personal tragedy, the discipline of critical disability studies has emerged to question why disability is considered an inherently negative experience and if there is more to disability than a body that has something wrong with it. Fiona Kumari C bell suggests ableism – ‘the network of beliefs, processes and practices that produces a particular kind of self and body (the corporeal standard) that is projected as the perfect, species typical and therefore essential and fully human’ – is repeatedly performed in our culture. This cultural project is difficult to sustain because by their very nature all bodies are out of control. People with disability are an acute reminder of the temporariness of an able bodied ontology (650). In order to maintain this ision and network of beliefs, the idea that disability is a personal tragedy rather than a set of social relations designed to exclude some bodies but not others is culturally reproduced through stereotypes such as the idea that people with disabilities who achieve both ordinary and extraordinary things are sources of inspiration. Resilience as a personal quality is implicated in this stereotype. In a powerful R Up blog that was republished on the ABC’s Drum and the influential popular culture/mummy blogging site website Mamamia, Stella Young takes issues with the media’s framing of disability as inspirational: We all learn how to use the bodies we're born with, or learn to use them in an adjusted state, whether those bodies are considered disabled or not. So that image of the kid drawing a picture with the pencil held in her mouth instead of her hand? That's just the best way for her, in her body, to do it. For her, it's normal. I can't help but wonder whether the source of this strange assumption that living our lives takes some particular kind of courage is the news media, an incredibly powerful tool in shaping the way we think about disability. Most journalists seem utterly incapable of writing or talking about a person with a disability without using phrases like "overcoming disability", "brave", "suffers from", "defying the odds", "wheelchair bound" or, my personal favourite, "inspirational". If we even begin to question the way we're labelled, we slide immediately to the other end of the scale and become "bitter" and "ungrateful". We fail to be what people expect. (610) These phrases, that Young claims the media rely on to isolate people with disabilities, are synonyms for the qualities Deveson attributes to resilient in iduals (632). As Beth Haller notes, although disabled activists and academics attempt to progress important political work, the news media continue to frame people with disability as courageous and inspirational simply for living their lives (216). By comparison, disability theorist Irving Zola describes rejecting his leg braces (symbolic of his professional status) electing instead to use a wheelchair: If we lived in a less healthiest, capitalist, and hierarchal society, which spent less time finding ways to exclude and disenfranchise people and more time finding ways to include and enhance the potentialities of everyone, then there wouldn’t have been so much for me to overcome. (654) Harilyn Russo agrees, and in her memoir Don’t Call Me Inspirational highlights the socially created barriers put in her way and the ways these are ignored in favour of in idualising social disablement as something inspirational people ‘overcome’: I’ll tell you why I am inspirational: I put up with the barriers, the barricades, the bullshit you put between us to avoid confronting something—probably yourself—and still pay the rent on time and savor dark chocolate. Now that takes real courage. (651) Throughout her book, Russo seeks to ‘overcome disability prejudice’ rather than ‘overcome disability’. Russo establishes herself and her experiences as normal and every day while articulating the tedium she finds in being pigeon holed as inspirational. These authors are constructing a new way of thinking about disability. Michael Oliver first described this as the ‘social model of disability’ in 1981. He sought to overturn the pathologisation of disability by giving people ‘a way of applying the idea that it was society not people with impairments that should be the target for professional intervention and practice’ (Runswick-Cole and Goodley 634). Resilience: A Key Concept Fiona Kumari C bell questions whether resilience is a useful concept in the context of disability and reflects on its use to obscure “the ‘real’ problem, namely disability oppression” (649). She interrogates traditional definitions of resilience as they draw on notions of good outcomes in spite of risk factors or experiences of severe trauma and calls for an understanding of the interactive and dynamic features of resilience as opposed to ‘in idualised psychological attributes’. Thus, in idualised notions of resilience as they are implicated in the cultural stories of inspirational people with disabilities are embedded within the ableist relations that Kumari C bell seeks to expose. In Empowerment, Self-Advocacy and Resilience, Dan Goodley argues that resilience is a key concept that has repeatedly emerged throughout his research into disability and self-advocacy. He draws on the reflections of people with disabilities to offer a re-definition of resilience as a response to a disabling society that includes five interrelated aspects (648). First is resilience as contextual, which recognises resilience as the result of the contexts in which it emerges, including through relationships with others and the experience of disabling and enabling environments. Secondly, resilience complicates preconceived notions about people with disabilities such as the view that they are passive. Goodley’s third feature of resilience is optimism. He notes resistance toward oppression as a key characteristic of optimistic resilience. Goodley again considers the importance of interpersonal relationships and group identity when he argues that the fourth feature of resilience relies on people with disabilities forming relationships with each other and group identities to question their oppression. Finally, Goodley argues ‘resilience is indicative of disablement’ and suggests that people with disability must be resilient in everyday life because we live in a disabling society. Kumari C bell posits that in idualised notions of resilience are a ‘cop out’ designed to ‘distract and defuse the reality of people labouring under very difficult circumstances of which the solution is better access to quality services’. She is hopeful, like Goodley, that resilience can be redefined as a political project, and encourages people with disabilities to develop a critical consciousness and find a new sense of community through art, humour and peer support. Therefore, according to Kumari C bell and Goodley, resilience can be redefined as a response to social disablement rather than bodily impairment. Disability Culture: Acts of Resilience in a Disabling Society Russo and Zola’s work is part of a disability culture that has emerged in response to narrow ways of understanding disability. Steven Brown emphasises the importance of experience and personal identity in his definition of disability culture: People with disabilities have forged a group identity. We share a common history of oppression and a common bond of resilience. We generate art, music, literature, and other expressions of our lives and our culture, infused from our experience of disability. Most importantly, we are proud of ourselves as people with disabilities. We claim our disabilities with pride as part of our identity. (520) Brown’s definition of disability culture therefore draws on all five of Goodley’s features of resilience. Disability culture is contextual, complicating, optimistic, interpersonal and indicative of disablement. The forging of a group identity reveals the resilience of disability culture as contextual and interpersonal. The creation of art, music, literature and other cultural artefacts reveals resilience as optimistic. The notion that people with disabilities are proud of their identity complicates traditional understandings of disability as a personal tragedy. Brown’s emphasis on the common history of the oppression of people with disabilities, as it initiated the whole disability culture movement, is ‘indicative of disablement’. The bonds of resilience that create the disability cultural movement are a result of the social oppression of people with disabilities (Gill Martin Brown Goodley). Conclusion Whereas people with disabilities going about their every day lives have often been considered inspirational and as possessing resilient qualities, a new disability culture is emerging that repositions the resilience of people with disabilities as a political response to social oppression. Drawing on Runswick-Cole and Goodley’s argument that in idualising qualities of resilience in inspirational people with disabilities has not benefitted people with disabilities, this paper sought to reveal the importance of resilience as a response to social oppression. People with disabilities in their formation of a disability cultural movement are reworking and redefining resilience as a response to oppression. Throughout this paper I have drawn on the reflections of a number of people with disabilities to illustrate the emergence of a disability culture as it has begun the work of redefining resilience as a political project that “‘outs’ the problems that disabled people face and names and prioritises the concerns” (Kumari C bell 649). As Goodley argues, people with disabilities have developed a politics of resilience ‘in the face of a disabling world’. References Barnes, Colin. “Disabling Imagery and the Media: An Exploration of the Principles for Media Representations of Disabled People.” 1992. Brown, Steven. “What Is Disability Culture?” Disability Studies Quarterly 22.2 (2002). Clear, Mike. Promises, Promises: Disability and Terms of Inclusion. Leichhardt: Federation Press, 2000. Deveson, Ann. Resilience. Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin, 2003. Ellis, Katie. Disabling Diversity: The Social Construction of Disability in 1990s Australian National Cinema. Saarbrücken, Germany: VDM Verlag, 2008. Frank, Arthur. The Wounded Storyteller: Body, Illness and Ethics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1995. Gill, Carol. “A Psychological View of Disability Culture.” Disability Studies Quarterly (Fall 1995). ———. "Disability in Australia: Exposing a Social Apartheid." Sydney: University of New South Wales, 2005. Goodley, Dan. “Empowerment, Self-Advocacy and Resilience.” Journal of Intellectual Disabilities 9.4 (2005): 333-343. Haller, Beth. Representing Disability in an Ableist World: Essays on Mass Media. Louisville, KY: Avocado Press, 2010. Hunt, Paul. “A Critical Condition.” Stigma: The Experience of Disability. Ed. Paul Hunt. London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1966. King, Gillian, Elizabeth Brown, and Linda Smith. “Resilience: Learning from People with Disabilities and the Turning Points in Their Lives.” Health Psychology. Ed. Barbara, Tinsley. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2003. Kumari C bell, Fiona. Contours of Ableism: The Production of Disability and Abledness. New York: Palgrave Macmillian, 2009. ———. “Out of the Shadows: Resilience and Living with Ableism Seminar.” The University of Dundee, 13 Sep. 2010. Martin-Breen, Patrick, and J. Marty Anderies. “Resilience: A Literature Review.” The Rockefeller Foundation, 2011. Martin, Douglas. Disability Culture: Eager to Bite the Hands That Would Feed Them. New York Times, 1997. Oliver, Mike. “Understanding Disability: From Theory to Practice.” Houndsmill, Basingstoke: Macmillian, 1996. Oxford English Dictionary. “resilience, n.” Oxford University Press. Richardson, G. E. “The Metatheory of Resilience and Resiliency,” Journal of Clinical Psychology 58.3. (2002): 307-321. Rousso, Harilyn. "Don’t Call Me Inspirational: A Disabled Feminist Talks Back." Philadelphia: Temple University Press. 2013. Runswick-Cole, Katherine, and Dan Goodley. “Resilience: A Disability Studies and Community Psychology Approach.” Social and Personality Psychology Compass 7. 2 (2013): 67-78. Shakespeare, Tom. “Cultural Representation of Disabled People: Dustbins for Disavowal?” Disability & Society 9.3 (1994): 283-299. Wilkes, Glenda. “Introduction – A Second Generation of Resilience Research.” Journal of Clinical Psychology 58.3 (2002): 229-232. Young, Stella. “We’re Not Here for Your Inspiration.” R Up 2012. Zola, Irving. Missing Pieces: A Chronicle of Living with a Disability. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. 1982.
Students with Disabilities and eLearning in Australia: Experiences of Accessibility and Disclosure at Curtin University
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 27-09-2018
Disability and Communication in the COVID-19 Pandemic
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Date: 2021
Impacts of Mobile Use on Third Agers in China
Publisher: IGI Global
Date: 2019
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-7885-7.CH002
Abstract: The chapter explores the role of smart phones and mobile apps in the process of third age formation in Zhengzhou, a second-tier city in China located in central Henan province. The term ‘third age' refers to a transition period from active work to retirement. Compared with the previous generation, the demographic approaching retirement in China today is more digitally literate, although this varies accordingly in Zhengzhou, a second-tier city. The use of digital technology offers people a different kind of retirement. This study shows that an increasing number of people around retirement age (55-65) in Zhengzhou are using smart phones and apps to reimagine the possibilities of post-work lifestyles. The research asks if the use of mobile apps is changing peoples' perspectives on traditional responsibilities and peoples' expectations of retirement.
Disability and Remote Learning during COVID-19
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Date: 2021
Beyond crisis: Enacted sense-making among ethnic minority carers of people with dementia in Australia
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 23-11-2020
Abstract: The ‘family crisis’ narrative is frequently used in dementia studies to explain ethnic minority families’ pathways to health and aged care and why there is delayed dementia diagnoses in ethnic minority communities. Such narratives may obscure the family carers’ agency in negotiating services and managing personal, social and structural burdens in the lead up to diagnosis. To illuminate agency, this article describes ethnic minority families’ pathways to a dementia diagnosis using the concept of sense-making. Three case studies were drawn from 56 video interviews with family carers of older adults with dementia from Chinese, Arab and Indian backgrounds. Interviews were conducted across Australia from February to August 2018, then translated, transcribed and thematically analysed. Findings suggest families did not enter into formal care because of a crisis, instead navigating fragmented systems and conflicting advice to obtain a dementia diagnosis and access to relevant care. This experience was driven by sense-making (a search for plausible explanations) that involved family carers interpreting discrepant cues in changes to the behaviour of the person with dementia over time, managing conflicting (medical) advice about these discrepancies and reinterpreting their relationships with hindsight. The sense-making concept offers a more constructive hermeneutic than the ‘family crisis’ narrative as it illuminates the agency of carers’ in understanding changed behaviours, negotiating services and managing personal, social and structural barriers pre-diagnosis. The concept also demonstrates the need for a multimodal approach to promoting timely diagnosis of dementia in ethnic minority communities through dementia awareness and literacy c aigns as well as initiatives that address structural inequities.
Digital television flexibility: A survey of Australians with disability
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 02-2014
DOI: 10.1177/1329878X1415000120
Abstract: Flexibility for many viewers comes from digital technologies and their interaction with television broadcasting. Significantly, as television is switched to digital transmissions, viewers with disability have the potential to experience flexibility in the form of accessibility features such as audio descriptions, captions, lip-reading avatars, signing avatars, spoken subtitles and clean audio. This flexibility may in fact provide some people with access to television for the first time. This exploratory study reports results from an online survey of Australians with disabilities conducted during the final months of the simulcast period before analogue signals were switched off in 2013. While captioning emerged as the most desired accessibility feature, differences surfaced when the data were broken into specific impairment types. This article highlights the importance of digital flexibility specific to impairment type, and locates people with disability as a significant group to consider as more changes take place around digital television broadcasting via the NBN.
Community Accessibility: Tweeters Take Responsibility for an Accessible Web 2.0
Publisher: University of Texas at Arlington Libraries
Date: 2010
Cripping Time – Understanding the Life Course through the Lens of Ableism
Publisher: Stockholm University Press
Date: 2020
DOI: 10.16993/SJDR.710
Taste is the enemy of creativity: Disability, YouTube and a new language
Publisher: Elsevier
Date: 2012
The Preferred User: How Audio Description could Change Understandings of Australian Television Audiences and Media Technology
Publisher: Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Date: 2018
DOI: 10.5334/CSCI.105
Abstract: Audio description continues to be unavailable on broadcast television in Australia, despite the technological capabilities to provide it and the existence of a federally funded back catalogue or ‘secret library’ of audio described television content. This paper reveals findings into both the amount of audio described content that has been created but not made available to television audiences, while also reviewing existing innovative platforms for audio description, such as the app BAM-Describe. It contextualises these findings in an overview of the history of audio description in and outside of Australia, highlighting key technological and policy changes. Evoking theories of the preferred user and how this understanding of television audiences addresses disability, we argue that different interpretations of how audio description can be delivered, determined through a process of interpretive flexibility (and continued industry creativity and innovation) may finally shift the stagnating discussions around audio description provision, and thus ultimately change the accessibility of television for the blind and vision impaired.
Video on Demand for People with Disability: Traversing Terrestrial Borders
Publisher: Queensland University of Technology
Date: 13-10-2016
DOI: 10.5204/MCJ.1158
Abstract: IntroductionWithin Australia, the approach taken to the ways in which disabled people access television is heavily influenced by legislation and activism from abroad. This is increasingly the case as television moves to online modes of distribution where physical and legislative boundaries are more fluid. While early investigations of the intersections between television and the concept of abroad focused on the impacts of representation and national reputation (Boddy), the introduction of new media technologies saw a shifting focus towards the impact and introduction of new media technologies. Drawing on Chan’s definition of media internationalisation as “the process by which the ownership, structure, production, distribution, or content of a country’s media is influenced by foreign media interests, culture and markets” (Chan 71), this article considers the impacts of legislative and advocacy efforts abroad on Australian television audiences with disabilities accessing subscription Video on Demand (VOD).Subscription (VOD) services have caused a major shift in the way television is used and consumed in Australia. Prior to 2015, there was a small subscription VOD industry operating out of this country. Providers such as Quickflix had limited content and the bulk of VOD services used by Australians related to catch-up television, user-generated videos on YouTube or Vimeo, or accessing Netflix US illegally through virtual private networks (VPNs) and proxy services (Ryall Lombato and Meese). VOD is distinct in that it is generally streamed over Internet-based online services and is not linear, giving viewers the opportunity to watch the video at any time once the programme is available. Unlike broadcast television, there is no particular government or corporate entity controlling the creation of VOD. These services take advantage of the time-shifted convenience of the medium. In addition, VOD is typically not terrestrial, traversing national boundaries and challenging audience expectations and legislative boundaries. This research is concerned with the subscriber model of VOD in Australia where subscribers pay a fee to gain access to large collections of content.This internationalising of television has also offered the opportunity for people with disabilities that previously excluded them from the practice of television consumption, to participate in this national pastime. On an international level, audio description is becoming more available on VOD than it is on broadcast television, thus allowing disabled people access to television. This article situates the Australian approach to VOD accessibility within a broader international framework to question whether the internationalisation of television has affected the ways in which of content is viewed, both at legislative and public levels. While providers are still governed by national regulations, these regulations are influenced by international legislation. Further, the presence and success of advocacy groups to agitate for change has exacerbated the way accessibility is viewed and defined in Australia. The role of the Accessible Netflix Project, in conjunction with changes in the 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act (CVAA) in the USA, has not only reframed accessibility discourse in the US, but also, as companies such as Netflix move abroad, has potentially stimulated a shift in media accessibility standards in Australia.We focus in particular on the impact of three new services – Netflix Australia, Stan, and Presto Entertainment—which entered the Australian market in 2015. At the time, Australia was described as having entered the “streaming wars” and consumers were predicted to be the beneficiaries (Tucker). Despite international moves to improve the accessibility of VOD for disabled consumers, via legislation and advocacy, none of these providers launched with an accessibility policy in place. Even closed captions, whose provision on Australian broadcast television had been mandated via the broadcasting services act since the early 1990s, were conspicuously absent. The absence of audio description was less surprising. With the exception of a 12-week trial on the Australian Broadcasting Commission (ABC) in 2012 and a follow up trial on iView in 2015, audio description has never been available to Australian people who are vision impaired.The findings and methodology of this article are based on research into disability and streaming television in Australia, conducted in 2015 and 2016. Funded by the Australian Communications and Consumer Action Network (ACCAN), the 12-month project reviewed national and international policy surveyed 145 people with disability and conducted interviews with media professionals, policy advisors, accessibility advocates, and disabled Australian VOD consumers.Accessibility Abroad Impacting on Local Accessibility: The Netflix ModelDespite the lack of a clear accessibility policy, Netflix is in front in terms of accessibility, with captions available for most content. Audio description for some content became available in April 2015 shortly after its Australian launch. The introduction of this accessibility feature has been directly attributed to the advocacy efforts of the Accessible Netflix Project, an international online movement operating out of the US and advocating for improved accessibility of VOD in the US and abroad (Ellis & Kent). Similarly, Chris Mikul, author of Access on Demand, was interviewed as part of this research. He told us that Netflix’s provision of captions was due to the impacts of legislation in the USA, namely the CVAA. The CVAA, which we discuss later in the paper, while having no jurisdiction in Australia, has improved the availability of captions by mandating accessibility abroad. As a result, accessible content is imported into the Australian market. When Netflix introduced audio description on its original programming, the VOD provider described the access feature as an option customers could choose, “just like choosing the soundtrack in a different language” (Wright). However, despite successful trials, other VOD providers have not introduced audio description as a way to compete with Netflix, and there is no legislation in place regarding the provision of audio description in Australia. People with disability, including people with vision impairments, do use VOD and continue to have particular unmet access needs. As the Netflix ex le illustrates, both legislation and recognition of people with a disability as a key audience demographic will result in a more accessible television environment.Impact of International LegislationThe accessibility of VOD in Australia has been impacted upon by international legislation in three key ways: through comparative bench-marks, or industry expectations via user-led expectations and awareness of differing policies and products and also through the introduction of international providers onto the Australian VOD market, and the presence of parallel-import VOD services. While international VOD providers such as Netflix and iTunes have officially launched in Australia, Australian consumers, both prior to and after the official availability, often access the parallel USA versions of such services. Lombato and Meese theorise that the delays in content launches between the US and Australia, and the limitations caused by licensing agreements (reducing the content availability) have prompted the continued use of Netflix US and a “kind of transnational shop-front hopping” (126). This is significant for VOD content accessibility as it emphasises the effect of, and disparities in national legislation, whereby the same company provides accessible content only in locations in which it is subject to legal requirements. Our analysis of international policy regarding the accessibility of VOD has found a varied approach—from a complete absence of accessibility regulations (New Zealand), to a layering of policy through disability discrimination acts alongside new media laws (USA). Additionally, this need to address convergence and new media in media accessibility regulation is currently a subject being discussed at government levels in some countries, primarily in the UK (ATVOD). However, outside of the USA, there remains either a lack of accessibility policies for media, new or old—as is the case in Singapore—or a lack of policies that facilitate accessibility for the VOD market—such as in Australia where a level of accessibility is required for broadcasters and subscription television but not VOD.While these changes and advancements in accessibility are taking place abroad, the space that online businesses occupy is fluid. The accessibility requirements of physical spaces cross national boundaries, and operate across multiple media and technologies, and thus, multiple media laws. For ex le, Australian television broadcasters are subject to some captioning requirements, yet VOD is not. Furthermore, catch-up VOD services provided by mainstream Australian television broadcasters are not subject to these laws. While legislation that accommodates convergence and the new digital media landscape is logical (ACMA) there remain few ex les globally that have made changes to reflect accessibility requirements in this context. The CVAA in the US is perhaps the most effective to date, specifically addressing the issue of access to modern communications for people with disability.The CVAA and CaptioningThe CVAA seeks to ensure that “accessibility laws enacted in the 1980s and 1990s are brought up to date with 21st century technologies, including new digital, broadband, and mobile innovations” (FCC). The CVAA is designed to be forward-thinking and evolve with changing technologies (Varley). As such, the Act has been distinctive in its approach to accessibility for Internet protocol delivered video programming, including VOD. While full accessibility requirements, such as the inclusion of audio description are not addressed, the Act is considered to be the most accessible globally in its requirements for captioning of all content—specifically, English and Spanish—across cable, broadcast, satellite, and VOD content. VOD apps, plug-ins and devices are also required to implement the complete captioning capabilities, with specific requirements for personalised presentation, colour, size, and fonts. This requirement is applied to video programming distributors and to video programming owners. Indeed, programmers are expected to provide captioning compliance certificates, and distributors are required to report a failure to do so. Quality standards have also been established, with an emphasis not simply on the presence of captioning, but also on accuracy, synchronicity, completeness, and appropriate placement of captions. Despite an absence of similar legislation locally, the impacts of these foreign interests will penetrate the Australian market.In Australia, the ex le set by the CVAA has warranted recommendations by the ACMA and Media Access Australia. In a recent interview, Chris Mikul reinforced the position that, in order for the accessibility of VOD to improve in Australia, a similar Act is needed to the one established in the US. According to Mikul, “The CVAA in the US bridges the gap to some extent with captioning, although it doesn’t venture into online audio description. […] We need something like the CVAA here” (Mikul).Beyond the impact of the CVAA on US VOD programming, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) (1990) has been significant in the developing captioning requirements of the CVAA. In 2010, disability advocates seeking more accessible VOD services attempted to prosecute Netflix under the ADA. The National Association for the Deaf (NAD) argued that Netflix discriminated against those with a hearing impairment by not providing closed captions for all content. At this time, the CVAA did not include captioning requirements for VOD providers. Instead, it was argued that online businesses should be considered as a “place” of publication accommodation, and thus subject to the same standards and anti-discrimination laws. Netflix settled out of court in 2012, agreeing to caption 100% of its content by 2014 (Mullin Wolford). However, a Federal Appeals Court later ruled that Netflix was not a place of public accommodation and therefore did not have to comply with the ruling (Hattem). Notably, during the case Netflix also argued that it should not be required to provide captions, as it was abiding by CVAA requirements at that time.Accessibility Activism and AdvocacyAdvocates for accessibility, such as the NAD, have impacted not only on the legislative framework for VOD in the USA, but also on the international public perception and expectation of accessibility. It is important to note that many of the help forums generated by international VOD providers mix customers from multiple countries, establishing a global space in which requirements, expectations and perceptions are shared. These spaces generate a transnational accessibility, providing an awareness of what provisions are being made in other countries, and where they are not. Orrego-Carmona conducted a study on subtitling for the purpose of language translation and found the globalisation of audio-visual content and international media flows have impacted on the public view of subtitling. Indeed, this finding can be extended to subtitling for people with disability. In the help forums for VOD providers, users identified an awareness of other more accessible media environments (such as whether companies provided closed captions in other countries), the impact of legislation in other countries on accessibility, and how or if international media companies were replicating accessibility standards transnationally. Social media c aigns, instigated in both the UK and the US are significant ex les of consumer and public-led activism for accessibility. “LOVEFiLM hates deaf people”, #subtitleit, launched by the Action on Hearing Loss group in the UK, and #withcaptions, were all effective online c aigns launched by in iduals and disability activist groups. In early 2014, comedian Mark Thomas, as part of his show 100 Acts of Minor Dissent, placed two large posters at the entrance to the offices of Amazon UK stating "LOVEFiLM hates deaf people." A subsequent petition through change.com attracted 15154 signatures, asking for rental DVDs that were subtitled to be listed, and all streamed content to be subtitled (/lovefilm-amazon-prime-video-amazon-uk-please-list-your-subtitled-rental-dvds-and-subtitle-your-streamed-content). A year later, Amazon increased the subtitling of its content to 40 percent. As of June 2015 the company was working towards 100% subtitling. The petition turned its attention to Sky On Demand, initiated by Jamie Danjoux, a 17-year-old boy with hearing loss (/sky-enable-subtitles-for-ondemand), has attracted 6556 signatures. The social media c aigns #subtitleit and #withcaptions similarly aimed to target both VOD providers and the government, with the aim for both consistent and compulsory captioning across all VOD content. While UK legislation is yet to specifically address VOD captioning, the subject of accessibility and VOD is currently being debated at policy level. It was also successful in gaining commitments from Sky and BT TV to improve subtitles for their VOD and catch-up VOD programming.In the USA, The Accessible Netflix Project and founder Robert Kingett have been significant advocates for the inclusion of audio description on Netflix and other US VOD providers. Further, while the Accessible Netflix Project has a focus on the United States, its prominence and effectiveness has facilitated awareness of the accessibility of VOD transnationally, and the group internally monitors and comments on international ex les. This group was integral in persuading Netflix to provide audio descriptions, a move that has impacted on the level of accessibility worldwide.These advocacy efforts abroad have not only included Australian audiences via their invitations to participate in transnational online spaces, but their success also has direct impact on the availability of captions and audio description imported to Australian video on demand consumers. ConclusionThe national borders of television have always been permeable—with content from abroad influencing programming and culture. However, within Australia, borders have been erected around the television culture with long wait times between shows airing abroad and locally. In addition, licencing deals between overseas distributors and pay television have delayed the introduction of VOD until 2015. That year saw the introduction of three VOD providers to the Australian television landscape: Stan, Presto Entertainment, and Netflix Australia. With the introduction of VOD, it is not only international content that has altered television consumption. Overseas providers have established a firm place in the Australia television marketplace. Even before the formal launch of overseas VOD providers, disabled users were accessing content from providers such as Netflix USA via VPNs and tunnelling services, illustrating both the clear demand for VOD content, and demonstrating the multiple ways in which international legislation and provider approaches to accessibility have permeated the Australian television industry.The rapid increase of ways in which we watch television has increased its accessibility. The nature of video on demand—streamed online and nonlinear—means that the content accessed is no longer as restricted by space, time and television. Audiences are able to personalise and modify access, and can use multiple devices, with multiple assistive technologies and aids. This increasingly accessible environment is the result of legislative and advocacy efforts originating in other countries. Efforts to improve captions and introduce audio description, while not originating in Australia, have seen improvements to the availability of accessibility features for disabled Australian television audiences. To return to Chan’s definition of media internationalisation with which we began this article, a concern with television accessibility while not originating in Australia, has taken place due to the influence of “foreign media interests, culture and markets” (Chan 71).However, despite the increased potential for full accessibility, there remains deficits. Captions and audio description, the two main features that support the playback of online video content in an accessible way, are not consistently provided. There are no clear, applicable legislative requirements for VOD accessibility in Australia. This must change. Based on our research, change at government, industry and advocacy levels are required in order for VOD in Australia to become fully accessible. Legislation needs to be introduced that requires a minimum level of accessibility, including audio description accessibility, on broadcast television and VOD. Further, governments should work to ensure that PWD are aware of the accessibility features that are provided across all media. For VOD providers, it should be recognised that a significant portion of the consumer base could be PWD, or their families and friends may wish to share in the activity of VOD. Establishing an understanding of the different accessibility requirements may come from hiring specialised accessibility consultants to make platforms accessible and useable for PWD. For consumers of VOD and advocates of accessibility, participation in advocacy efforts that encourage and demand that VOD providers improve accessibility options have been shown to increase accessibility abroad, and should be applied to the Australian context.ReferencesACMA. Australian Government. Converged Legislative Frameworks: International Approaches. Jul. 2011. 1 Aug. 2016 www.acma.gov.au/theACMA/Library/researchacma/Occasional-papers/coverged-legislative-frameworks-international-approaches .ATVOD. Provision of Video on Demand Access Services: A Report on the Level of Provision by On Demand. UK: The Authority for Television on Demand, 18 Dec. 2015. 13 May 2016 stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/on-demand/accesseuropean/AS_survey_report_2015.pdf .Boddy, William. "U.S. Television Abroad: Market Power and National Introspection." Quarterly Review of Film and Video 15.2 (1994): 45-55.Chan, Joseph Man. "Media Internationalization in China: Processes and Tensions." Journal of Communication 44.3 (1994): 70-88.Ellis, Katie, and Mike Kent. "Accessible Television: The New Frontier in Disability Media Studies Brings Together Industry Innovation, Government Legislation and Online Activism." First Monday 20 (2015). js/index.php/fm/article/view/6170 .FCC. 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act (CVAA) 2010. USA: Federal Communications Commission. 27 May 2016 onsumers/guides/21st-century-communications-and-video-accessibility-act-cvaa .Hattem, Julian. “Court: Netflix Doesn’t Have to Comply with Disability Law.” The Hill, 3 Apr. 2015. 20 Aug. 2015 olicy/technology/237829-court-netflix-doesnt-have-to-comply-with-disability-law .Lombato, Roman, and James Meese, eds. “Australia: Circumnavigation Goes Mainstream.” Geoblocking and Global Video Culture. Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures, 2016.Media Access Australia. “Policy and Expectations: What You Can Expect on Free-to-air Television.” Australia: Media Access Australia, 2013. 27 May 2016 www.mediaaccess.org.au/tv-video olicy-and-expectations .Mullin, Joe. “Netflix Settles with Deaf-Rights Group, Agrees to Caption All Videos by 2014.” Arstechnica 11 Oct. 2012. 1 Jan. 2014 ech-policy/2012/10/netflix-settles-with-deaf-rights-group-agrees-to-caption-all-videos-by-2014/ .Orrego-Carmona, Daniel. “Subtitling, Video Consumption and Viewers.” Translation Spaces 3 (2014): 51-70.Ryall, Jenni. “How Netflix Is Dominating Australia from Abroad.” Mashable Australia 14 Jul. 2014. 14 Sep. 2016 /07/14/how-netflix-is-dominating-australia-from-abroad/#kI9Af70FngqW .Tucker, Harry. “Netflix Leads the Streaming Wars, Followed by Foxtel’s Presto.” News.com.au 24 Jun. 2015. 18 May 2016 www.news.com.au/technology/home-entertainment/tv/netflix-leads- the-streaming-wars-followed-by-foxtels-presto/news story/7adf45dcd7d9486ff47ec5ea5951287f .Unites States Government. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. 27 May 2016 ubs/adastatute08.htm .Varley, Alex. “New Access for a New Century: We Sit Down with Karen Peltz Strauss.” Media Access Australia 28 Aug. 2013. 27 May 2016 www.mediaaccess.org.au/latest_news/australian-policy-and-legislation/new-access-for-a- new-century .Wolford, Josh. “Netflix Will Caption All Streaming Videos by 2014, per Settlement.” WebProNews, 11 Oct. 2012. 1 Jan. 2014 etflix-will-caption-all-streaming-videos-by-2014-per-settlement-2012-10/ .Wright, Tracey. “Netflix Begins Audio Description for Visually Impaired.” Netflix, 14 Apr. 2015. 5 June 2016 /04/netflix-begins-audio-description-for.html .
Disability and the Internet in 2015: Where to now?
Publisher: University of Illinois Libraries
Date: 09-12-2019
Abstract: Earlier this decade, the emerging field of disability media began to focus on the Internet and people with disabilities. Books such as Paul T. Jaeger’s Disability and the Internet in 2012 and Disability and new media by this issue’s editors in 2011 both extended earlier work in this field particularly Goggin and Newell’s 2003 Digital disability.This new focus incorporated changes to the environment with the hype around Web 2.0, the rise of online social networks and the increasing prevalence of smartphone and other mobile devices being used to access the Internet, as well as the evolving legal environment around access to technology for people with disabilities.Our aim in compiling this special issue was to continue the work we began with Disability and new media.
Privacy and Digital Data of Children with Disabilities: Scenes from Social Media Sharenting
Publisher: Cogitatio
Date: 10-11-2020
Abstract: Children with disabilities have been an overlooked group in the debates on privacy and data management, and the emergence of discourses on responsibilization. In this article, we offer a preliminary overview, conceptualization, and reflection on children with disabilities, their experiences and perspectives in relation to privacy and data when it comes to existing and emergent digital technology. To give a sense of the issues at play, we provide a brief case study of “sharenting” on social media platform (that is, sharing by parents of images and information about their children with disabilities). We conclude with suggestions for the research and policy agenda in this important yet neglected area.
Disability media participation: Opportunities, obstacles and politics
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 02-2015
DOI: 10.1177/1329878X1515400111
Abstract: This article discusses participatory media from a critical disability perspective. It discusses the relative absence of explicit discussion and research on disability in the literatures on community, citizen and alternative media. By contrast, disability has emerged as an important element of participatory cultures and digital technologies. To explore disability participatory cultures, the article offers analysis of case studies, including disability blogs, ABC's R Up website and crowd-funding platforms (such as Kickstarter).
Live music in a virtual world: Exuberant flourishing and disability at wheelies nightclub in second life
Publisher: Elsevier
Date: 2015
Producerly Disability Popular Culture
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 31-10-2019
Roundtable on Disability and Advertising, Part I
Publisher: Project MUSE
Date: 2021
Manifestos for the Future of Critical Disability Studies
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 03-10-2018
Caption
Publisher: Queensland University of Technology
Date: 21-06-2017
DOI: 10.5204/MCJ.1267
Abstract: When Malcolm Fraser opened The Australian Captioning Centre in 1982, he emphasised the importance of changing technology in improving the provision of captions:there is always going to be new technology coming forward, there will always be better ways of doing it if you wait a while. This has been delayed a long while already and I don't believe that there is any excuse for further delay by the ABC or by commercial stations on the grounds of technology.New captioning technologies are coming forward at a rapid pace. In the time we have been preparing this issue, Facebook announced it would offer users the ability to have live videos captioned, a group of fansubbers in the Netherlands were found to be engaging in illegal activities (see Hollier et al this issue), the Australian copyright Act was amended to allow the creation of accessible versions of content to address any form of disability, and The National Center for Accessible Media in the US launched a free Caption and Description Editing Tool (CADET) following a crowd funding c aign.Captions are most often associated with making audiovisual content accessible to people who are D/deaf or hard of hearing however, with technological advancements, people are increasingly finding mainstream benefits for captions, whether as a learning tool in education, or to capture the attention of Facebook users quickly scrolling through their news feeds, or to watch television in a crowded or noisy area such as bars and gyms. Captions have also taken on a central role in popular memes, social media, and Web-based creativity. Historically, the mainstream benefits of captions have been integral to their increasingly widespread availability (Downey). This issue of M/C seeks to investigate the changing uses of captions in media and culture.We begin with a feature article from Catherine Burwell exploring the use of captions in Al Jazeera Plus (AJ+) news videos created in response to Facebook’s autoplay feature. Analysing two recent AJ+ videos, Burwell shows how captions add new layers of meaning to the already multimodal form of the video, and how they change the way that news stories are communicated. The broader role that captions play in audience engagement, branding, and profit-making extends these textual interpretations, and the paper ends with a brief enquiry into the implications of captions for our understanding of literacy in an age of constantly shifting media.Melissa Merchant, Katie Ellis and Natalie Latter offer a historical progression of the availability of captions on television—using the cooking genre as their case study—to identify three stages of caption availability and quality. These can be broadly summarised as early yet inconsistent captions, captions becoming more widely available and accurate—often as a direct result of activism and legislation—but not yet fully verbatim, and verbatim captions as adopted within mainstream augmentative uses.Mike Kent, Katie Ellis and Gwyneth Peaty take up the shifting concept of literacy and the potential uses of mainstreaming captions to consider what happens when captioned online university lectures are made available to the entire student population. Their article reports findings of research assessing the usefulness of captioned recorded lectures as a mainstream learning tool to determine their usefulness in enhancing inclusivity and learning outcomes for the disabled, international, and broader student population.Beth Haller’s essay reflects on the Switched at Birth all American Sign Language (ASL) episode Uprising to consider what happens when captions are opened to and utilised by the majority of the population. The US cable television show Switched at Birth (2011-2017) broke new ground within mass media by hiring numerous deaf actors and allowing those actors to perform using sign language rather than vocalizing English. The show’s honouring of Deaf culture and language reflects a new openness from television executives toward integrating more people with a variety of visible and invisible physical embodiments, such as hearing loss, into television content. This article looks at the cultural inclusivity fostered by the show. Gwyneth Peaty’s article likewise considers the interplay between silence, sound, and text in the horror film Hush (2016). Within this film, deafness is utilised as a source of tension and empowerment for the main character, and offers a reworking of the ‘Final Girl’ trope in horror. Text and captioning are subtly woven into the film, and function to create character development and narrative cohesion. The use of both sound and silence in this film also convey complexities in audience and text relationships.While Haller and Peaty offer some contemporary ex les of captions and reflect on the ways ASL and captioning can be used in new and innovative ways in audio visual media, Scott Hollier, Katie Ellis and Mike Kent argue commercial providers are not always meeting their legislative or best practice requirements in the provision of captions. Their paper explores an interesting mix of activism, volunteer effort, and hacking whereby Netflix users compile instructions to allow users to upload their own captions and make content accessible by essentially hacking into secret caption files in the Netflix media player. They conceive of this user-generated practice as a conflation of the hacker and the acknowledged digital influencer, but caution that copyright restrictions may drive this practice of sharing information for accessibility underground.Katy Galiardi brings together two key concerns explored throughout this issue—social justice for people with disability and the use of captions in online communication. The paper redefines Facebook comments as a form of cultural captioning to explore critiques and ex les of what disability activists describe as inspiration porn. The paper offers critique and analysis of the ways comments on an Autism Speaks Facebook post about a young man with autism fit the inspiration porn narrative. Through quantitative and qualitative analyses of comments on this post, this paper argues language use and over-disclosure are two contributing factors to the discrimination inherent within inspiration porn.Nicole Erin Morse also considers the role of captions in social media but with a focus on Instagram. Within social media visibility c aigns, selfie captions usually work to produce coherent identity categories, linking disparate selfies together through hashtags. Furthering visibility politics, such selfie captions claim that authentic identities can be made visible through selfies and can be described and defined by these captions. However, selfie captions by the trans-artist Alok Vaid-Menon challenge the assumption that selfies and their captions can make authentic identity legible. Through hashtags, emojis, and punning text, Vaid-Menon’s selfie captions interrogate visibility politics from within one of visibility politics most popular contemporary tools, demonstrating how social media can be used to theorise representation.The final paper in this issue by Katie Ellis, Mike Kent and Kathryn Locke explores a discrepancy between the provision of captions and audio description on Australian broadcast television and video on demand. While audio description as a technology, like captions, was developed in the 1960s, it remains largely absent from current Australian television. In the current media climate of multiple platform and content delivery options, it was envisaged that television would become more accessible. However, despite multiple audio description trials on both broadcast and catch-up television, and an increase in political and advocate attention, the availability of audio description is still nowhere near the level of captions.“To caption” is to take, catch, seize, capture, subtitle, title, and/or translate. The articles collected in this issue demonstrate the increasing potential of captions to augment communication and highlight a range of emerging issues, practices, and focal points. The use of captions as a vital accessibility feature for people who are D/deaf or hard of hearing is acknowledged throughout all of the papers. The role of captions in activist efforts of people with disability is also emphasised—from criticisms of inspiration porn, to hacking the back end of Netflix, to recent calls to raise the importance of audio description to the level of captions in the Australian Broadcasting Act (1992). The mainstream use of captions to augment visual imagery, memes, television, and video is also recognised throughout this issue as a vital tool for expression, identity formation, and personalised learning styles. Collectively, these articles demonstrate the changing uses of captions in media and culture, examining the ways they are also increasingly used by larger portions of the population.AcknowledgmentsThe editors acknowledge the support of the Curtin University Teaching Excellence Development Fund in the development of this issue. We also offer our sincerest thanks to the referees who shared their time and insight and particularly those who were also contributors. ReferencesDowney, Greg. “Constructing Closed-Captioning in the Public Interest: From Minority Media Accessibility to Mainstream Educational Technology.” Info 9.2–3 (2007): 69–82.Fraser, Malcolm. “Address at the Opening of the Caption Centre Sydney.” PM Transcripts 13 Sep. 1982. 14 June 2017 mtranscripts.pmc.gov.au/release/transcript-5907 .
A purposeful rebuilding: Youtube, representation, accessibility and the socio-political space of disability
Publisher: Swinburne University of Technology
Date: 05-2010
DOI: 10.2104/TJA10021
Cultural safety as a foundation for allyship in disability arts
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 06-05-2022
Open Literacy: Games, Social Responsibility and Social Innovation: Editorial Introduction to the Special Issue of Cultural Science Journal
Publisher: Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Date: 2019
DOI: 10.5334/CSCI.132
Abstract: This is the Editorial Introduction to the special collection of articles on Open Literacy: Games, Social Responsibility and Social Innovation, which will be published across volumes 11 and 12 of the Journal. The Editorial includes information on the research symposium where these papers were first presented, and biographical details for the contributors.
Privacy and the Ethics of Disability Research: Changing Perceptions of Privacy and Smartphone Use
Publisher: Springer Netherlands
Date: 2019
I Love Every Part of You
Publisher: Queensland University of Technology
Date: 02-10-2023
DOI: 10.5204/MCJ.2997
Cripples, Bastards and Broken Things: Disability in Game of Thrones
Publisher: Queensland University of Technology
Date: 25-10-2014
DOI: 10.5204/MCJ.895
Abstract: Games of Thrones was awarded a Media Access Award in 2013 in recognition of its efforts in "promoting awareness of the disability experience, accessibility for people with disabilities, and the accurate depiction of characters with disabilities" (Winter Is Coming). In addition to this award, the in idual character Tryion Lannister has amassed somewhat of a cult following for his depiction of disability. As Sparky, a blogger for Fangs for the Fantasy comments:Normally when disabled characters are included they are shunted to the side and most certainly not central to the story line. From the moment Tyrion is introduced having sex with multiple women, it was clear that his role would be far different from the norm. Disabled people are very seldom seen as sexual beings. Tyrion is not only sexual, it would be fair to describe him as hyper sexual. For Tyrion expressing his sexuality is part of how he declares his manhood, in a world that simple seeks to dismiss him because of his size.According to Dan Harvey and Drew Nelles, Game Of Thrones is “fundamentally, a show about power: who has it, who doesn’t, the fickleness and impermanence of its favour” (Harvey and Nelles). They argue that following the murders of Ned, Robb, and Catelyn Stark, the show embraced more ambiguous heroes such as Tyrion and indicated who the audience should identify with by turning them into misfits – cripples, bastards and broken things. While the call for papers for this special issue identifies Jon Snow’s illegitimacy as potentially allowing him to redeem a “society that has become morally, if not openly, itself illegitimate”, several characters with disabilities occupy the same illegitimate status as Jon Snow. Game of Thrones includes a number of characters with disability, both lifelong impairments (Hodor, Tyrion, Shireen, Lysa, Seylse) and those acquired through injury, illness or misfortune (Bran, Jamie, the Hound, Theon/Reek, Aemon, Beric, Illyn Payne, Khal Drago). Some of these characters, particularly Tyrion, demonstrate the same potential to reject "political corruption and violence" while also critiquing broader practices of social disablement. Isaac Stein argues that notions of legitimacy and illegitimacy impact on the social experience of disability. For Stein, impairments such as a broken thumb are socially legitimate and acceptable to acknowledge and compensate for while long term or permanent impairments (or disabilities) are feared and result in "confusion, uncertainty and social awkwardness" when encountered in an ableist society. Critical disability theorist Tobin Siebers describes this as the ideology of ability. He explains that a pervasive but contradictory ideology revolves around human ability which has resulted in people with disability being marginalised as less than human and excluded from society and indeed critical theory. Disability is socially constructed as an illegitimate identity and positioned as outside of boundaries of normality. As transgressive figures who exist outside socially created boundaries of normality and humanness, people with disabilities shore up these boundaries (see Davis Garland-Thomson Hall McRuer Kumari C bell Siebers Mitchell and Snyder). Siebers calls for disability studies to investigate the "social meanings, symbols and stigmas attached to disability identity" as part of a broader questioning of "enforced systems of exclusion and oppression" (Siebers 3). Tyrion Lannister enacts the same critique throughout Game of Thrones when he identifies as "bastard in [his] father’s eyes" and later claims to have been "on trial" his whole life "for being a dwarf". Game of Thrones introduces a number of important disability critiques around the social meanings and stigmas that surround disability. Indeed, characters with disability hold central narrative positions, occupy the screen in close ups and are given a significant amount of on screen time. Critiques such as adapting the environment to suit an impaired body rather than attempting to cure or exclude that body occur often in Game of Thrones (notably through Bran and Jamie). These critiques have not gone unnoticed by disabled bloggers. This paper draws on these disability critiques within the Game of Thrones television text itself and amongst disability bloggers to approach the intersection between disability and illegitimacy from a critical disability and television studies perspective. Disability and TVGame of Thrones, the television adaptation of George R.R. Martin’s fantasy novels The Song of Ice and Fire, is set on the fictional continents of Essos and Westeros with the majority of action taking place on Westeros. As the seven kingdoms of Westeros engage in civil war for the iron throne, the exiled last lineal descendant of the overthrown dynasty amasses an enormous army of freed slaves in the hopes of reclaiming the throne. At the same time, following a decade of summer, an impending winter looms dangerously along with mythical threats from the north. Adapted for television by HBO it is a much lauded ex le of what Thomas Doherty describes as "arc TV" (Doherty) and what Dean DeFino refers to as the "HBO effect" (DeFino)."Arc TV" is a new form of television which rejects old conventions such as narrative resolution and static characters. Shows such as Game of Thrones instead prefer "long arcs of character and plot development filmed in big-ticket productions" (anonmyous). Similarly, the "HBO effect" refers to the rejection of formulaic, safe television content designed to appeal to a mass market and the impact of this rejection on popular culture generally. Greg Metcalf (2) also recognises the impacts of this rejection in his book The DVD Novel. He argues that prior to the 1970s television characters were not permitted to evolve because,You could not rely on viewers to watch every episode or to remember information from week to week, so storylines had to conclude in a single viewing. Everything had to be tied up and put back in the box. This created a dramatic limitation on writing. The main characters had to remain the same from episode to episode […] so viewers saw familiar people acting the same whenever they came back.Theorists such as Doherty, DeFino and Metcalf argue that changes in the way we access television has fundamentally changed television (see also Sepinwall Ellis and Goggin Napoli Gray). Digital modes of access such as DVRS, DVDs, tablet TVs and high quality cable has given greater cultural legitimacy to television. The ability to binge watch television and access comprehensive behind the scenes commentaries as well as the views of other fans through online wikis and forums has seen characters evolve and change in unprecedented ways. As Metcalf explains, television is no longer ephemeral, producers can expect audiences to build up extensive knowledge bases regarding narratives and in idual characters and indeed watch an entire season within a short period of time. The success of television is no longer reliant on reinforcing the beliefs of a mass audience through the regurgitation of familiar characters behaving the same way week to week. This holds significant potential for the inclusion of characters with disability who are now able to venture outside discourses of tragedy and inspiration. Consider, for ex le Jamie Lannister who began Game of Thrones a heartless character willing to murder a child to keep his sexual relationship with his sister secret. Once losing his hand he rescues Brienne of Tarth, an outsider character by virtue of her height and androgynous appearance, from a brutal gang rape. Similarly, the more screen time afforded to The Hound, the more sympathetic he becomes as we gradually learn the origins of his scars and fear of fire (Harvey and Nelles). Doherty also draws on ex les of characters with disabilities, such as Breaking Bad’s Walter White and Homeland’s Carrie Mathison, in his explanation of arc TV which he likens to novels, serious plays and films in their embrace of back story and evolution. As Ellis and Goggin argue, these depictions hold great potential for a complex representation in which disability is explored in terms of both adjustment and as an ordinary part of life. Traditionally, critiques of disability on television have concentrated on underrepresentation, negative stereotypes and inaccurate portrayals of normalisation (Müller, Klijn and Van Zoonen). Stereotypes have been of particular concern with theorists identifying both damaging stereotypes and so-called more legitimate ways of depicting disability (see Longmore Barnes Cumberbatch and Negrine Darke Harnett). For ex le, in his seminal book The Politics of Disablement Michael Oliver argued that people with disability were never presented as ordinary people with ordinary problems they were always super-heroes, villains or tragic in iduals. Applying this framework to Game of Thrones suggests an entirely negative representation. For ex le, when Bran acquires a spinal injury he also becomes a telepathic super-hero. Jamie Lannister who threw Bran from a castle in an attempt to protect his incestuous sectreis later punished with his own impairment when enemies utate his arm. Tyrion himself ascribes to three stereotypes Longmore argues are fundamentally negative – criminality, adjustment and sexuality. While these disabled characters in Game of Thrones may be super-heroes, villains or tragic in iduals, the narrative frequently speaks to the broader notion of social disablement:Since its earliest episodes, [Game of Thrones] has introduced us to a paralyzed boy with a supernatural gift, has endeared us to a Little Person defined not by his height but by his wit, and has regularly mined the lives of “cripples, bastards, and broken things” to celebrate their strengths and complexities. In fact, it is a fantastic credit … that Game of Thrones is not commonly thought of as a show that “deals with” disability — it is something even better: a show that embraces the reality that no one is easily definable. (David Radcliff cited in Winter Is Coming)In Rebecca Mallet’s view, disability studies’ focus on stereotypes as opposed to how we read disability, has seen research into disability and television stagnate. Alison Wilde, suggests a framework for a more comprehensive analysis of depictions of disability that takes into account the potential for ersity:rather than focussing upon stereotypes… the central question about better portrayals and the social engagement with disability issues, is about how to achieve cultural recognition on equal terms, to work towards cultural images where being depicted as good, evil, wise, ordinary, extra-ordinary or changeable, is as possible for people with impairments as it is for other people.In addition to these academic theorists, TV reviews such as Alan Sepinwall note a shift in television production. Sepinwall identifies a number of television shows including, amongst others, The Sopranos, Lost, Friday Night Lights and Breaking Bad as "game changers" in the television landscape because they targeted smaller and more erse audiences. They took risks to challenge cultural assumptions about how we establish borders of normality and define ourselves. The Sopranos which challenged the notion of having a moral and likeable leading character is a case in point. Disability occurs frequently throughout The Sopranos as "just another fact of life" (LeBesco 55). According to LeBesco, The Sopranos reversed the ideology of ability by making disability more comforting and familiar (LeBesco 55), by making it legitimate. Game of Thrones which has "the most disabled characters of any television drama today—perhaps ever" (Harvey and Nelles) performs a similar function, as evidenced by important discussions occurring in online blogs and forums dedicated to both the show itself and the experience of disability. Game of Thrones Disability and Blogger InsightsSarah, a blogger with Chrohns Disease, argues that the representation of disabilities in Game of Thrones doesn’t “get talked about enough”. She offers a complex definition of disability which recognises its dependence on the way we construct the world through the built environment and prejudicial attitudes which result in inflexible procedures, practices and people. She identifies the ways disability is central to the narrative through characters such as Shireen, Hodor, Bran and Tyrion. Focusing in particular on Tyrion she describes three features of his characterisation which have important implications for disability on television,It’s not often you get 1) a story about a disabled person, 2) that isn’t a cheesy, “uplifting” story meant to motivate able-bodied people into appreciating their own lives, who 3) gets to consistently point out how terribly society treats people like him.Sarah’s critique illustrates Mallett and Wilde’s suggestions to “pay attention to the transgression of established boundaries” (Mallett 9) rather than listing negative stereotypes. Tyrion regularly transgresses established boundaries of existing cultural images of people of restricted growth (see Gerber) as That Stark boy comments:I began to love the series because of Tyrion, I was just fucking tired of seeing dwarves as clowns in every goddamned show I watched – and hear everyone around me applauding – and when I saw that dwarf that was just as complex as any other character I knew this show was just as badass as they said. (That Stark boy comment on Winter Is Coming)Tyrion who describes having a "tender spot in [his] heart for cripples and bastards and broken things" faces prejudice from the society in which he lives. He is constantly devalued by his father, Tywin, who resents him for his disability and his mother’s death in childbirth. Tywin describes wanting to carry Tyrion into the sea and "let the waves wash [him] away" variously calling him a "stunted fool", and "an ill-made, spiteful little creature full of envy, lust, and low cunning". Although Tywin constantly reminds Tyrion of his socially devalued qualities, Tyrion displays intellect, compassion, loyalty, bravery and wit. Significantly, his compassion extends to rival family the Starks.When Bran loses the use of his legs, Tyrion evokes a social model argument that with the right environmental modifications and adaptive technology, people with disabilities should be able to participate equally: "With the right horse and saddle, even a cripple can ride". Although Bran does not want to identify as a cripple, Tyrion’s adapted saddle allows him to ride a horse. As Sparky argues:the disabled would navigate the world with much greater ease and far less limits if the world weren’t so completely designed around the needs of able bodied people with so little consideration for what the disabled need.Aside from the bastard Jon Snow who also occupies a liminal position, Tyrion is the only character who discusses Bran’s future in relation to what he can still do while others including Arya, Catelyn, Robb, and Ned focus on what he can’t with Cersei and Jamie suggesting it is cruel to even keep him alive (Sparky). Bran’s impairment and the reactions of those around him offer a window into important philosophical matters such as mortality and personhood, the good life and the choices we make (Tedesco, 2012). As he lies comatose, Jamie encourages Bran’s father Ned Stark to end the boy’s suffering with a quick and merciful death rather than allow him to live on as a "cripple". As viewers we know Jamie’s motivations are not entirely related to ending Bran’s "torment" but are more concerned with keeping Jamie’s own secret – that he pushed Bran from the castle to prevent him from revealing Jamie and Cersei’s incestuous relationship and possible illegitimate children. For Tedesco, Bran’s impairment does not warrant euthanasia because it would not prevent him from living a good life and having meaningful relationships, though it would end his favourite hobby – climbing. However, it is not uncommon for the news media in particular to perpetuate a view that you are better dead than disabled (Haller). Consider Jamie’s position on killing Bran in light of his future disablement. When Jamie loses his hand he is no longer able to wield a sword and thus loses his job, social standing, and thing he most loves to do. With neither Bran or Jamie subject to the mercy deaths Jamie advocates they offer illustrations that question the popular refrain that you are better dead than disabled.However, another Game of Thrones character Khal Drago’s mercy killing at the hands of his wife Daenerys Stormborn is potentially warranted for Tedesco on the basis of a difference between humanness and personhood. Australian philosopher Peter Singer rose to notoriety for advocating the death of disabled infants in his 1985 publication Should the Baby Live? He argued that parents be permitted to euthanize disabled babies up to 28 days after their birth (Kuhse 195). Singer justified his argument on a separation of humans and persons. Tedesco uses the medical crises of Bran and Drago respectively to illustrate the difference between humanness and personhood. Whereas Bran would recover and go on to lead a good life, albeit with restrictions, is both human and person, Drago who has become uncommunicative with a blank stare has according to Tedesco and Singer’s arguments lost the qualities that make him a person, although he remains biologically human. Comparing the plights of Bran and Drago raises a number of tricky questions regarding humanity, legitimacy and the social context of disablement.A number of disability advocates, notably Harriett McBryde Johnson took issue with Singer’s argument and challenged his assumptions around killing disabled infants suggesting instead that social disablement should be addressed "We shouldn't offer assistance with suicide until we all have the assistance we need to get out of bed in the morning and live a good life." (Johnson). To return to Tywin’s social exclusion of Tyrion, it began in his infancy when Tywin would have preferred to kill Tyrion at birth as Singer recommends. However, disability activists caution against advocating to end the lives of people with impairments socially designated as illegitimate, such as Drago’s, asking who will be next (Drake)? Tyrion’s advice to Jon Snow about living with the stigma of illegitimacy and how to deal with other people’s prejudice is a clear statement about disability rights and inclusion that although set in another time and place has resonance today. He says: “Let me give you some advice, bastard: Never forget what you are. The rest of the world will not. Wear it like armour, and it can never be used to hurt you.” Tyrion identifies with Jon Snow because “all dwarves are bastards in their father’s eyes.”Bloggers identify other aspects of Tyrion’s characterisation that subvert the typical representations of disability. In contrast to Longmore’s argument that all representations of disability are fundamentally negative stereotypes of criminality, adjustment and sexuality, disabled blogger Andrew Pulrang observes more progressive elements:Tyrion's main attributes are his sense of humor, in contrast to everyone else's deadly seriousness, his sexual appetites, his love of drink, and, increasingly, his knowledge and knack for strategy. The interesting thing about his sexual exploits is that in the context of this fantasy world, he's not depicted as a pervert or predator, as people with disabilities sometimes are in fiction, but as a more or less straightforwardly hard-partying dude. People joke about it, but no differently than they would any other randy young man in Westeros. There's a kind of equality here, but when he actually starts to fall in love, we see Tyrion again slow to accept that love and real attachment can happen for him.Tyrion’s (and by extension Peter Dinklage’s) status as the star of Game of Thrones was solidified in Season 4 when on trial for Joffrey’s murder, which he did not commit. He in essence accused the world of perpetuating prejudice against people with disabilities. I wish to confess. I wish to confess! I saved you…I saved this city…all your worthless lives. I should’ve let Stannis kill you all. I’m guilty…guilty…is that what you want to hear? [Tywin: "You admit you poisoned the king?"] No. Of that I’m innocent. I’m guilty of a far more monstrous crime. I’m guilty of being a dwarf. [Tywin: "You are not on trial for being a dwarf."] Oh, yes, I am. I’ve been on trial my entire life. [Tywin: "Have you nothing to say in your defense?"] Nothing but this: I did not do it. I did not kill Joffrey but I wish that I had! Watching your vicious bastard die gave me more relief than a thousand lying whores! I wish I was the monster you think I am! I wish I had enough poison for the whole pack of you! I would gladly give my life to watch you all swallow it! I will not give my life for Joffrey’s murder, and I will get no justice here.Tyrion "claims" disability in this scene. He claims both his impairment (that of being a "dwarf") and further, the social disablement he is constantly subjected to. Such an act according to Siebers as cited in Stein, "marks one as a target [and] exposes and resists the prejudices of society." Tyrion embraces this identity to become an ambiguous hero within Game of Thrones and amongst its audiences. The impassioned monologue prompted an equally impassioned Twitter response through the hashtage #FreeTyrion (Steiner). Significantly this twitter discussion was located in the broader online discussion of Game of Thrones and not disability specific blogging sites. It is unusual for characters with disabilities to hold leading roles on television (Cumberbatch and Negrine) and even more unusual for audiences to identify with disabled characters (Rodan, Ellis, and Lebeck). Even disabled audiences will identify with non-disabled television characters rather than their onscreen disabled counterparts (Wilde). Disability critiques are introduced in Game of Thrones through Tyrion who embraces his socially created illegitimacy in order to expose the way people who are in a position of difference are constantly judged and treated in discriminatory ways in spite of any contribution they make to their communities and society.Are People with Disability Valued as Legitimate Television Audiences?While Tyrion exposes the ways people with disabilities are marked as illegitimate members of the community and treated in discriminatory ways, the airing of Game of Thrones on Foxtel in Australia reveals the way people with disabilities particularly people with hearing impairments who require closed captions are not valued as audience members. For ex le, following the screening of the first episode of Season 3, a Foxtel viewer posted to the Foxtel Facebook fanpage:HEY FOXTEL WHY ARENT YOU BROADCASTING SUBTITLES WITH GAME OF THRONES FIRST SCREENING??? iT HAS THEM ON SUBSEQUENT SCREENINGS( SOMETIMES) please please please SCREEN THEM FOR PEOPLE WHO STRUGGLE TO HEAR (Miles)A Foxtel representative responded that they were unable to provide captions on the fast tracked screenings because "we do not have the time to be able to add these captions or the Digital Dolby surround sound into this screening. The following screening on at 8:30pm, which is only 7 hours after the screening in the US, will have both the closed captions and surround sound included" (Foxtel comment on Miles). Television accessibility is emerging alongside representations of disability as a site of social disablement (Jaeger Goggin and Newell Ellis and Kent Ellcessor). To draw again on the notion of illegitimacy as the process of social exclusion (see Grytten and Maseide), the lack of captioning on first run programming is an ex le of the ways people with disability are not regarded as an important audience (Ellcessor).While critics of Foxtel’s business model argue that viewers are forced to subscribe to packages when they only wish to watch one show (LeMay), audiences with disabilities frustrated by the lack of accessibility are also taking issue with Foxtel’s claim that they are providing express services, when the service is in fact useless to them. To return to Miles, "I pay huge $ for my Foxtel subscription and I expect better service, as do the thousands of other subscribers who rely on subtitles to enjoy tv" (Miles).In Australia, the provision of captions is mandated by the Broadcasting Services Act (1992) and the Disability Discrimination Act (1992). Recent changes to the BSA mandate that captioning must be available on 100% broadcast content between 6am and midnight on free to air television. However, subscription television, such as Foxtel, is subject to a more complicated set of rules with quotas relating to the genre of programming (see Media Access Australia). Game of Thrones is celebrated as a leading ex le of the new cleverly scripted televisual environment illustrative of the culture formerly ascribed to cinema (Weissmann Ellis and Goggin). Another disappointed fan attempted to neutralise the ideology of ability by suggesting viewers without hearing impairments, just trying to keep up with all the names and locations, would also benefit from the provision of captions:For hearing impaired people, a series like Game of Thrones is almost unwatchable without the captions. I know people with full hearing that still turn the captions on because there are so many people and names. (Stombat)ConclusionDisability is a value judgement based on whose bodies are considered legitimate in particular spaces. Tyrion Lannister occupies a body that is marginalised in both the fictional fantasy realm in which he exists and today’s society. Yet both disabled and nondisabled bloggers recognise him as a compelling character changing the nature of disability representation. Game of Thrones is an ex le the recent ersification of television content. This ersification has pioneered a new type of storytelling and led to an environment where television could be taken seriously (Sepinwall). Like a number of programmes featuring in this new televisual arena, Game of Thrones features characters with disability and develops them as complex people with strengths and weaknesses. As evidenced through discussion occurring on disability blogs considered throughout this article, audiences identify with Tyrion in particular, not despite his liminal or illegitimate status but because of it. While characters with disabilities hold central narrative positions and enact disability critiques by claiming their illegitimate status in Game of Thrones, audience members with disability are still subject to "enforced systems of exclusion and oppression" (Siebers 3) via inaccessibility such as a lack of captions. This social exclusion again positions people with disability as illegitimate.ReferencesAnonymous. "Television's New Golden Age." Wilson Quarterly 37.1 (2013): 110-11. Barnes, Colin "Disabling Imagery and the Media: An Exploration of the Principles for Media Representations of Disabled People." Disability Archive, 1992. 15 Sep. 2014 ‹www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies/archiveuk/Barnes/disabling%20imagery.pdf›. Cumberbatch, Guy, and Ralph Negrine. Images of Disability on Television. London: Routledge, 1992. Darke, Paul. "The Changing Face of Representations of Disability in the Media." Disabling Barriers - Enabling Environments. Ed. John Swain. Los Angeles: Sage, 2004. 100-05. Davis, Lennard. Enforcing Normalcy: Disability, Deafness, and the Body. London: Verso, 1995. DeFino, Dean. The HBO Effect. New York: Bloomsbury, 2013. Doherty, Thomas. "Storied Tv: Cable Is the New Novel". The Chronicle of Higher Education, 17 Sep. 2012. 2 Sep. 2014 ‹rticle/Cable-Is-the-New-Novel/134420/›.Drake, Stephen. "Disabled Are Fearful: Who Will Be Next?" LA Times, 29 Oct. 2003.Ellcessor, Elizabeth. "Captions On, Off on TV, Online: Accessibility and Search Engine Optimization in Online Closed Captioning." Television & New Media 2011. ‹ontent/early/2011/10/24/1527476411425251.abstract?patientinform-links=yes& legid=sptvn v1›. Ellis, Katie, and Gerard Goggin. Disability and the Media. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, forthcoming 2015. Ellis, Katie, and Mike Kent. Disability and New Media. Routledge Studies in New Media and Cyberculture. New York: Routledge, 2011. Finkelstein, Victor. "Representing Disability." Disabling Barriers - Enabling Environments. Eds. John Swain et al. London: Sage, 2004. 13-20. Garland-Thomson, Rosemarie. "Integrating Disability: Transforming Feminist Theory." Gendering Disability. Eds. Bonnie G. Smith and Beth Hutchison. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 2004. 73-103. Gerber, David. "The 'Careers' of People Exhibited in Freak Shows: The Problem of Violition and Valorization." Freakery: The Cultural Spectacles of the Extraordinary Body. Ed. Thomson, Rosemary Garland. New York: New York University Press, 1996. 38-54. Goggin, Gerard, and Christopher Newell. Digital Disability: The Social Construction of Disability in New Media. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc, 2003. Gray, Jonathan. Television Entertainment. Communication and Society. Ed. Curran, James. New York: Routledge, 2008. Grytten, Nina, and Per Maseide. "What Is Expressed Is Not Always What Is Felt’: Coping with Stigma and the Embodiment of Perceived Illegitimacy of Multiple Sclerosis." Chronic Illness 1 (2005): 231–43. Hall, Kim Q. Feminist Disability Studies. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2011. Haller, Beth. "The New Phase of Disability Humor on TV." Representing Disability in an Ableist World. Louisville: Avacado Press, 2010. 153-74. Harnett, Alison. "Escaping the 'Evil Avenger' and the 'Supercrip': Images of Disability in Popular Television." Irish Communications Review 8 (2000): 21-29. Harvey, Dan, and Drew Nelles. "Cripples, Bastards, and Broken Things: Disability in Game of Thrones". Hazlift, 10 June 2014. 3 Sep. 2014 ‹www.randomhouse.ca/hazlitt/feature/cripples-bastards-and-broken-things-disability-game-thrones›.Jaeger, Paul. Disability and the Internet: Confronting a Digital Divide. Disability in Society. Ed. Berger, Ronald. Boulder, London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2012. Jenkins, Henry. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York: New York University Press, 2006. Johnson, Harriet McBryde. "Unspeakable Conversations ". New York Times 16 Feb. 2003. 10 Oct. 2014 ‹003/02/16/magazine/unspeakable-conversations.html›.Kumari C bell, Fiona. Contours of Ableism: The Production of Disability and Abledness New York: Palgrave Macmillan 2009. Kuhse, Helga. Should the Baby Live? The Problem of Handicapped Infants / Helga Kuhse and Peter Singer. Ed. Singer, Peter. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985. LeBesco, Kathleen. "Disability, Gender and Difference on The Sopranos." Women's Studies in Communication 29.1 (2006): 39-59. LeMay, Renai. "Screw You, Australia: Game of Thrones Goes Foxtel-Only." Delimiter, 3 Feb. 2013. 9 Oct. 2014 ‹delimiter.com.au/2014/02/03/screw-australia-game-thrones-goes-foxtel/›.Longmore, Paul. "Screening Stereotypes: Images of Disabled People in Television and Motion Pictures." Images of the Disabled, Disabling Images. Eds. Gartner, Alan and Tom Joe. New York: Praeger, 1987. 65-78. Media Access Australia. "How You Can Repeal Red Tape and Improve Captioning." Media Access Australia 2014. Miles, Christine. "Facebook Post." Facebook, 22 May 2013. 8 Oct. 2014 ‹www.facebook.com/FOXTEL osts/10152863155815074›.Mallett, Rebecca. "Choosing ‘Stereotypes’: Debating the Efficacy of (British) Disability-Criticism." Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs 9.1 (2009): 4-11. McRuer, Robert. Crip Theory: Cultural Signs of Queerness and Disability. Cultural Front. Ed. Berube, Michael. New York and London: New York University Press, 2006. Metcalf, Greg. The DVD Novel: How the Way We Watch Television Changed the Television We Watch. California: Praeger, 2012. Mitchell, David, and Sharon Snyder. Narrative Prosthesis: Disability and the Dependencies of Discourse. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 2000. Müller, Floris, Marlies Klijn, and Liesbet van Zoonen. "Disability, Prejudice and Reality TV: Challenging Disablism through Media Representations." Telecommunications Journal of Australia 62.2 (2012): 28.1-28.13.Napoli, Philip M. Audience Evolution: New Technologies and the Transformation of Media Audiences. New York: Columbia University Press, 2011. Nelson, Jack. "The Media Role in Building the Disability Community." Journal of Mass Media Ethics 15.3 (2000): 180-93. Oliver, Mike. The Politics of Disablement. Basingstoke, England: Macmillan Education, 1990. ---. Understanding Disability: From Theory to Practice. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1996. Pulrang, Andrew. "Pop Culture Review: Tyrion Lannister, 'Game of Thrones'." Disability Thinking, 1 May 2013. 3 Sep. 2014 ‹disabilitythinking.blogspot.com.au/2013/05 op-culture-review-tyrion-lannister.html›.Rodan, Debbie, Katie Ellis, and Pia Lebeck. Disability, Obesity and Ageing: Popular Media Identifications. Surrey: Ashgate, 2014. Ross, Karen. "But Where's Me in It?: Disability, Broadcasting and the Media." Media, Culture & Society 19 (1997): 669-77. Sarah. "Cripples, Bastards, and Broken Things: Disability in Game of Thrones". Skeptability, 6 June 2014. 3 Sep. 2014 ‹014/06/06/cripples-bastards-and-broken-things-disability-in-game-of-thrones/›.Sepinwall, Alan. The Revolution Was Televised: The Cops, Crooks, Slingers and Slayers Who Changed TV Drama Forever. Austin Texas: Touchstone, 2012. Siebers, Tobin. Disability Theory. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2008. Sparky. "The Disabled Can Play the Game of Thrones." Fangs for the Fantasy, 30 Mar. 2012. 4 Sep. 2014 ‹012/03/disabled-can-play-game-of-thrones.html›.Stein, Isaac. "Breaking a Disabled Limb: Social and Medical Construction of 'Legitimate' and 'Illegitimate' Impairments." Disability Studies Quarterly 30.3/4 (2010). 18 Sep. 2014 ‹rticle/view/1294/330›.Steiner, Amanda. "‘Game of Thrones’ Fans Call to #Freetyrion after Fiery Speech". Hollywood Life, 12 May 2014. 4 Sep. 2014 ‹014/05/12/free-tyrion-game-of-thrones-twitter-fans-react-speech-laws-of-gods-and-men/#›.Stombat. "No Closed Captions on New Programs." Telstra, 16 Apr. 2013. 9 Oct. 2014 ‹crowdsupport.telstra.com.au/t5/Foxtel/No-closed-captions-on-new-programs/td-p/148074›.Tedesco, Matthew. "Life or Death in Westeros and beyond the Narrow Sea." Game of Thrones and Philosophy: Logic Cuts Deeper than Swords. Ed. Jacoby, Henry. New Jersey: Blackwell Wiley, 2012. Weissmann, Elke. Transnational Television Drama: Special Relations and Mutual Influence between the US and UK. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012. Wendell, Susan. The Rejected Body: Feminist Philosophical Reflections on Disability. London & New York: Routledge, 1996. Wilde, Alison. "Are You Sitting Comfortably? Soap Operas, Disability and Audience." Dis: cover! 2 (2004). 18 June 2013 ‹disability-studies.leeds.ac.uk/files/library/wilde-Alison-Wilde-Dis-cover-2-Adapted-Paper.pdf›.Williams, Bronwyn T. Shimmering Literacies: Popular Culture & Reading & Writing Online. New York: Peter Lang, 2009. Winter Is Coming. "Game of Thrones Wins Award Honoring Disability Awareness." Winter Is Coming, 22 Oct. 2013. 6 Apr. 2014 ‹013/10/game-of-thrones-wins-award-honoring-disability-awareness/›.
iTunes Is Pretty (Useless) When You’re Blind: Digital Design Is Triggering Disability When It Could Be a Solution
Publisher: Queensland University of Technology
Date: 02-07-2008
DOI: 10.5204/MCJ.55
Abstract: Introduction This year, 2008, marks the tenth anniversary of the portable MP3 player. MPMan F10, the first such device to utilise the MP3-encoding format, was launched in March 1998 (Smith). However it was not until April 2003 when Apple Inc launched the iPod that the market began the massive growth that has made the devices almost ubiquitous in everyday life. In 2006 iPods were rated as more popular than beer amongst college students in the United States, according to Student Monitor. Beer had only previously surpassed in popularity once before, in 1997, by the Internet (Zeff). This year will also see the launch in Australia of the latest offering in this line of products – the iPhone – which incorporates the popular MP3 player in an advanced mobile phone. The iPhone features a touch-sensitive flat screen that serves as the interface for its operating system. While the design is striking, it also generates accessibility problems. There are obvious implications for those with vision impairments when there are no physical markers to point towards the phone’s functions (Crichton). This article critically examines the promise of Internet-based digital technology to open up the world to people with disabilities, and the parallel danger that the social construction of disability in the digital environment will simply come to mirror pre-existing analogue discrimination. This paper explores how technologies and innovations designed to improve access by the disabled actually enhance access for all users. The first part of the paper focuses on ‘Web 2.0’ and digital access for people with disability, particularly those with vision impairment. The online software that drives the iPod and iPhone and exclusively delivers content to these devices is iTunes. While iTunes seems on the surface to provide enormous opportunity for the vision impaired to access a broad selection of audio content, its design actually works to inhibit access to the platform for this group. Apple promotes the use of iTunes in educational settings through the iTunes U channel, and this potentially excludes those who have difficulty with access to the technology. Critically, it is these excluded people who, potentially, could benefit the most from the new technology. We consider the difficulty experienced by users of screen readers and braille tablets in relation to iTunes and highlight the potential problems for universities who seek to utilise iTunes U. In the second part of the paper we reframe disability accessibility as a principle of universal access and design and outline how changes made to assist users with disability can enhance the learning experience of all students using the Lectopia lecture recording and distribution system as an ex le. The third section of the paper situates these digital developments within the continuum of disability theory deploying Finkelstein’s three stages of disability development. The focus then shifts to the potential of online virtual worlds such as Second Life to act as a place where the promise of technology to mediate for disability might be realised. Goggin and Newell suggest that the Internet will not be fully accessible until disability is considered a cultural identity in the same way that class, gender and sexuality are. This article argues that accessibility must be addressed through the context of design and shared open standards for digital platforms. Web 2.0 and Accessibility The World Wide Web based its successful development on a set of common standards that worked across different software and operating systems. This interoperability held out great opportunity for the implementation of enabling software for those with disability, particularly sight and hearing impairments. The increasing sophistication and ersification of online content has confounded this initial promise. Websites have become more complex, particularly with the rise of ‘Web 2.0’ and the associated trends in coding and website design. This has aggravated attempts to mediate this content for a disabled audience through software (Zajicek). As Wood notes, ‘these days many computers are used principally to access the Internet – and there is no telling what a blind person will encounter there’. As the content requiring translation – either from text into audio or onto a braille tablet, or from audio into text captions – become less standardised and more complex, it becomes both harder for software to act as a translator, and harder to navigate this media once translated. This is particularly the case when links are generated ‘on the fly’ for each view of a website and where images replace words as hyperlinks. These problems can trace their origin to before the development of the World Wide Web. Reihing, addressing another Apple product in 1987 notes: The Apple Macintosh is particularly hard to use because it depends heavily on graphics. Some word processors ‘paint’ pictures of letters on the screen instead of using standard computer codes, and speech or braille devices can’t cope (in Goggin and Newell). Web 2.0 sites loaded with Ajax and other forms of Java scripting present a particular challenge for translation software (Zajicek). iTunes, an iconic Web 2.0 application, is a further step away from easily translated content as proprietary software that while operating though the Internet, does not conform to Web standards. Many translation software packages are unable to read the iTunes software at all or are limited and only able to read part of the page, but not enough of it to use the program (Furendal). As websites utilising ‘Web 2.0’ technology increase in popularity they become less attractive to users who are visually impaired, particularly because the dynamic elements can not be accessed using screen readers provided with the operating system (Bigham, Prince and Ladner). While at one level this presents an inability for a user with a disability to engage with the popular software, it also meant that universities seeking to use iTunes U to deliver content were excluding these students. To Apple’s credit they have taken some of these access concerns on board with the recent release of both the Apple operating system and iTunes, to better enable Apple’s own access software to translate the iTunes screen for blind users. However this also illustrates the problems with this type of software operating outside of nominated standards as there are still serious problems with access to iTunes on Microsoft’s dominant Windows operating system (Furendal). While Widows provides its own integrated screen reading software, the company acknowledges that this is not sufficiently powerful for regular use by disabled users who will need to use more specialised programs (Wood). The recent upgrade of the standard Windows operating system from XP to Vista seems to have abandoned the previous stipulation that there was a keyboard shortcut for each operation the system performed – a key requirement for those unable to use a visual interface on the screen to ‘point and click’ with a mouse (Wood). Other factors, such as the push towards iTunes U, explored in the next section, explain the importance of digital accessibility for everyone, not just the disabled as this technology becomes ubiquitous. The use of Lectopia in higher education demonstrates the value of flexibility of delivery to the whole student population, inclusive of the disabled. iPods and Higher Education iTunes is the enabling software supporting the iPod and iPhone. As well as commercial content, iTunes also acts as a distribution medium for other content that is free to use. It allows in iduals or organisations to record and publish audio and video files – podcasts and vodcasts – that can be automatically downloaded from the Internet and onto in idual computers and iPods as they become available. Significantly this technology has provided opportunities for educational use. iTunes U has been developed by Apple to facilitate the delivery of content from universities through the service. While Apple has acknowledged that this is, in part, a deliberate effort to drive the uptake of iTunes (Udell), there are particular opportunities for the distribution of information through this channel afforded by the technology. Duke University in the United States was an early adopter, distributing iPods to each of its first-year students for educational use as early as 2004 (Dean). A recent study of students at The University of Western Australia (UWA) by Williams and Fardon found that students who listen to lectures through portable media players such as iPods (the ‘Pod’ in iPod stands for ‘portable on demand’) have a higher attendance rate at lectures than those who do not. In 1998, the same year that the first portable MP3 player was being launched, the Lectopia (or iLecture) lecture recording and distribution system was introduced in Australia at UWA to enable students with disabilities better access to lecture materials. While there have been significant criticisms of this platform (Brabazon), the broad uptake and popularity of this technology, both at UWA and at many universities across Australia, demonstrates how changes made to assist disability can potentially help the broader community. This underpins the concept of ‘universal design’ where consideration given to people with disability also improves the lives of people without disability. A report by the Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, examined the accessibility of digital technology. Disability issues, such as access to digital content, were reframed as universal design issues: Disability accessibility issues are more accurately perceived in many cases as universal access issues, such that appropriate design for access by people with disabilities will improve accessibility and usability for … the community more generally. The idea of universal access was integral to Tim Berners-Lee’s original conception of the Web – however the platform has developed into a more complex and less ordered environment that can stray from agreed standards (Edwards, "Stop"). iTunes comes with its own accessibility issues. Furendal demonstrated that its design has added utility for some impairments notably dyslexia and colour blindness. However, as noted above, iTunes is highly problematic for those with other vision impairment particularly the blind. It is an ex le of the condition noted by Regan: There exists a false perception among designers that accessibility represents a restriction on creativity. There are few ex les that exist in the world that can dissuade designers of this notion. While there are no technical reasons for this ision between accessibility and design, the notion exists just the same. The invisibility of this issue confirms that while an awareness of differing abilities can assist all users, this blinkered approach to erse visual acuities is not only blocking social justice imperatives but future marketing opportunities. The iPhone is notable for problems associated with use by people with disabilities, particularly people with hearing (Keizer) and vision impairments (Crichton). In colder climates the fact that the screen would not be activated by a gloved hand has also been a problem, its design reflects bias against not just the physically impaired. Design decisions reflect the socially constructed nature of disability where disability is related to how humans have chosen to construct the world (Finkelstein ,"To Deny"). Disability Theory and Technology Nora Groce conducted an anthropological study of Martha’s Vineyard in the United States. During the nineteenth century the island had an unusually high incidence of deafness. In response to this everyone on the island was able to communicate in sign language, regardless of the hearing capability, as a standard mode of communication. As a result the impairment of deafness did not become a disability in relation to communication. Society on the island was constructed to be inclusive without regard to a person’s hearing ability. Finkelstein (Attitudes) identified three stages of disability ‘creation’ to suggest disability (as it is defined socially) can be eradicated through technology. He is confident that the third phase, which he argues has been occurring in conjunction with the information age, will offset many of the prejudicial attitudes established during the second phase that he characterised as the industrial era. Digital technologies are often presented as a way to eradicate disability as it is socially constructed. Discussions around the Web and the benefits for people with disability usually centre on accessibility and social interaction. Digital documents on the Internet enable people with disability greater access than physical spaces, such as libraries, especially for the visually impaired who are able to make use of screen readers. There are more than 38 million blind people who utilise screen reading technology to access the Web (Bigham, Prince and Ladner). A visually impaired person is able to access digital texts whereas traditional, analogue, books remain inaccessible. The Web also allows people with disability to interact with others in a way that is not usually possible in general society. In a similar fashion to arguments that the Web is both gender and race neutral, people with disability need not identify as disabled in online spaces and can instead be judged on their personality first. In this way disability is not always a factor in the social encounter. These arguments however fail to address several factors integral to the social construction of disability. While the idea that a visually impaired person can access books electronically, in conjunction with a screen reader, sounds like a disability-free utopia, this is not always the case as ‘digital’ does not always mean ‘accessible’. Often digital documents will be in an image format that cannot be read by the user’s screen reader and will need to be converted and corrected by a sighted person. Sapey found that people with disabilities are excluded from informational occupations. Computer programming positions were fourth least likely of the 58 occupations examined to employ disabled people. As Rehing observed in 1987, it is a fantasy to think that accessibility for blind people simply means turning on a computer (Rehing in Goggin and Newell). Although it may sound empowering for people with disability to interact in an environment where they can live out an identity different from the rhythm of their daily patterns, the reality serves to decrease the visibility of disability in society. Further, the Internet may not be accessible for people with disability as a social environment in the first place. AbilityNet’s State of the eNation Web Accessibility Report: Social Networking Sites found a number of social networking sites including the popular MySpace and Facebook are inaccessible to users with a number of different disabilities, particularly those with a visual impairment such as blindness or a cognitive disability like dyslexia. This study noted the use of ‘Captcha’ – ‘Completely Automated Public Turing test to tell Computers and Humans Apart’ – technology designed to differentiate between a person signing up for an account and an automated computer process. This system presents an image of a word deliberately blurred and disfigured so that it cannot be readily identified by a computer, which can only be translated by a human user. This presents an obstacle to people with a visual impairment, particularly those relying on transcription software that will, by design, not be able to read the image, as well as those with dyslexia who may also have trouble translating the image on the screen. Virtual Worlds and New Possibilities The development of complex online virtual worlds such as Second Life presents their own set of challenges for access, for ex le, the use of Captcha. However they also afford opportunity. With over a million residents, there is a ersity of creativity. People are using Second Life to try on different identities or c aign for causes relevant in the real world. For ex le, Simon Stevens (Simon Walsh in SL), runs the nightclub Wheelies in the virtual world and continues to use a wheelchair and helmet in SL – similar to his real-life self: I personally changed Second Life’s attitude toward disability when I set up ‘Wheelies’, its first disability nightclub. This was one of those daft ideas which grew and grew and… has remained a central point for disability issues within Second Life. Many new Disabled users make contact with me for advice and wheelies has helped some of them ‘come out’ and use a wheelchair (Carter). Able-bodied people are also becoming involved in raising disability awareness through Second Life, for ex le Fez Richardson is developing applications for use in Second Life so that the non-disabled can experience the effects of impairment in this virtual realm (Cassidy) Tertiary Institutions are embracing the potential of Second Life, utilising the world as a virtual classroom. Bates argues that Second Life provides a learning environment free of physical barriers that has the potential to provide an enriched learning experience for all students regardless of whether they have a disability. While Second Life might be a good environment for those with mobility impairment there are still potential access problems for the vision and hearing impaired. However, Second Life has recently become open source and is actively making changes to aid accessibility for the visually impaired including an audible system where leaves rustle to denote a tree is nearby, and text to speech software (Sierra). Conclusion Goggin and Newell observe that new technology is a prominent component of social, cultural and political changes with the potential to mitigate for disability. The uneven interface of the virtual and the analogue, as demonstrated by the implementation and operation of iTunes, indicates that this mitigation is far from an inevitable consequence of this development. However James Edwards, author of the Brothercake blog, is optimistic that technology does have an important role in decreasing disability in wider society, in line with Finkelstein’s third phase: Technology is the last, best hope for accessibility. It's not like the physical world, where there are good, tangible reasons why some things can never be accessible. A person who's blind will never be able to drive a car manually someone in a wheelchair will never be able to climb the steps of an ancient stone cathedral. Technology is not like the physical world – technology can take any shape. Technology is our slave, and we can make it do what we want. With technology there are no good reasons, only excuses (Edwards, "Technology"). Internet-based technologies have the potential to open up the world to people with disabilities, and are often presented as a way to eradicate disability as it is socially constructed. While Finkelstein believes new technologies characteristic of the information age will offset many of the prejudicial attitudes established during the industrial revolution, where technology was established around able-bodied norms, the ex les of the iPhone and Captcha illustrate that digital technology is often constructed in the same social world that people with disability are routinely disabled by. The Lectopia system on the other hand enables students with disabilities to access lecture materials and highlights the concept of universal access, the original ideology underpinning design of the Web. Lectopia has been widely utilised by many different types of students, not just the disabled, who are seeking flexibility. While we should be optimistic, we must also be aware as noted by Goggin and Newell the Internet cannot be fully accessible until disability is considered a cultural identity in the same way that class, gender and sexuality are. Accessibility is a universal design issue that potentially benefits both those with a disability and the wider community. References AbilityNet Web Accessibility Team. State of the eNation Web Accessibility Reports: Social Networking Sites. AbilityNet. January 2008. 12 Apr. 2008 ‹www.abilitynet.org.uk/docs/enation/2008SocialNetworkingSites.pdf›. Bates, Jacqueline. "Disability and Access in Virtual Worlds." Paper presented at Alternative Format Conference, LaTrobe University, Melbourne, 21–23 Jan. 2008. Bigham, Jeffrey P., Craig M. Prince, and Richard E. Ladner . "WebAnywhere: A Screen Reader On-the-Go." Paper presented at 17th International World Wide Web Conference, Beijing, 21–22 April 2008. 29 Apr. 2008 ‹apers/webanywhere-html/›. Brabazon, Tara. "Socrates in Earpods: The iPodification of Education." Fast Capitalism 2.1, (July 2006). 8 June 2008 ‹uma/agger/fastcapitalism/2_1/brabazon.htm›. Carter, Paul. "Virtually the Same." Disability Now (May 2007). Cassidy, Margaret. "Flying with Disability in Second Life." Eureka Street 18.1 (10 Jan. 2008): 22-24. 15 June 2007 ‹www.eurekastreet.com.au/article.aspx?aeid=4849›. Crichton, Paul. "More on the iPhone…" Access 2.0. BBC.co.uk 22 Jan. 2007. 12 Apr. 2008 ‹www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/access20/2007/01/more_on_the_iphone.shtml›. Dean, Katie. "Duke Gives iPods to Freshmen." Wired Magazine (20 July 2004). 29 Apr. 2008 ‹ntertainment/music/news/2004/07/64282›. Edwards, James. "Stop Using Ajax!" Brothercake (24 April 2008). 1 May 2008 ‹rticles/view/stop-using-ajax›. –––. "Technology Is the Last, Best Hope for Accessibility." Brothercake 13 Mar. 2007. 1 May 2008 ‹ite/resources/reference/hope›. Finkelstein, Victor. "To Deny or Not to Deny Disability." Magic Carpet 27.1 (1975): 31-38. 1 May 2008 ‹ocs1/finkelstein.html›. –––. Attitudes and Disabled People: Issues for Discussion. Geneva: World Rehabilitation Fund, 1980. 1 May 2008 ‹www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies/archiveuk/finkelstein/attitudes.pdf›. Furendal, David. "Downloading Music and Videos from the Internet: A Study of the Accessibility of The Pirate Bay and iTunes store." Presentation at Uneå University, 24 Jan. 2007. 13 Apr. 2008 ‹www.david.furendal.com/Accessibility.aspx›. Groce, Nora E. Everyone Here Spoke Sign Language: Hereditary Deafness on Martha's Vineyard. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 1985. Goggin, Gerard, and Christopher Newell. Digital Disability: The Social Construction of Disability in New Media. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003. Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission. Accessibility of Electronic Commerce and New Service and Information Technologies for Older Australians and People with a Disability. 31 March 2000. 30 Apr. 2008 ‹www.hreoc.gov.au/disability_rights/inquiries/ecom/ecomrep.htm#BM2_1›. Keizer, Gregg. "Hearing Loss Group Complains to FCC about iPhone." Computerworld (20 Sep. 2007). 12 Apr. 2008 ‹ction/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic& articleId=9037999›. Regan, Bob. "Accessibility and Design: A Failure of the Imagination." ACM International Conference Proceedings Series 63: Proceedings of The 2004 International Cross-disciplinary Workshop on Web Accessibility (W4A). 29–37. Sapey, Bob. "Disablement in the Information Age." Disability and Society 15.4 (June 2000): 619–637. Sierra. "IBM Project: Second Life Accessible for Blind People." Techpin (24 Sep. 2007). 3 May 2008 ‹bm-project-second-life-accessible-for-blind-people/›. Smith, Tony. "Ten Years Old: The World’s First MP3 Player." Register Hardware (10 Mar. 2008). 12 Apr. 2008 ‹www.reghardware.co.uk/2008/03/10/ft_first_mp3_player/›. Udell, Jon. "The iTunes U Agenda." InfoWorld (22 Feb. 2006). 13 Apr. 2008 ‹dell/2006/02/22.html›. Williams, Jocasta, and Michael Fardon. "Perpetual Connectivity: Lecture Recordings and Portable Media Players." Proceedings from Ascilite, Singapore, 2–5 Dec. 2007. 1084–1092. Wood, Lamont. "Blind Users Still Struggle with 'Maddening' Computing Obstacles." Computerworld (16 Apr. 2008). 27 Apr. 2008 ‹ction/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic& articleId=9077118& source=NLT_AM& nlid=1›. Zajicek, Mary. "Web 2.0: Hype or Happiness?" Paper presented at International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility, Banff, Canada, 2–9 May 2007. 12 Apr. 2008 ‹007 rog/k2-zajicek.pdf›. Zeff, Robbin. "Universal Design across the Curriculum." New Directions for Higher Education 137 (Spring 2007): 27–44.
Disability masked avengers
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 22-08-2019
FCJ-188 Disability’s Digital Frictions: Activism, Technology, and Politics
Publisher: The Fibreculture Journal
Date: 22-12-2015
Captioned Recorded Lectures as a Mainstream Learning Tool
Publisher: Queensland University of Technology
Date: 21-06-2017
DOI: 10.5204/MCJ.1262
Abstract: In Australian universities, many courses provide lecture notes as a standard learning resource however, captions and transcripts of these lectures are not usually provided unless requested by a student through dedicated disability support officers (Worthington). As a result, to date their use has been limited. However, while the requirement for—and benefits of—captioned online lectures for students with disabilities is widely recognised, these captions or transcripts might also represent further opportunity for a personalised approach to learning for the mainstream student population (Podszebka et al. Griffin). This article reports findings of research assessing the usefulness of captioned recorded lectures as a mainstream learning tool to determine their usefulness in enhancing inclusivity and learning outcomes for the disabled, international, and broader student population.Literature ReviewCaptions have been found to be of benefit for a number of different groups considered at-risk. These include people who are D/deaf or hard of hearing, those with other learning difficulties, and those from a non-English speaking background (NESB).For students who are D/deaf or hard of hearing, captions play a vital role in providing access to otherwise inaccessible audio content. Captions have been found to be superior to sign language interpreters, note takers, and lip reading (Stinson et al. Maiorana-Basas and Pagliaro Marschark et al.).The use of captions for students with a range of cognitive disabilities has also been shown to help with student comprehension of video-based instruction in a higher education context (Evmenova Evmenova and Behrmann). This includes students with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) (Knight et al. Reagon et al.) and students with dyslexia (Alty et al. Beacham and Alty). While, anecdotally, captions are also seen as of benefit for students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (Kent et al.), studies have proved inconclusive (Lewis and Brown).The third group of at-risk students identified as benefiting from captioning recorded lecture content are those from a NESB. The use of captions has been shown to increase vocabulary learning (Montero Perez, Peters, Clarebout, and Desmet Montero Perez, Van Den Noortgate, and Desmet) and to assist with comprehension of presenters with accents or rapid speech (Borgaonkar, 2013).In addition to these three main groups of at-risk students, captions have also been demonstrated to increase the learning outcomes for older students (Pachman and Ke, 2012 Schmidt and Haydu, 1992). Captions also have demonstrable benefits for the broader student cohort beyond these at-risk groups (Podszebka et al. Griffin). For ex le, a recent study found that the broader student population utilised lecture captions and transcripts in order to focus, retain information, and overcome poor audio quality (Linder). However, the same study revealed that students were largely unaware about the availability of captions and transcripts, nor how to access them.MethodologyIn 2016 students in the Curtin University unit Web Communications (an introductory unit for the Internet Communications major) and its complementary first year unit, Internet and Everyday Life, along with a second year unit, Web Media, were provided with access to closed captions for their online recorded lectures. The latter unit was added to the study serendipitously when its lectures were required to be captioned through a request from the Curtin Disability Office during the study period. Recordings and captions were created using the existing captioning system available through Curtin’s lecture recording platform—Echo360. As well as providing a written caption of what is being said during the lectures, this system also offers a sophisticated search functionality, as well as access to a total transcript of the lecture. The students were provided access to an online training module, developed specifically for this study, to explain the use of this system.Enrolled Curtin students, both on-c us and online, Open Universities Australia (OUA) students studying through Curtin online, teaching staff, and disability officers were then invited to participate in a survey and interviews. The study sought to gain insights into students’ use of both recorded lectures and captioned video at the time of the survey, and their anticipated future usage of these services (see Kent et al.).A total of 50 students—of 539 enrolled across the different instances of the three units—completed the survey. In addition, five follow-up interviews with students, teaching staff, and disability support staff were conducted once the surveys had been completed. Staff interviewed included tutors and unit coordinators who taught and supervised units in which the lecture captions were provided. The interviews assessed the awareness, use, and perceived validity of the captions system in the context of both learning and teaching.ResultsA number of different questions were asked regarding students’ demographics, their engagement with online unit materials, including recorded lectures, their awareness of Echo360’s lecture captions, as well as its additional features, their perceived value of online captions for their studies, and the future significance of captions in a university context.Of the 50 participants in the survey, only six identified themselves as a person with a disability—almost 90 per cent did not identify as disabled. Additionally, 45 of the 50 participants identified English as their primary language. Only one student identified as a person with both a disability and coming from a NESB.Engagement with Online Unit Materials and Recorded LecturesThe survey results provide insight into the ways in which participants interact with the Echo360 lecture system. Over 90 per cent of students had accessed the recorded lectures via the Echo360 system. While this might not seem notable at first, given such materials are essential elements of the units surveyed, the level of repeated engagement seen in these results is important because it indicates the extent to which students are revising the same material multiple times—a practice that captions are designed to facilitate and assist. For instance, one lecture was recorded per week for each unit surveyed, and most respondents (70 per cent) were viewing these lectures at least once or twice a week, while 10 per cent were viewing the lectures multiple times a week. Over half of the students surveyed reported viewing the same lecture more than once. Out these participants, 19 (or 73 per cent) had viewed a lecture twice and 23 per cent had viewed it three times or more. This illustrates that frequent revision is taking place, as students watch the same lecture repeatedly to absorb and clarify its contents. This frequency of repeated engagement with recorded unit materials—lectures in particular—indicates that students were making online engagement and revision a key element of their learning process.Awareness of the Echo360 Lecture Captions and Additional FeaturesHowever, while students were highly engaged with both the online learning material and the recorded lectures, there was less awareness of the availability of the captioning system—only 34 per cent of students indicated they were aware of having access to captions. The survey also asked students whether or not they had used additional features of the Echo360 captioning system such as the search function and downloadable lecture transcripts. Survey results confirm that these features were being used however, responses indicated that only a minority of students using the captions system used these features, with 28 per cent using the search function and 33 per cent making use of the transcripts. These results can be seen as an indication that additional features were useful for revision, albeit for the minority of students who used them. A Curtin disability advisor noted in their interview that:transcripts are particularly useful in addition to captions as they allow the user to quickly skim the material rather than sit through a whole lecture. Transcripts also allow translation into other languages, highlighting text and other features that make the content more accessible.Teaching staff were positive about these features and suggested that providing transcripts saved time for tutors who are often approached to provide these to in idual students:I typically receive requests for lecture transcripts at the commencement of each study period. In SP3 [during this study] I did not receive any requests.I feel that lecture transcripts would be particularly useful as this is the most common request I receive from students, especially those with disabilities.I think transcripts and keyword searching would likely be useful to many students who access lectures through recordings (or who access recordings even after attending the lecture in person).However, the one student who was interviewed preferred the keyword search feature, although they expressed interest in transcripts as well:I used the captions keyword search. I think I would like to use the lecture transcript as well but I did not use that in this unit.In summary, while not all students made use of Echo360’s additional features for captions, those who did access them did so frequently, indicating that these are potentially useful learning tools.Value of CaptionsOf the students who were aware of the captions, 63 per cent found them useful for engaging with the lecture material. According to one of the students:[captions] made a big difference to me in terms on understanding and retaining what was said in the lectures. I am not sure that many students would realise this unless they actually used the captions…I found it much easier to follow what was being said in the recorded lectures and I also found that they helped stay focussed and not become distracted from the lecture.It is notable that the improvements described above do not involve assistance with hearing or language issues, but the extent to which captions improve a more general learning experience. This participant identified themselves as a native English speaker with no disabilities, yet the captions still made a “big difference” in their ability to follow, understand, focus on, and retain information drawn from the lectures.However, while over 60 per cent of students who used the captions reported they found them useful, it was difficult to get more detailed feedback on precisely how and why. Only 52.6 per cent reported actually using them when accessing the lectures, and a relatively small number reported taking advantage of the search and transcripts features available through the Echo360 system. Exactly how they were being used and what role they play in student learning is therefore an area to pursue in future research, as it will assist in breaking down the benefits of captions for all learners.Teaching staff also reported the difficulty in assessing the full value of captions—one teacher interviewed explained that the impact of captions was hard to monitor quantitatively during regular teaching:it is difficult enough to track who listens to lectures at all, let alone who might be using the captions, or have found these helpful. I would like to think that not only those with hearing impairments, but also ESL students and even people who find listening to and taking in the recording difficult for other reasons, might have benefitted.Some teaching staff, however, did note positive feedback from students:one student has given me positive feedback via comments on the [discussion board].one has reported that it helps with retention and with times when speech is soft or garbled. I suspect it helps mediate my accent and pitch!While 60 per cent claiming captions were useful is a solid majority, it is notable that some participants skipped this question. As discussed above, survey answers indicate that this was because these 37 students did not think they had access to captions in their units.Future SignificanceOverall, these results indicate that while captions can provide a benefit to students’ engagement with online lecture learning material, there is a need for more direct and ongoing information sharing to ensure both students and teaching staff are fully aware of captions and how to use them. Technical issues—such as the time delay in captions being uploaded—potentially dissuade students from using this facility, so improving the speed and reliability of this tool could increase the number of learners keen to use it. All staff interviewed agreed that implementing captions for all lectures would be beneficial for everyone:any technology that can assist in making lectures more accessible is useful, particularly in OUA [online] courses.it would be a good ex le of Universal Design as it would make the lecture content more accessible for students with disabilities as well as students with other equity needs.YES—it benefits all students. I personally find that I understand and my attention is held more by captioned content.it certainly makes my role easier as it allows effective access to recorded lectures. Captioning allows full access as every word is accessible as opposed to note taking which is not verbatim.DiscussionThe results of this research indicate that captions—and their additional features—available through the Echo360 captions system are an aid to student learning. However, there are significant challenges to be addressed to make students aware of these features and their potential benefits.This study has shown that in a cohort of primarily English speaking students without disabilities, over 60 per cent found captions a useful addition to recorded lectures. This suggests that the implementation of captions for all recorded lectures would have widespread benefits for all learners, not only those with hearing or language difficulties. However, at present, only “eligible” students who approach the disability office would be considered for this service, usually students who are D/deaf or hard of hearing. Yet it can be argued that these benefits—and challenges—could also extend to other groups that are might traditionally have been seen to benefit from the use of captions such as students with other disabilities or those from a NESB.However, again, a lack of awareness of the training module meant that this potential cohort did not benefit from this trial. In this study, none of the students who identified as having a disability or coming from a NESB indicated that they had access to the training module. Further, five of the six students with disabilities reported that they did not have access to the captions system and, similarly, only two of the five NESB students. Despite these low numbers, all the students who were part of these two groups and who did access the captions system did find it useful.It can therefore be seen that the main challenge for teaching staff is to ensure all students are aware of captions and can access them easily. One option for reducing the need for training or further instructions might be having captions always ON by default. This means students could incorporate them into their study experience without having to take direct action or, equally, could simply choose to switch them off.There are also a few potential teething issues with implementing captions universally that need to be noted, as staff expressed some concerns regarding how this might alter the teaching and learning experience. For ex le:because the captioning is once-off, it means I can’t re-record the lectures where there was a failure in technology as the new versions would not be captioned.a bit cautious about the transcript as there may be problems with students copying that content and also with not viewing the lectures thinking the transcripts are sufficient.Despite these concerns, the survey results and interviews support the previous findings showing that lecture captions have the potential to benefit all learners, enhancing each student’s existing capabilities. As one staff member put it:in the main I just feel [captions are] important for accessibility and equity in general. Why should people have to request captions? Recorded lecture content should be available to all students, in whatever way they find it most easy (or possible) to engage.Follow-up from students at the end of the study further supported this. As one student noted in an email at the start of 2017:hi all, in one of my units last semester we were lucky enough to have captions on the recorded lectures. They were immensely helpful for a number of reasons. I really hope they might become available to us in this unit.ConclusionsWhen this project set out to investigate the ways erse groups of students could utilise captioned lectures if they were offered it as a mainstream learning tool rather than a feature only disabled students could request, existing research suggested that many accommodations designed to assist students with disabilities actually benefit the entire cohort. The results of the survey confirmed this was also the case for captioning.However, currently, lecture captions are typically utilised in Australian higher education settings—including Curtin—only as an assistive technology for students with disabilities, particularly students who are D/deaf or hard of hearing. In these circumstances, the student must undertake a lengthy process months in advance to ensure timely access to essential captioned material. Mainstreaming the provision of captions and transcripts for online lectures would greatly increase the accessibility of online learning—removing these barriers allows education providers to harness the broad potential of captioning technology. Indeed, ensuring that captions were available “by default” would benefit the educational outcomes and self-determination of the wide range of students who could benefit from this technology.Lecture captioning and transcription is increasingly cost-effective, given technological developments in speech-to-text or automatic speech recognition software, and the increasing re-use of content across different iterations of a unit in online higher education courses. At the same time, international trends in online education—not least the rapidly evolving interpretations of international legislation—provide new incentives for educational providers to begin addressing accessibility shortcomings by incorporating captions and transcripts into the basic materials of a course.Finally, an understanding of the erse benefits of lecture captions and transcripts needs to be shared widely amongst higher education providers, researchers, teaching staff, and students to ensure the potential of this technology is accessed and used effectively. Understanding who can benefit from captions, and how they benefit, is a necessary step in encouraging greater use of such technology, and thereby enhancing students’ learning opportunities.AcknowledgementsThis research was funded by the Curtin University Teaching Excellence Development Fund. Natalie Latter and Kai-ti Kao provided vital research assistance. We also thank the students and staff who participated in the surveys and interviews.ReferencesAlty, J.L., A. Al-Sharrah, and N. Beacham. “When Humans Form Media and Media Form Humans: An Experimental Study Examining the Effects Different Digital Media Have on the Learning Outcomes of Students Who Have Different Learning Styles.” Interacting with Computers 18.5 (2006): 891–909.Beacham, N.A., and J.L. Alty. “An Investigation into the Effects That Digital Media Can Have on the Learning Outcomes of In iduals Who Have Dyslexia.” Computers & Education 47.1 (2006): 74–93.Borgaonkar, R. “Captioning for Classroom Lecture Videos.” University of Houston 2013. h-ir/handle/10657/517 .Evmenova, A. “Lights. Camera. Captions: The Effects of Picture and/or Word Captioning Adaptations, Alternative Narration, and Interactive Features on Video Comprehension by Students with Intellectual Disabilities.” Ph.D. thesis. Virginia: George Mason U, 2008.Evmenova, A., and M. Behrmann. “Enabling Access and Enhancing Comprehension of Video Content for Postsecondary Students with Intellectual Disability.” Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities 49.1 (2014): 45–59.Griffin, Emily. “Who Uses Closed Captions? Not Just the Deaf or Hard of Hearing.” 3PlayMedia Aug. 2015 /08/28/who-uses-closed-captions-not-just-the-deaf-or-hard-of-hearing/ .Kent, Mike, Katie Ellis, Gwyneth Peaty, Natalie Latter, and Kathryn Locke. Mainstreaming Captions for Online Lectures in Higher Education in Australia: Alternative Approaches to Engaging with Video Content. Perth: National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education (NCSEHE), Curtin U, 2017. www.ncsehe.edu.au ublications/4074/?doing_wp_cron=1493183232.7519669532775878906250 .Knight, V., B.R. McKissick, and A. Saunders. “A Review of Technology-Based Interventions to Teach Academic Skills to Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder.” Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 43.11 (2013): 2628–2648. .1007/s10803-013-1814-y .Linder, Katie. Student Uses and Perceptions of Closed Captions and Transcripts: Results from a National Study. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State U Ec us Research Unit, 2016.Lewis, D., and V. Brown. “Multimedia and ADHD Learners: Are Subtitles Beneficial or Detrimental?” Annual Meeting of the AECT International Convention, The Galt House, Louisville 2012. df roceedings12/2012/12_17.pdf .Maiorana-Basas, M., and C.M. Pagliaro. “Technology Use among Adults Who Are Deaf and Hard of Hearing: A National Survey.” Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 19.3 (2014): 400–410. .1093/deafed/enu005 .Marschark, Marc, Greg Leigh, Patricia Sapere, Denis Burnham, Carol Convertino, Michael Stinson, Harry Knoors, Mathijs P. J. Vervloed, and William Noble. “Benefits of Sign Language Interpreting and Text Alternatives for Deaf Students’ Classroom Learning.” Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 11.4 (2006): 421–437. .1093/deafed/enl013 .Montero Perez, M., E. Peters, G. Clarebout, and P. Desmet. “Effects of Captioning on Video Comprehension and Incidental Vocabulary Learning.” Language Learning & Technology 18.1 (2014): 118–141.Montero Perez, M., W. Van Den Noortgate, and P. Desmet. “Captioned Video for L2 Listening and Vocabulary Learning: A Meta-Analysis.” System 41.3 (2013): 720–739. .1016/j.system.2013.07.013 .Pachman, M., and F. Ke. “Environmental Support Hypothesis in Designing Multimedia Training for Older Adults: Is Less Always More?” Computers & Education 58.1 (2012): 100–110. .1016/j.compedu.2011.08.011 .Podszebka, Darcy, Candee Conklin, Mary Apple, and Amy Windus. “Comparison of Video and Text Narrative Presentations on Comprehension and Vocabulary Acquisition”. Paper presented at SUNY – Geneseo Annual Reading and Literacy Symposium. New York: Geneseo, May 1998. aai/nadh161.pdf .Reagon, K.A., T.S. Higbee, and K. Endicott. “Using Video Instruction Procedures with and without Embedded Text to Teach Object Labeling to Preschoolers with Autism: A Preliminary Investigation.” Journal of Special Education Technology 22.1 (2007): 13–20.Schmidt, M.J., and M.L. Haydu. “The Older Hearing‐Impaired Adult in the Classroom: Real‐Time Closed Captioning as a Technological Alternative to the Oral Lecture.” Educational Gerontology 18.3 (1992): 273–276. .1080/0360127920180308 .Stinson, M.S., L.B. Elliot, R.R. Kelly, and Y. Liu. “Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students’ Memory of Lectures with Speech-to-Text and Interpreting/Note Taking Services.” The Journal of Special Education 43.1 (2009): 52–64. .1177/0022466907313453 .Worthington, Tom. “Are Australian Universities Required to Caption Lecture Videos?” Higher Education Whisperer 14 Feb. 2015. /02/are-australian-universities-required-to.html .
Developing accessible technologies for a changing world: understanding how people with vision impairment use smartphones
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 07-08-2021
Indefinitely beyond Our Reach: The Case for Elevating Audio Description to the Importance of Captions on Australian Television
Publisher: Queensland University of Technology
Date: 21-06-2017
DOI: 10.5204/MCJ.1261
Abstract: IntroductionIn a 2013 press release issued by Blind Citizens Australia, the advocacy group announced they were lodging a human rights complaint against the Australian government and the ABC over the lack of audio description available on the public broadcaster. Audio description is a track of narration included between the lines of dialogue which describes important visual elements of a television show, movie or performance. Audio description is broadly recognised as an essential feature to make television accessible to audiences who are blind or vision impaired (Utray et al.). Indeed, Blind Citizens Australia maintained that audio description was as important as captioning on Australian television:people who are blind have waited too long and are frustrated that audio description on television remains indefinitely beyond our reach. Our Deaf or hearing impaired peers have always seen great commitment from the ABC, but we continue to feel like second class citizens.While audio description as a technology was developed in the 1960s—around the same time as captions (Ellis, “Netflix Closed Captions”)—it is not as widely available on television and access is therefore often considered to be out of reach for this group. As a further comparison, in Australia, while the provision of captions was mandated in the Broadcasting Services Act (BSA) 1992 and television sets had clear Australian standards regarding their capability to display captions, there is no legislation for audio description and no consistency regarding the ability of television sets sold in Australia to display them (Ellis, “Television’s Transition”). While as a technology, audio description is as old as captioning it is not as widely available on television. This is despite the promise of technological advancements to facilitate its availability. For ex le, Cronin and King predicted that technological change such as the introduction of stereo sound on television would facilitate a more widespread availability of audio description however, this has not eventuated. Similarly, in the lead up to the transition from analogue to digital broadcasting in Australia, government policy documents predicted a more widespread availability of audio description as a result of increased bandwidth available via digital television (Ellis, “Television’s Transition”). While these predictions paved way for an audio description trial, there has been no amendment to the BSA to mandate its provision.Audio description has been experienced on Australian broadcast television in 2012, but only for a 14-week trial on ABC1. The trial report, and feedback from disability groups, identified several technical impediments and limitations which effected the experience of audio described content during this trial, including: the timing of the trial during a period in which the transition from analogue to digital television was still occurring (creating hardware compatibility issues for some consumers) the limitations of the “ad hoc” approach undertaken by the ABC and manual implementation of audio description and the need for upgraded digital receivers (ABC “Trial of Audio Description”, 2). While advocacy groups acknowledged the technical complexities involved, the expected stakeholder discussions that were due to be held post-trial, in part to attempt to resolve the issues experienced, were never undertaken. As a result of the lack of subsequent commitments to providing audio description, in 2013 advocacy group Blind Citizens Australia lodged their formal complaints of disability discrimination against the ABC and the Federal Government. Since the 2012 trial on ABC1, the ABC’s catch-up portal iView instigated another audio description trial in 2015. Through the iView trial it was further confirmed that audio description held considerable benefits for people with a vision impairment. They also demonstrated that audio description was technically feasible, with far less ‘technical difficulties’ than the experience of the 2012 broadcast-based trial. Over the 15 month trial on ABC iView 1,305 hours of audio described content was provided and played 158, 277 times across multiple platforms, including iOS, Android, the Freeview app and desktop computers (ABC, “ABC iView Audio Description Trial”).Yet despite repeated audio description trials and the lodgement of discrimination complaints, there remains no audio description on Australian broadcast television. Similarly, whereas 55 per cent of DVDs released in Australia have captions, only 25 per cent include an audio description track (Media Access Australia). At the time of writing, the only audio description available on Australian television is on Netflix Australia, a subscription video on demand provider.This article seeks to highlight the importance of television access for people with disability, with a specific focus on the provision of audio description for people with vision impairments. Research consistently shows that despite being a visual medium, people with vision impairments watch television at least once a day (Cronin and King Ellis, “Netflix Closed Captions”). However, while television access has been a priority for advocates for people who are Deaf and hard of hearing (Downey), audiences advocating audio description are only recently making gains (Ellis, “Netflix Closed Captions” Ellis and Kent). These gains are frequently attributed to technological change, particularly the digitisation of television and the introduction of subscription video on demand where users access television content online and are not constrained by broadcast schedules. This transformation of how we access television is also considered in the article, again with a focus on the provision–or lack thereof—of audio description.This article also reports findings of research conducted with Australians with disabilities accessing the emerging video on demand environment in 2016. The survey was run online from January to February 2016. Survey respondents included people with disability, their families, and carers, and were sourced through disability organisations and community groups as well as via disability-focused social media. A total of 145 people completed the survey and 12 people participated in follow-up interviews. Insights were gained into both how people with disability are currently using video on demand and their anticipated usage of services. Of note is that most subscription video on demand services (Netflix Australia, Stan, and Presto) had only been introduced in Australia in the year before the survey being carried out, with only Foxtel Play and Quickflix having been in operation for some time prior to that.Finally, the article ends by looking at past and current advocacy in this area, including a discussion on existing—albeit, to date, limited—political will.Access to Television for People with DisabilitiesTelevision can be disabling in different ways for people with impairments, yet several accessibility features exist to translate information. For ex le, people who are D/deaf or hard of hearing may require captions, while people with vision impairments prefer to make use of audio description (Alper et al.). Similarly, people with mobility and dexterity impairments found the transition to digital broadcasting difficult, particularly with relation to set top box set up (Carmichael et al.). As Joshua Robare has highlighted, even legislation has generally favoured the inclusion of audiences with hearing impairments, while disregarding those with vision impairments. Similarly, much of the literature in this area focuses on the provision of captions—a vital accessibility feature for people who are D/deaf or hard of hearing. Consequently, research into accessibility to television for a ersity of impairments, going beyond hearing impairments, remains deficient.In a study of Australian audiences with disability conducted between September and November 2013—during the final months of the analogue to digital simulcast period of Australian broadcast television—closed captions, clean audio, and large/colour-coded remote control keys emerged as the most desired access features (see Ellis, “Digital Television Flexibility”). Audio description barely registered in the top five. In a different study conducted two years ago/later, when disabled Australian audiences of video on demand were asked the same question, captions continued to dominate at 63.4 per cent however, audio description was also seen to be a necessary feature for almost one third of respondents (see Ellis et al., Accessing Subcription Video).Robert Kingett, founder of the Accessible Netflix Project, participated in our research and told us in an interview that video on demand providers treat accessibility as an “afterthought”, particularly for blind people whom most don’t think of as watching television. Yet research dating back to the 1990s shows almost 100 per cent of people with vision impairments watch television at least once a day (Cronin & King). Statistically, the number of Australians who identify as blind or vision impaired is not insignificant. Vision Australia estimates that over 357,000 Australians have a vision impairment, while one in five Australians have a disability of some form. With an ageing population, this number is expected to grow exponentially in the next ten years (Australian Network on Disability). Kingett therefore describes this lack of accessibility as evidence video on demand is “stuck in the dark ages”, and advocates that people with vision impairments do use video on demand and therefore continue to have unmet access needs.Video on Demand—Transforming TelevisionSubscription video on demand services have caused a major shift in the way television is used and consumed in Australia. Prior to 2015, there was a small subscription video on demand industry in this country. However, in 2015, following the launch of Netflix Australia, Stan, and Presto, Australia was described as having entered the “streaming wars” (Tucker) where consumers would benefit from the increased competition. As Netflix gained dominance in the video on demand market internationally, people with disability began to recognise the potential this service could have in transforming their access to television.For ex le, the growing availability of video on demand services continues to provide disruptive change to the way in which consumers enjoy information and entertainment. While traditional broadcast television has provided great opportunities for participation in news, events, and popular culture, both socially and in the workplace, the move towards video on demand services has seen a notable decline in traditional television viewing habits, with online continuing to increase at the expense of Australian free-to-air programming (C-Scott).For the general population, this always-on, always-available, and always-shareable nature of video on demand means that the experience is both convenient and instant. If a television show is of interest to friends and family, it can be quickly shared through popular social media with others, allowing everyone to join in the experience. For people with disability, the ability to both share and personalise the experience of television is critical to the popularity of video on demand services for this group. This gives them not only the same benefits as others but also ensures that people with disability are not unintentionally excluded from participation—it allows people with disability the choice as to whether or not to join in. However, exclusion from video on demand is a significant concern for people with disability due to the lack of accessibility features in popular subscription services. The lack of captions, audio description, and interfaces that do not comply with international Web accessibility standards are resulting in many people with disability being unable to fully participate in the preferred viewing platforms of family and friends.The impact of this expands beyond the consumption patterns of audiences, shifting the way the audience is defined and conceptualised. With an increasing distribution of audience attention to multiple channels, products, and services, the ability to, and strategies for, acquiring a large audience has changed (Napoli). As audience attention is distributed, it is broken up, into smaller, fragmented groups. The success, therefore, of a new provider may be to amass a large audience through the aggregation of smaller, niche audiences. This theory has significance for consumers who require audio description because they represent a viable target group. In this context, accessibility is reframed as a commercial opportunity rather than a cost (Ellis, “Netflix Closed Captions”).However, what this means for future provision of audio description in Australia is still unclear. Chris Mikul from Media Access Australia, author of Access on Demand, was interviewed as part of this research. He told us that the complete lack of audio description on local video on demand services can be attributed to the lack of Australian legislation requiring it. In an interview as part of this research he explained the central issue with audio description in this country as “the lack of audio description on broadcast TV, which is shocking in a world context”.International providers fare only slightly better. Robert Kingett established the Accessible Netflix Project in 2013 with the stated aim of advocating for the provision of audio description on Netflix. Netflix, despite a lack of a clear accessibility policy, are seen as being in front in terms of overall accessibility—captions are available for most content. However, the provision of audio description was initially not considered to be of such importance, and Netflix were initially against the idea, citing technical difficulties. Nevertheless, in 2015—shortly after their Australian launch—they did eventually introduce audio description on original programming, describing the access feature as an option customers could choose, “just like choosing the soundtrack in a different language” (Wright). However, despite such successful trials, the issue in the Australian market remains the absence of legislation mandating the provision of audio description in Australia and the other video on demand providers have not introduced audio description to compete with Netflix. As the Netflix ex le illustrates, both legislation and recognition of people with disability as a key audience demographic will result in a more accessible television environment for this group.Currently, it is debatable as to whether this increasingly competitive market, the shifting perception of audience attraction and retention, and the entry of multiple international video on demand providers, has influenced how accessibility is viewed, both for broadcast television and video on demand. Although there is some evidence for an increasing consideration of people with disability as “valid” consumers—take, for ex le, the iView audio description trial, or the inclusion of audio description by Netflix—our research indicates accessibility is still inconsistently considered, designed for, and applied by current providers.Survey Response: Key Issues Regarding AccessibilityRespondents were asked to provide an overall impression of video on demand services, and to tell us about their positive and negative experiences. Analysis of 68 extended responses, and the responses provided by the interview participants, identified a lack of availability of accessibility features such as audio description as a key problem. What our results indicate is that while customers with a disability are largely accommodating of the inaccessibility of providers—they use their own assistive technology to access content—they are keenly aware of the provisions that could be made. As one respondent put it:they could do a lot better: talking menus, spoken sub titles, and also spoken messages on screen.However, many expressed low expectations due to the continued absence of audio description on broadcast television:so, the other thing is, my expectations are quite low because of years of not having audio descriptions. I have slightly different expectations to other people.This reflection is important in considering both the shifting expectations regarding video on demand providers but also the need for a clear communication of what features are available so that providers can cater to—and therefore capture—niche markets.The survey identified captioning as the main accessibility problem of video on demand services. However, this may not accurately reflect the need for other accessibility features such as audio description. Rather, it may be indicative that this feature is often the only choice given to consumers. As, Chris Mikul identified, “the only disability being catered for to any great extent is deafness/hearing impairment”. Kingett agreed, noting:people who are deaf and hard of hearing are placed way before the rest because captions are beyond easy and cheap to create now. Please, there’s even companies that people use to crowd source captions so companies don’t have to do it anymore. This all came about because the deaf community has [banded] together … to achieve a cause. I know audio description isn’t as cheap to make as captions but, by these companies’ budgets that’s like dropping a penny.Advocacy and Political WillAs noted above, it has been argued by some that accessibility features that address vision impairments have been neglected. The reason behind this is twofold—the perception that this disability is experienced by a minority of the population and that, because blind people “don’t watch television”, it is not an important accessibility feature. This points towards a need for both disability advocacy and political will by politicians to introduce legislation. As one survey respondent identified, the reality is that, in Australia, neither politicians nor people with vision impairments have yet to address the issue on audio description in an organised or sustained way:we have very little audio described content available in Australia. We don’t have the population of blind people nor the political will by politicians to force providers to provide for us.However, Blind Citizens Australia—the coalition of television audiences with vision impairments who lodged the human rights complaint against the government and the ABC—suggest the tide is turning. Whereas advocates for people with vision impairments have traditionally focused on access to the workforce, the issue of television accessibility is increasingly gaining attention, particularly as a result of international activist efforts and the move towards video on demand (see Ellis and Kent).For ex le, Kingett’s Accessible Netflix Project in the US is considered one of the most successful accessibility movements towards the introduction of audio description. While its members are predominantly US-based, it does include several Australian members and continues to cover Netflix Australia’s stance on audio description, and be covered by Australian media and organisations (including Media Access Australia and Life Hacker). When Netflix launched in Australia, Kingett encouraged Australians to become more involved in the project (Ellis and Kent).However, despite the progress towards mandating of audio description in parliament and the resolution of efforts made by advocacy groups (including Vision Australia and Blind Citizens Australia), the status of audio description remains uncertain. Whilst some support has been gained—specifically through motions made by Senator Siewert and the ABC iView audio description trials—significant change has been slow. For ex le, conciliation discussions are still ongoing regarding the now four-year-old complaint brought against the ABC and the Federal Government by Blind Citizens Australia. Meanwhile, although the Senate supported Senator Siewert’s motion to change the Broadcasting Services Act to include audio description, the Act has yet to be amended.The results of multiple ABC trials of audio description remain in discussion. Whilst the recently released report on the findings of the April 2015—July 2016 iView trial states that the “trial has identified that those who utilised the audio description service found it a valuable enhancement to their media engagement and their social interactions” (ABC, “ABC iView Audio Description Trial” 18), it also cautioned that “any move to introduce AD services in Australia would have budgetary implications for the broadcasters in a constrained financial environment” and “broader legislative implications” (ABC, “ABC iView Audio Description Trial” 18). Indeed, although the trial was considered “successful”—in that experiences by users were generally positive and the benefits considerable (Media Access Australia, “New Report”)—the continuation of audio description on iView alone was clarified as representing “a systemic failure to provide people who are blind or have low vision with basic access to television now, given that iView is out of reach for many people in the blindness and low vision community” (Media Access Australia, “New Report”). Indeed, the relatively low numbers of plays of audio described content during the trial (158, 277 plays, representing 0.58% of total program plays on iView) were likely a result of a lack of access to smartphones or Internet technology, prohibitive data speeds and/or general Internet costs, all factors which affect the accessibility of video on demand significantly more for people with disability (Ellis et al., “Access for Everyone?”).On a more positive note, the culmination of advocacy pressure, the ABC iView trial, political attention, and increasing academic literature on the accessibility of Australian media has resulted in the establishment of an Audio Description Working Group by the government. This group consists of industry representatives, advocacy group representatives, academics, and “consumer representatives”. The aims of the group are to: identify options to sustainably increase access to audio description services identify any impediments to the implementation of audio description provide expert advice on audio description implementation options and develop a report on the findings due at the end of 2017.ConclusionIn the absence of audio description, people who are blind or vision impaired report a less satisfying television experience (Cronin and King Kingett). However, with each technological advancement in the delivery of television, from stereo sound to digital television, this group has held hopes for a more accessible experience. The reality, however, has been a continued lack of audio description, particularly in broadcast television.Several commentators have compared the provision of audio description with closed captioning. They find that audio description is not as widely available, and reflect this is likely a result of lack of legislation (Robare Ellis, “Digital Television Flexibility”)—for ex le, in the Australian context, whereas the provision of captions is mandated in the Broadcasting Services Act 1992, audio description is not. As a result, there have been limited trials of audio description in this country and inconsistent standards in how to display it. As discussed throughout this paper, people with vision impairments and their allies therefore often draw on the ex le of the widespread “acceptance” of captions to make the case that audio description should also be more widely available.However, following the introduction of subscription video on demand in Australia, and particularly Netflix, the issue of audio description is receiving greater attention. It has been argued that video on demand has transformed television, particularly the ways in which television is accessed. Video on demand could also potentially transform the way we think about accessibility for audiences with disability. While captions are a well-established accessibility feature facilitating television access for people with a range of disabilities, video on demand is raising the profile of the importance of audio description for audiences with vision impairments.ReferencesABC. “Audio Description Trial on ABC Television: Report to the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy”. Dec. 2012. 8 Apr. 2017 www.communications.gov.au/sites/g/files/net301/f/ABC-Audio-Description-Trial-Report2.pdf .ABC. “ABC iView Audio Description Trial: Final Report to The Department of Communications and the Arts.” Oct. 2016. 6 Apr. 2017 www.communications.gov.au/documents/final-report-trial-audio-description-abc-iview .Alper, Meryl, et al. “Reimagining the Good Life with Disability: Communication, New Technology, and Humane Connections.” Communication and the Good Life. Ed. H. Wang. New York: Peter Lang, 2015.Australian Network on Disability. “Disability Statistics.” Mar. 2017. 30 Apr. 2017 www.and.org.au ages/disability-statistics.html .Blind Citizens Australia. Government and ABC Fail to Deliver on Accessible TV for Australia’s Blind. Submission. 10 July 2013. 1 May 2017 bca.org.au/submissions/ .C-Scott, Marc. “The Battle for Audiences as Free-TV Viewing Continues Its Decline.” Mumbrella 22 Apr. 2016. 24 May 2016 mumbrella.com.au/the-battle-for-audiences-as-free-tv-viewing-continues-its-decline-362010 .Carmichael, Alex, et al. “Digital Switchover or Digital Divide: A Prognosis for Useable and Accessible Interactive Digital Television in the UK.” Universal Access in the Information Society 4 (2006): 400–16.Cronin, Barry J., and Sharon Robertson King. “The Development of the Descriptive Video Services.” National Center to Improve Practice in Special Education through Technology, Media and Materials. Sep. 1998. 8 May 2014 www2.edc.org/NCIP/library/v& c/Cronin.htm .Downey, G. “Constructing Closed-Captioning in the Public Interest: From Minority Media Accessibility to Mainstream Educational Technology.” Info 9.2–3 (2007): 69–82.Ellis, Katie. “Digital Television Flexibility: A Survey of Australians with Disability.” Media International Australia 150 (2014): 96.———. “Netflix Closed Captions Offer an Accessible Model for the Streaming Video Industry, But What about Audio Description?” Communication, Politics & Culture 47.3 (2015).———. “Television’s Transition to the Internet: Disability Accessibility and Broadband-Based TV in Australia.” Media International Australia 153 (2014): 53–63.Ellis, Katie, and Mike Kent. “Accessible Television: The New Frontier in Disability Media Studies Brings Together Industry Innovation, Government Legislation and Online Activism.” First Monday 20 (2015). js/index.php/fm/article/view/6170 .Ellis, Katie, et al. Accessing Subscription Video on Demand: A Study of Disability and Streaming Television in Australia. Australian Communications Consumer Action Network. Aug. 2016. accan.org.au/grants/current-grants/1066-accessing-video-on-demand-a-study-of-disability-and-streaming-television .Ellis, Katie, et al. “Access for Everyone? Australia’s ‘Streaming Wars’ and Consumers with Disabilities.” Continuum (2017, publication pending).Kingett, Robert. “The Accessible Netflix Project Advocates Taking Steps to Ensure Netflix Accessibility for Everyone.” 2014. 30 Jan. 2014 netflixproject.wordpress.com .Media Access Australia. “Statistics on DVD Accessibility in Australia.” 2012. 21 Nov. 2014 mediaaccess.org.au/dvds/Statistics%20on%20DVD%20accessibility%20in%20Australia .———. “New Report on the Trial of A.D. on ABC iView.” 7 Mar. 2017. 30 Apr. 2017 mediaaccess.org.au/latest_news/television/new-report-on-the-trial-of-ad-on-abc-iview .Napoli, Philip M., ed. Audience Evolution: New Technologies and the Transformation of Media Audiences. New York: Columbia UP, 2011.Robare, Joshua S. “Television for All: Increasing Television Accessibility for the Visually Impaired through the FCC’s Ability to Regulate Video Description Technology.” Federal Communications Law Journal 63.2 (2011): 553–78.Tucker, Harry. “Netflix Leads the Streaming Wars, Followed by Foxtel’s Presto.” News.com.au 24 June 2016. 18 May 2016 www.news.com.au/technology/home-entertainment/tv/netflix-leads-the-streaming-wars-followed-by-foxtels-presto/news-story/7adf45dcd7d9486ff47ec5ea5951287f .Utray, Francisco, et al. “Monitoring Accessibility Services in Digital Television.” International Journal of Digital Multimedia Broadcasting (2012): 9.
The Case for Captioned Lectures in Australian Higher Education
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 10-10-2018
Accessible television: The new frontier in disability media studies brings together industry innovation, government legislation and online activism
Publisher: University of Illinois Libraries
Date: 10-09-2015
Abstract: As television moves beyond digital broadcast modes of distribution towards online modes of delivery, this paper considers the opportunities and challenges for people with disabilities. With accessibility relying on a complex mix of regulation, legislation and industry innovation, the paper questions whether predictions of improved accessibility are an automatic outcome of new television technologies. The paper asks ‘where to next?’ for disability and the Internet through an emphasis on the importance of television in an accessible new media environment. The paper draws on government policies, the activist intervention of a number of people with disabilities as documented online, and primary research into Australian television audiences with disabilities that took place in 2013 and 2014.
Captions and the Cooking Show
Publisher: Queensland University of Technology
Date: 21-06-2017
DOI: 10.5204/MCJ.1260
Abstract: While the television cooking genre has evolved in numerous ways to withstand competition and become a constant feature in television programming (Collins and College), it has been argued that audience demand for televisual cooking has always been high because of the daily importance of cooking (Hamada, “Multimedia Integration”). Early cooking shows were characterised by an instructional discourse, before quickly embracing an entertainment focus modern cooking shows take on a more competitive, out of the kitchen focus (Collins and College). The genre has continued to evolve, with celebrity chefs and ordinary people embracing transmedia affordances to return to the instructional focus of the early cooking shows. While the television cooking show is recognised for its broad cultural impacts related to gender (Ouellette and Hay), cultural capital (Ibrahim Oren), television formatting (Oren), and even communication itself (Matwick and Matwick), its role in the widespread adoption of television captions is significantly underexplored. Even the fact that a cooking show was the first ever program captioned on American television is almost completely unremarked within cooking show histories and literature.A Brief History of Captioning WorldwideWhen captions were first introduced on US television in the early 1970s, programmers were guided by the general principle to make the captioned program “accessible to every deaf viewer regardless of reading ability” (Jensema, McCann and Ramsey 284). However, there were no exact rules regarding captioning quality and captions did not reflect verbatim what was said onscreen. According to Jensema, McCann and Ramsey (285), less than verbatim captioning continued for many years because “deaf people were so delighted to have captions that they accepted almost anything thrown on the screen” (see also Newell 266 for a discussion of the UK context).While the benefits of captions for people who are D/deaf or hard of hearing were immediate, its commercial applications also became apparent. When the moral argument that people who were D/deaf or hard of hearing had a right to access television via captions proved unsuccessful in the fight for legislation, advocates lobbied the US Congress about the mainstream commercial benefits such as in education and the benefits for people learning English as a second language (Downey). Activist efforts and hard-won legal battles meant D/deaf and hard of hearing viewers can now expect closed captions on almost all television content. With legislation in place to determine the provision of captions, attention began to focus on their quality. D/deaf viewers are no longer just delighted to accept anything thrown on the screen and have begun to demand verbatim captioning. At the same time, market-based incentives are capturing the attention of television executives seeking to make money, and the widespread availability of verbatim captions has been recognised for its multimedia—and therefore commercial—applications. These include its capacity for information retrieval (Miura et al. Agnihotri et al.) and for creative repurposing of television content (Blankinship et al.). Captions and transcripts have been identified as being of particular importance to augmenting the information provided in cooking shows (Miura et al. Oh et al.).Early Captions in the US: Julia Child’s The French ChefJulia Child is indicative of the early period of the cooking genre (Collins and College)—she has been described as “the epitome of the TV chef” (ray 53) and is often credited for making cooking accessible to American audiences through her onscreen focus on normalising techniques that she promised could be mastered at home (ray). She is still recognised for her mastery of the genre, and for her capacity to entertain in a way that stood out from her contemporaries (Collins and College ray).Julia Child’s The French Chef originally aired on the US publicly-funded Public Broadcasting System (PBS) affiliate WBGH from 1963–1973. The captioning of television also began in the 1960s, with educators creating the captions themselves, mainly for educational use in deaf schools (Downey 70). However, there soon came calls for public television to also be made accessible for the deaf and hard of hearing—the debate focused on equality and pushed for recognition that deaf people were culturally erse (Downey 70).The PBS therefore began a trial of captioning programs (Downey 71). These would be “open captions”—characters which were positioned on the screen as part of the normal image for all viewers to see (Downey 71). The trial was designed to determine both the number of D/deaf and hard of hearing people viewing the program, as well as to test if non-D/deaf and hard of hearing viewers would watch a program which had captions (Downey 71). The French Chef was selected for captioning by WBGH because it was their most popular television show in the early 1970s and in 1972 eight episodes of The French Chef were aired using open—albeit inconsistent—captions (Downey 71 Jensema et al. 284).There were concerns from some broadcasters that openly captioned programs would drive away the “hearing majority” (Downey 71). However, there was no explicit study carried out in 1972 on the viewers of The French Chef to determine if this was the case because WBGH ran out of funds to research this further (Downey 71). Nevertheless, Jensema, McCann and Ramsey (284) note that WBGH did begin to re-broadcast ABC World News Tonight in the 1970s with open captions and that this was the only regularly captioned show at the time.Due to changes in technology and fears that not everyone wanted to see captions onscreen, television’s focus shifted from open captions to closed captioning in the 1980s. Captions became encoded, with viewers needing a decoder to be able to access them. However, the high cost of the decoders meant that many could not afford to buy them and adoption of the technology was slow (Youngblood and Lysaght 243 Downey 71). In 1979, the US government had set up the National Captioning Institute (NCI) with a mandate to develop and sell these decoders, and provide captioning services to the networks. This was initially government-funded but was designed to eventually be self-sufficient (Downey 73).PBS, ABC and NBC (but not CBS) had agreed to a trial (Downey 73). However, there was a reluctance on the part of broadcasters to pay to caption content when there was not enough evidence that the demand was high (Downey 73—74). The argument for the provision of captioned content therefore began to focus on the rights of all citizens to be able to access a public service. A complaint was lodged claiming that the Los Angeles station KCET, which was a PBS affiliate, did not provide captioned content that was available elsewhere (Downey 74). When Los Angeles PBS station KCET refused to air captioned episodes of The French Chef, the Greater Los Angeles Council on Deafness (GLAD) picketed the station until the decision was reversed. GLAD then focused on legislation and used the Rehabilitation Act to argue that television was federally assisted and, by not providing captioned content, broadcasters were in violation of the Act (Downey 74).GLAD also used the 1934 Communications Act in their argument. This Act had firstly established the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and then assigned them the right to grant and renew broadcast licenses as long as those broadcasters served the ‘‘public interest, convenience, and necessity’’ (Michalik, cited in Downey 74). The FCC could, argued GLAD, therefore refuse to renew the licenses of broadcasters who did not air captioned content. However, rather than this argument working in their favour, the FCC instead changed its own procedures to avoid such legal actions in the future (Downey 75). As a result, although some stations began to voluntarily caption more content, it was not until 1996 that it became a legally mandated requirement with the introduction of the Telecommunications Act (Youngblood and Lysaght 244)—too late for The French Chef.My Kitchen Rules: Captioning BreachWhereas The French Chef presented instructional cooking programming from a kitchen set, more recently the food genre has moved away from the staged domestic kitchen set as an instructional space to use real-life domestic kitchens and more competitive multi-bench spaces. The Australian program MKR straddles this shift in the cooking genre with the first half of each season occurring in domestic settings and the second half in Iron Chef style studio competition (see Oren for a discussion of the influence of Iron Chef on contemporary cooking shows).All broadcast channels in Australia are mandated to caption 100 per cent of programs aired between 6am and midnight. However, the 2013 MKR Grand Final broadcast by Channel Seven Brisbane Pty Ltd and Channel Seven Melbourne Pty Ltd (Seven) failed to transmit 10 minutes of captions some 30 minutes into the 2-hour program. The ACMA received two complaints relating to this. The first complaint, received on 27 April 2013, the same evening as the program was broadcast, noted ‘[the D/deaf community] … should not have to miss out’ (ACMA, Report No. 3046 3). The second complaint, received on 30 April 2013, identified the crucial nature of the missing segment and its effect on viewers’ overall enjoyment of the program (ACMA, Report No. 3046 3).Seven explained that the relevant segment (approximately 10 per cent of the program) was missing from the captioning file, but that it had not appeared to be missing when Seven completed its usual captioning checks prior to broadcast (ACMA, Report No. 3046 4). The ACMA found that Seven had breached the conditions of their commercial television broadcasting licence by “failing to provide a captioning service for the program” (ACMA, Report No. 3046 12). The interruption of captioning was serious enough to constitute a breach due, in part, to the nature and characteristic of the program:the viewer is engaged in the momentum of the competitive process by being provided with an understanding of each of the competition stages how the judges, guests and contestants interact and their commentaries of the food and the cooking processes during those stages. (ACMA, Report No. 3046 6)These interactions have become a crucial part of the cooking genre, a genre often described as offering a way to acquire cultural capital via instructions in both cooking and ideological food preferences (Oren 31). Further, in relation to the uncaptioned MKR segment, ACMA acknowledged it would have been difficult to follow both the cooking process and the exchanges taking place between contestants (ACMA, Report No. 3046 8). ACMA considered these exchanges crucial to ‘a viewer’s understanding of, and secondly to their engagement with the different inter-related stages of the program’ (ACMA, Report No. 3046 7).An additional complaint was made with regards to the same program broadcast on Prime Television (Northern) Pty Ltd (Prime), a Seven Network affiliate. The complaint stated that the lack of captions was “Not good enough in prime time and for a show that is non-live in nature” (ACMA, Report No. 3124 3). Despite the fact that the ACMA found that “the fault arose from the affiliate, Seven, rather than from the licensee [Prime]”, Prime was also found to also have breached their licence conditions by failing to provide a captioning service (ACMA, Report No. 3124 12).The following year, Seven launched captions for their online catch-up television platform. Although this was a result of discussions with a complainant over the broader lack of captioned online television content, it was also a step that re-established Seven’s credentials as a leader in commercial television access. The 2015 season of MKR also featured their first partially-deaf contestant, Emilie Biggar.Mainstreaming Captions — Inter-Platform CooperationOver time, cooking shows on television have evolved from an informative style (The French Chef) to become more entertaining in their approach (MKR). As Oren identifies, this has seen a shift in the food genre “away from the traditional, instructional format and towards professionalism and competition” (Oren 25). The affordances of television itself as a visual medium has also been recognised as crucial in the popularity of this genre and its more recent transmedia turn. That is, following Joshua Meyrowitz’s medium theory regarding how different media can afford us different messages, televised cooking shows offer audiences stylised knowledge about food and cooking beyond the traditional cookbook (Oren ray). In addition, cooking shows are taking their product beyond just television and increasing their inter-platform cooperation (Oren)—for ex le, MKR has a comprehensive companion website that viewers can visit to watch whole episodes, obtain full recipes, and view shopping lists. While this can be viewed as a modern take on Julia Child’s cookbook success, it must also be considered in the context of the increasing focus on multimedia approaches to cooking instructions (Hamada et al., Multimedia Integration Cooking Navi Oh et al.). Audiences today are more likely to attempt a recipe if they have seen it on television, and will use transmedia to download the recipe. As Oren explains:foodism’s ascent to popular culture provides the backdrop and motivation for the current explosion of food-themed formats that encourages audiences’ investment in their own expertise as critics, diners, foodies and even wanna-be professional chefs. FoodTV, in turn, feeds back into a web-powered, gastro-culture and critique-economy where appraisal outranks delight. (Oren 33)This explosion in popularity of the web-powered gastro culture Oren refers to has led to an increase in appetite for step by step, easy to access instructions. These are being delivered using captions. As a result of the legislation and activism described throughout this paper, captions are more widely available and, in many cases, now describe what is said onscreen verbatim. In addition, the mainstream commercial benefits and uses of captions are being explored. Captions have therefore moved from a specialist assistive technology for people who are D/deaf or hard of hearing to become recognised as an important resource for creative television viewers regardless of their hearing (Blankinship et al.). With captions becoming more accessible, accurate, financially viable, and mainstreamed, their potential as an additional television resource is of interest. As outlined above, within the cooking show genre—especially with its current multimedia turn and the demand for captioned recipe instructions (Hamada et al., “Multimedia Integration”, “Cooking Navi” Oh et al.)—this is particularly pertinent.Hamada et al. identify captions as a useful technology to use in the increasingly popular educational, yet entertaining, cooking show genre as the required information—ingredient lists, instructions, recipes—is in high demand (Hamada et al., “Multimedia Integration” 658). They note that cooking shows often present information out of order, making them difficult to follow, particularly if a recipe must be sourced later from a website (Hamada et al., “Multimedia Integration” 658-59 Oh et al.). Each step in a recipe must be navigated and coordinated, particularly if multiple recipes are being completed at the same times (Hamada, et al., Cooking Navi) as is often the case on cooking shows such as MKR. Using captions as part of a software program to index cooking videos facilitates a number of search affordances for people wishing to replicate the recipe themselves. As Kyeong-Jin et al. explain:if food and recipe information are published as linked data with the scheme, it enables to search food recipe and annotate certain recipe by communities (sic). In addition, because of characteristics of linked data, information on food recipes can be connected to additional data source such as products for ingredients, and recipe websites can support users’ decision making in the cooking domain. (Oh et al. 2)The advantages of such a software program are many. For the audience there is easy access to desired information. For the number of commercial entities involved, this consumer desire facilitates endless marketing opportunities including product placement, increased ratings, and software development. Interesting, all of this falls outside the “usual” parameters of captions as purely an assistive device for a few, and facilitates the mainstreaming—and perhaps beginnings of acceptance—of captions.ConclusionCaptions are a vital accessibility feature for television viewers who are D/deaf or hard of hearing, not just from an informative or entertainment perspective but also to facilitate social inclusion for this culturally erse group. The availability and quality of television captions has moved through three stages. These can be broadly summarised as early yet inconsistent captions, captions becoming more widely available and accurate—often as a direct result of activism and legislation—but not yet fully verbatim, and verbatim captions as adopted within mainstream software applications. This paper has situated these stages within the television cooking genre, a genre often remarked for its appeal towards inclusion and cultural capital.If television facilitates social inclusion, then food television offers vital cultural capital. While Julia Child’s The French Chef offered the first ex le of television captions via open captions in 1972, a lack of funding means we do not know how viewers (both hearing and not) actually received the program. However, at the time, captions that would be considered unacceptable today were received favourably (Jensema, McCann and Ramsey Newell)—anything was deemed better than nothing. Increasingly, as the focus shifted to closed captioning and the cooking genre embraced a more competitive approach, viewers who required captions were no longer happy with missing or inconsistent captioning quality. The was particularly significant in Australia in 2013 when several viewers complained to ACMA that captions were missing from the finale of MKR. These captions provided more than vital cooking instructions—their lack prevented viewers from understanding conflict within the program. Following this breach, Seven became the only Australian commercial television station to offer captions on their web based catch-up platform. While this may have gone a long way to rehabilitate Seven amongst D/deaf and hard of hearing audiences, there is the potential too for commercial benefits. Caption technology is now being mainstreamed for use in cooking software applications developed from televised cooking shows. These allow viewers—both D/deaf and hearing—to access information in a completely new, and inclusive, way.ReferencesAgnihotri, Lalitha, et al. “Summarization of Video Programs Based on Closed Captions.” 4315 (2001): 599–607.Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA). Investigation Report No. 3046. 2013. 26 Apr. 2017 www.acma.gov.au/~/media/Diversity%20Localism%20and%20Accessibility/Investigation%20reports/Word%20document/3046%20My%20Kitchen%20Rules%20Grand%20Final%20docx.docx .———. Investigation Report No. 3124. 2014. 26 Apr. 2017 www.acma.gov.au/~/media/Diversity%20Localism%20and%20Accessibility/Investigation%20reports/Word%20document/3124%20NEN%20My%20Kitchen%20Rules%20docx.docx .Blankinship, E., et al. “Closed Caption, Open Source.” BT Technology Journal 22.4 (2004): 151–59.Collins, Kathleen, and John Jay College. “TV Cooking Shows: The Evolution of a Genre”. Flow: A Critical Forum on Television and Media Culture (7 May 2008). 14 May 2017 /05/tv-cooking-shows-the-evolution-of-a-genre/ .Downey, Greg. “Constructing Closed-Captioning in the Public Interest: From Minority Media Accessibility to Mainstream Educational Technology.” The Journal of Policy, Regulation and Strategy for Telecommunications, Information and Media 9.2/3 (2007): 69–82. DOI: 10.1108/14636690710734670.Hamada, Reiko, et al. “Multimedia Integration for Cooking Video Indexing.” Advances in Multimedia Information Processing-PCM 2004 (2005): 657–64.Hamada, Reiko, et al. “Cooking Navi: Assistant for Daily Cooking in Kitchen.” Proceedings of the 13th Annual ACM International Conference on Multimedia. ACM.Ibrahim, Yasmin. “Food Porn and the Invitation to Gaze: Ephemeral Consumption and the Digital Spectacle.” International Journal of E-Politics (IJEP) 6.3 (2015): 1–12.Jensema, Carl J., Ralph McCann, and Scott Ramsey. “Closed-Captioned Television Presentation Speed and Vocabulary.” American Annals of the Deaf 141.4 (1996): 284–292.Matwick, Kelsi, and Keri Matwick. “Inquiry in Television Cooking Shows.” Discourse & Communication 9.3 (2015): 313–30.Meyrowitz, Joshua. No Sense of Place: The Impact of Electronic Media on Social Behavior. New York: Oxford University Press, 1985.Miura, K., et al. “Automatic Generation of a Multimedia Encyclopedia from TV Programs by Using Closed Captions and Detecting Principal Video Objects.” Eighth IEEE International Symposium on Multimedia (2006): 873–80.Newell, A.F. “Teletext for the Deaf.” Electronics and Power 28.3 (1982): 263–66.Oh, K.J. et al. “Automatic Indexing of Cooking Video by Using Caption-Recipe Alignment.” 2014 International Conference on Behavioral, Economic, and Socio-Cultural Computing (BESC2014) (2014): 1–6.Oren, Tasha. “On the Line: Format, Cooking and Competition as Television Values.” Critical Studies in Television: The International Journal of Television Studies 8.2 (2013): 20–35.Ouellette, Laurie, and James Hay. “Makeover Television, Governmentality and the Good Citizen.” Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies 22.4 (2008): 471–84.ray, krishnendu. “Domesticating Cuisine: Food and Aesthetics on American Television.” Gastronomica 7.1 (2007): 50–63.Youngblood, Norman E., and Ryan Lysaght. “Accessibility and Use of Online Video Captions by Local Television News Websites.” Electronic News 9.4 (2015): 242–256.
Disability and media activism
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 09-03-2018
Disability, communication, and life itself in the COVID-19 pandemic
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 03-05-2020
Who Gets to Play? Disability, Open Literacy, Gaming
Publisher: Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Date: 2019
DOI: 10.5334/CSCI.128
Abstract: Video games are an expanding area of popular culture spanning traditional age, gender and socioeconomic ides and appealing to a erse market. People with disability represent a significant but under researched gaming demographic (Beeston et al., 2018). While this group represent a large portion of the gaming population, inaccessible interfaces and consoles may prevent people with disability from playing games. Despite this, research dating back to 2008 suggests 92% of gamers with disability continue to play games despite these obstacles. This paper aims to put the topic of gamers with disabilities on the agenda for Open Literacies. The paper brings into dialogue research and conceptions of disability and digital media (especially the work of Gerard Goggin, Meryl Alper, Katie Ellis and Elizabeth Ellcessor) with accounts of gamers with disability, and how we might understand digital access as a cultural practice (for instance, the work of Foley & Ferri). This theoretical synthesis leads us to draw attention to the alternative ways in which games can be played and the impacts this has for the disability community. A secondary aim of the paper is to consider the contexts in which disability appears in gaming in popular culture and everyday life. For ex le, therapeutic and educational contexts dominate while recreation is considered less important. The paper concludes with reflections about the ways disabled gamers engage in open literacy to bring accessibility to the forefront and change the rules of the game.
Live fast, die young, become immortal
Publisher: Elsevier
Date: 2012
WeChat and the Voice Donor Campaign
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 27-09-2017
Subverting the Monster
Publisher: Queensland University of Technology
Date: 16-10-2021
DOI: 10.5204/MCJ.2828
Abstract: Introduction The blockbuster DreamWorks film Shrek is a play on the classic fairy tale narrative, where the hero, atop his noble steed, rescues the cursed princess from a dragon-guarded tower. Except the hero is an Ogre, the steed is a talking donkey, the dragon just wants to be loved, and, when they finally break the curse, the princess permanently transforms into an Ogre. From the opening scene, the first movie subverts the viewers’ expectations, offering reflection as well as a critique on “some of the cultural conventions that characterise modernity” (Lacassagne, Nieguth, and Dépelteau). As one of the most successful animated films in history (Lacassagne, Nieguth, and Dépelteau) Shrek is an important text to analyse from a disability perspective. As Amanda Taylor suggests, the film introduces several disability themes that work together to make a social and cultural critique about social exclusion: there are many social and cultural issues within the movie Shrek that should be addressed when looking through a lens of disability. Shrek and Fiona are the very opposite of what society looks at as a fairy tale, yet they are still so popular. The producers of this movie have tackled social issues in a very positive way. Elements such as obesity and economic ersity are portrayed within this movie that show that there is an alternative to stereotyping. Taking Shrek as its case study, this article argues that monstrous images offer complex representations of disability that align with the affirmation model of disability. We begin with a review of key literature before starting a disability analysis of Shrek by drawing parallels between the social exclusion experienced by characters within the film and the effects of social disablement identified within the social model of disability and critical disability studies. We then move beyond the social model of disability to follow the importance of interdependence and disability pride throughout Shrek as it culminates in a representation of the affirmation model of disability. Throughout this article we make parallels between monsters, ogres, freaks (as a form of the monstrous), and characters with disability. Each as constructed as having extraordinary bodies—the non-normative. Reading Monsters through a Disability Lens Critical disability studies theorists often observe the way disability is used within narratives as a metaphor for something else (Mitchell and Snyder Quayson Garland-Thomson Extraordinary Bodies Garland-Thomson Freakery). For Rosemarie Garland-Thomson, this is particularly illustrative in the figure of the monster in literary narratives: the word monster — perhaps the earliest and most enduring name for a singular body — derives from the Latin monstra, meaning to warn, show, or sign, and which has given us the modern verb demonstrate. (Garland-Thomson, Freakery 3) Disability has become a defining characteristic of the monstrous body—“bodies that in their gross failure to approximate to corporeal norms are radically excluded” (Shildrick 2). The field of critical disability studies is concerned with the ways these norms are constructed to exclude certain bodies. Jobling notes that the typical figure of the ogre occurs in folklore across many cultures around the world. The ogre performs the function of “a semi-human monster who commits crimes against the ingroup. The hero triumphs over the ogre, usually by killing him” (Jobling). Ogres, depicted as inhumanly large monstrous characters who eat children, are recognisable as a source of fear. The ogre occupies an important position as a narrative prosthesis (see Mitchell and Snyder) in children’s narratives. The monster therefore exists within narratives as a representation of something else. Reading monsters through a disability lens has been well researched in the critical disability studies field. Studies show how monstrosity is represented in film through disfigurement, typically in contrast to the normative or non-disabled body (Garland-Thomson Extraordinary Bodies). Feminist theory is often applied to gain an insight into “the meanings attributed to the bodies by cultural representation and the consequences of those meanings in the world” (Garland-Thomson Extraordinary Bodies). While several critical disability critiques emphasise the negative disability stereotypes associated with representations of monsters, increasingly theorists are considering the ways these monsters problematise and critique the social construction of the normate (Smith). Martha Stoddard Holmes’s Born This Way: Reading Frankenstein with Disability is a notable ex le of how a monstrous character poses both a critique and representation of society. The Creature forms a “visual identity first from the stares, words, and behaviours of others". She observes “his condition of disability and resulting social exclusion are, as narrated, purely aesthetic in nature, and as such, socially constructed”. Throughout the text, the Creature exemplifies both monstrosity to be feared and vulnerability to be pitied these are features outlined by Margrit Shildrick as concepts that underpin the non-normative body in popular culture. It is evident that the perception of monstrosity is one that is socially constructed, and is largely negative. Susan Marie Schweik suggests a relationship between this negative representation and the ugly laws. The ugly laws refer to a set of laws that prohibited ugly people from participating in society during 1860s through to 1974. The ugly laws focus on non-normative bodies, especially bodies that were disfigured. The phrasing of these laws was such that it removed the personhood of so-called ugly people. For ex le, in the quote “so as to be an unsightly or disgusting object, or an improper person to be allowed in or on the streets” (Schweik), the people phrasing the law objectify its subjects. These archaic ugly laws reflected a societal view that ugly people were frightening to behold, which manifests in fear of the person themselves. Thus, images of non-normative bodies in film and literature were reflected as frightening monsters. These representations described are the typical depiction of non-normative monstrous bodies. While monsters have been consistently read through a disability lens, we aim to demonstrate through this article the importance of representations such as Shrek, as they depict a move towards disability pride and an affirmative model of disability. The Affirmative Model of Disability The affirmative model was developed as part of the disability arts movement. Colin Cameron (Disability Arts 11) asserts “the affirmation model identifies impairment as an important part of people’s identities, to be owned as part of who they are, and not as something to be hidden or regarded as a source of shame". He locates the negative representations of disability in texts mentioned above as a reflection of the values and assumptions related to the medical model of disability. While the medical model positions disability as a problem within the body, the social model locates this so-called problem in society. The affirmative model builds on but also critiques the social model of disability. The social model has been criticised by feminists with disability as over-emphasising “socio-structural barriers and ignoring personal and experiential aspects of disability” (Cameron Developing an Affirmation Model 24). However, the affirmative model retains the definition of disability as being located in social structures, with the addition of a subversion of the dominant cultural narrative which views disability or impairment as inherently negative. While there are still heavily prevalent issues with stereotypes in media, and people with disability continue to be invoked in narratives of monsters a serious attempt to work with people with disability on authentic and positive representation is gaining traction. Inspired by the 2020 Oscar-nominated documentary film Crip C , Netflix-backed documentary filmmakers with disability organisation FWD-Doc has partnered with social impact company Doc Society to release A Toolkit for Inclusion & Accessibility to positively influence disability representation and media access (Mitchell FWD-Doc and Doc Society). This inclusion toolkit ascribes to the affirmative model of disability and makes the following recommendations that in films: people with disability are seen as multi-dimensional characters people’s life is seen as valid and valuable there is engagement in the disability community disability pride is shown intersectionality is shown allyship is shown good-quality audio description and captioning is used disability is not seen as tragic disability is not seen as inspiring disability is not used a punchline people overcoming disability are not shown people with disability are not infantilised no ableist language is used. The following section offers a thematic analysis of Shrek that draws on FWD-Doc’s recommendations. Although almost all these recommendations are achieved in Shrek, this article will focus on the most relevant instances. Findings: Setting Up a Normative Society Due to space limitations we have focussed on the first film in the Shrek franchise in this article. However, at the time of writing this there are four films, a few TV spin-offs, and a Broadway musical production. Lacassagne, Nieguth, and Dépelteau suggest that the first three films form a trilogy based on the original book and follow a “high level of thematic unity”, which continues the reflections and critiques of cultural conventions that are outlined in this article. However the spin-offs and fourth film are suggested to have departed from this thematic structure. The opening scene of Shrek is a fairy tale book being read by a narrator. It is a typical story of a princess being rescued by a handsome knight from a dragon-guarded tower. As the story nears its end, a page of the book is torn out and we hear the narrator say, “what a load of *flushing sound*”. This introduction is setting up an expectation of a film that will subvert the norms, and the film delivers. The viewer is introduced to a multi-dimensional title character who seems joyful, proud, independent, and comfortable in himself. He has hobbies he paints, cooks, and reads. Despite his looks, he is not at all the typical figure of the ogre. Although audiences are introduced to this proud character of Shrek, we soon see that the world he lives in does not treat him positively. Shrek encounters a group of townspeople that are coming to kill him. He tries to scare them away but they are frozen in place, gawking at him. This is indicative of Garland-Thomson’s concept of the stare referred to earlier in this article. The stare occurs when normative members of society encounter people viewed as the other, monsters, and freaks. The stare is depicted as something fascinating and potentially horrifying that compels people to be unable to look away. After encountering this representation of a society that doesn’t accept him, Shrek meets Donkey. Donkey is hiding from people who would persecute him for being different and immediately identifies Shrek as another “freak” and thus an ally. However, Shrek has a harder time accepting that someone might not immediately dismiss him as a monster. Shrek: Listen, little donkey. Take a look at me. What am I?Donkey: Uh—Really tall?Shrek: No! I’m an Ogre. You know. “Grab your torch and pitchforks.” Doesn’t that bother you?Donkey: Nope.Shrek: Really?Donkey: Really, really.Shrek: Oh.Donkey: Man, I like you. What's your name?Shrek: Uh, Shrek.Donkey: Shrek? Well, you know what I like about you, Shrek? You got that kind of I-don't-care-what-nobody-thinks-of-me thing. I like that. I respect that, Shrek. You all right. Although Shrek is comfortable in himself, he has built an opinion based on the view he takes from others. Much like Frankenstein’s monster (Stoddard Holmes), this view is aesthetic in nature and socially constructed. The viewer is then introduced to Lord Maximus Farquaad, who is a fitting representation of someone enforcing the Shrek franchise’s version of the ugly laws. Lord Farquaad frequently objectifies the “freaks”, referring to them as “it” or “that", and he claims that they are “poisoning my perfect world”. The lordship of Duloc he rules over is thus representative of normative society, with a welcoming song that claims Duloc as a “perfect town” and warning “don’t make waves, stay in line and we’ll get on just fine”. Duloc is also represented as a society that follows instructions around societal norms, this is done through the use of cue cards that are shown to the on-screen audience telling them how to react, which they follow. These cue cards also offer a commentary on the constructed nature of this perfect society. Farquaad himself is of short stature and therefore ascribes to Kumari C bell’s observations about the construction of ability. It is only by establishing and then marginalising disability as other that ability can be understood (Kumari C bell). Upon entering the castle, Shrek is discriminated against solely based on appearance. Guards are ordered to kill him as the crowd cheers on. However, as Shrek begins to display physical prowess in the fight, the crowd begins to cheer for him. This indicates a meritocratic society that finds value in Shrek now that he has shown himself to be skilled physically. Findings: Taking an Affirmative Stance After the film sets up this constructed normative society, Shrek and Donkey venture out and continue to disrupt the typical narrative. When Shrek accepts the quest of rescuing a princess instead of just destroying Farquaad, Donkey asks him why, and Shrek responds by describing actions of a typical ogre: “maybe I could have decapitated an entire village and put their heads on a pike”. Instead, he likens himself to an onion, because “onions have layers”, which reinforces the film’s idea that he is a multi-dimensional character. Donkey questions why he could not have used an analogy that everyone likes, such as parfaits, but Shrek explains it is not about what everyone likes. This is a notable ex le of an affirmative stance that values him for being multidimensional even if he is not normative. Shrek and Donkey rescue Princess Fiona from the tower. From the moment she is introduced, she says “this is all wrong” and “this isn’t how it’s supposed to happen". This sentiment can be read as an expression of the confusion the viewer is supposed to be feeling due to the subversion of the typical narrative. However, Shrek has been wearing a helmet and Fiona has not seen that he is an Ogre, meaning she is still treating him like a brave knight. When asked to take off his helmet, Shrek refuses. This is the first time we see Shrek as vulnerable or self-conscious. Shrek wants to be seen as something other than an Ogre. The journey back is long and Fiona’s character gains depth. She is portrayed as unconventional, she is not afraid of Shrek, instead she kills birds, eats rats, burps, fights off bandits, and catches bugs for him to eat. The relationship between Shrek and Fiona grows and Donkey advocates for them to be together, however Shrek is convinced that nobody could see him as anything other than an Ogre. Donkey points out that he did not. Donkey: What exactly is your problem? What do you got against the world?Shrek: I'm not the one with the problem. It’s the world that seems to have a problem. People take one look at me and go, “Aah! Help! Run! A big, stupid, ugly, Ogre!” (Sighs) They judge me before they even know me. That's why I’m better off alone.Donkey: You know? When we met, I didn’t think you were just a big, stupid, ugly, ogre.Shrek: Yeah. I know. Donkey is demonstrating how their shared experience of being “freaks” meant that he accepted his friend from the beginning. This is a notable ex le of disability community. Donkey then discovers Fiona turns into an Ogre at night. After his initial shock, he agrees she is “ugly” but does not show any indication that he cares about it or that it makes her any less valuable to him. This lack of a negative reaction is challenging for Fiona because she harbours self-hatred, similar to the internalised ableism prevalent in some people with disability. This internalised ableism is often based on a desire to be ‘normal’, usually due to a lack of support or exposure to the positive disability community (Blackwater). Donkey tries to help Fiona overcome this internalised stigma, but a miscommunication based on Shrek’s own internalised ableism pulls Shrek and Fiona apart. Donkey, who is quickly becoming the voice of affirmation for the other characters, is ultimately the one who implores Shrek to confront his internalised ableism, and makes him feel loved and accepted. It is important that this comes from another “freak”, as this represents the power in disability community, rather than an able-bodied hero complex that is common in film. This strength in disability community is another notable ex le of the affirmative model of disability. Shrek and Donkey return to Duloc to confront Farquaad and Fiona. We see more representation of a normative society the cue cards are present again, illustrating the constructed nature of normative society. Farquaad alludes again to the ugly laws of the lordship he rules over when he states “it’s rude enough being alive when no one wants you” to Shrek. When Fiona reveals herself to be an Ogre, Farquaad immediately rejects her, but she has already found community and affirmation with Shrek. Rather than being defeated by the now-hero Shrek, Farquaad is eaten by Dragon who is subverting the monstrous archetype of the dragon, instead being the ultimate defeater (Lacassagne, Nieguth, and Dépelteau). The crowd claps, indicating it was merely going along with the normative societal views that had been enforced on the community. A final rebellion against the normative society is indicated when the guard crosses out the cue card and writes “aww” in response to Shrek and Fiona’s first kiss. Shrek: Fiona? Fiona. Are you all right?Fiona: Well, yes. But I don’t understand. I’m supposed to be beautiful.Shrek: But you are beautiful. The conclusion is perhaps one of the most poignant representations of the affirmative model. Shrek and Fiona end up back at their sw where they are free to be Ogres, surrounded by other “freaks” as well as non-freak allies they’ve made along the way. They are flourishing in their proud community, surrounded by intersectional creatures. Although the first Shrek movie is a story about overcoming, it is not about people overcoming their monstrosity/disability. Instead, the film is about people overcoming societal and internalised views that disable them, and embracing a community that takes pride in difference. Conclusion Within critical disability studies, monsters are recognised as existing in the realm of hyper-representation. They are used within narratives to represent and reveal something else. As Garland-Thomson explains, monsters take on a semantic distinction to demonstrate the non-normative body. The ogre in children’s literature and popular culture is a monstrous figure used as a narrative prosthesis to incite fear. Shrek, however, takes this construction of the monster and subverts it to critique the construction of normative characters and societies in children’s narratives. To make this critique, the film draws on the affirmative model of disability and embraces disability pride through the personal journeys of its lead characters Shrek, Donkey and Fiona. References Blackwater, Amelia. “Disability Community – Our Internalised Ableism.” Deafness Forum of Australia 2020. 23 July 2021. www.disabilityaustraliahub.com.au/disability-community-our-internalised-ableism . Cameron, Colin. “Developing an Affirmation Model of Impairment and Disability.” 2013. ———. “Disability Arts: The Building of Critical Community Politics and Identity.” Politics, Power and Community Development (2016): 199. FWD-Doc, and Doc Society. A Toolkit for Inclusion & Accessibility: Changing the Narrative of Disability in Documentary Film. London: FWD-Doc. Feb. 2021. 2 Aug. 2021 tatic/5dd1c2b5a0f7a568485cbedd/t/602d4708d39c1d1154d0902a/1613581716771/FWD-Doc+Toolkit+small.pdf . Garland-Thomson, Rosemarie. Extraordinary Bodies: Figuring Physical Disability in American Culture and Literature. New York: Columbia University Press, 1997. ———. Freakery : Cultural Spectacles of the Extraordinary Body. New York: New York University Press, 1996. ———. “The Politics of Staring: Visual Rhetorics of Disability in Popular Photography.” Disability Studies: Enabling the Humanities. Eds. Sharon L. Snyder, Brenda Jo Brueggemann, and Rosemarie Garland-Thomson. New York: Modern Language Association of America, 2002. 56–75. . Jobling, Ian. “The Psychological Foundations of the Hero-Ogre Story: A Cross-Cultural Study.” Human Nature 12.3 (2001): 247–272. 2 Aug. 2021 .1007/s12110-001-1009-7 . Kafer, Alison. Feminist, Queer, Crip. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2013. Kumari C bell, Fiona. Contours of Ableism: The Production of Disability and Abledness New York: Palgrave Macmillan 2009. Lacassagne, Aurélie, Tim Nieguth, and François Dépelteau, eds. Investigating Shrek : Power, Identity, and Ideology. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011. Mitchell, David, and Sharon Snyder. Narrative Prosthesis: Disability and the Dependencies of Discourse. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2000. Mitchell, Wendy. “DocSociety, Netflix Launch Groundbreaking Disability and Inclusion Toolkit (Exclusive).” ScreenDaily 25 Feb. 2021. Quayson, Ato. Aesthetic Nervousness : Disability and the Crisis of Representation. New York: Columbia University Press, 2007. Schweik, Susan M. The Ugly Laws: Disability in Public. New York: New York University, 2009. Shildrick, Margrit. Embodying the Monster: Encounters with the Vulnerable Self. London: Sage, 2002. Smith, Angela. Hideous Progeny: Disability, Eugenics, and Classic Horror Cinema. West Sussex: Columbia University Press, 2012. Steig, William. Shrek! New York: Farrar, Straus and Grioux, 1990. Stoddard Holmes, Martha. “Born This Way: Reading Frankenstein with Disability.” Literature and Medicine 36.2 (2018): 372–387. Swain, John, and Sally French. “Towards an Affirmation Model of Disability.” Disability & Society 15.4 (2000): 569–582. Taylor, Amanda. “Shrek’s Portrayal of Disability.” Disability in Children’s Literature 5 May 2017. 13 July 2021 /05/05/shreks-portrayal-of-disability . Thomson, Rosemarie Garland. Extraordinary Bodies: Figuring Physical Disability in American Culture and Literature. New York: Columbia University Press, 2017.
Disability, locative media, and complex ubiquity
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 22-12-2015
Disability and Popular Culture: Focusing Passion, Creating Community and Expressing Defiance
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 23-05-2016
User-Generated Captions: From Hackers, to the Disability Digerati, to Fansubbers
Publisher: Queensland University of Technology
Date: 21-06-2017
DOI: 10.5204/MCJ.1259
Abstract: Writing in the American Annals of the Deaf in 1931, Emil S. Ladner Jr, a Deaf high school student, predicted the invention of words on screen to facilitate access to “talkies”. He anticipated:Perhaps, in time, an invention will be perfected that will enable the deaf to hear the “talkies”, or an invention which will throw the words spoken directly under the screen as well as being spoken at the same time. (Ladner, cited in Downey Closed Captioning)This invention would eventually come to pass and be known as captions. Captions as we know them today have become widely available because of a complex interaction between technological change, volunteer effort, legislative activism, as well as increasing consumer demand. This began in the late 1950s when the technology to develop captions began to emerge. Almost immediately, volunteers began captioning and distributing both film and television in the US via schools for the deaf (Downey, Constructing Closed-Captioning in the Public Interest). Then, between the 1970s and 1990s Deaf activists and their allies began to c aign aggressively for the mandated provision of captions on television, leading eventually to the passing of the Television Decoder Circuitry Act in the US in 1990 (Ellis). This act decreed that any television with a screen greater than 13 inches must be designed/manufactured to be capable of displaying captions. The Act was replicated internationally, with countries such as Australia adopting the same requirements with their Australian standards regarding television sets imported into the country. As other papers in this issue demonstrate, this market ultimately led to the introduction of broadcasting requirements.Captions are also vital to the accessibility of videos in today’s online and streaming environment—captioning is listed as the highest priority in the definitive World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Web Content Accessibility Guideline’s (WCAG) 2.0 standard (W3C, “Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0”). This recognition of the requirement for captions online is further reflected in legislation, from both the US 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act (CVAA) (2010) and from the Australian Human Rights Commission (2014).Television today is therefore much more freely available to a range of different groups. In addition to broadcast channels, captions are also increasingly available through streaming platforms such as Netflix and other subscription video on demand providers, as well as through user-generated video sites like YouTube. However, a clear discrepancy exists between guidelines, legislation and the industry’s approach. Guidelines such as the W3C are often resisted by industry until compliance is legislated.Historically, captions have been both unavailable (Ellcessor Ellis) and inadequate (Ellis and Kent), and in many instances, they still are. For ex le, while the provision of captions in online video is viewed as a priority across international and domestic policies and frameworks, there is a stark contrast between the policy requirements and the practical implementation of these captions. This has led to the active development of a solution as part of an ongoing tradition of user-led development user-generated captions. However, within disability studies, research around the agency of this activity—and the media savvy users facilitating it—has gone significantly underexplored.Agency of ActivityInformation sharing has featured heavily throughout visions of the Web—from Vannevar Bush’s 1945 notion of the memex (Bush), to the hacker ethic, to Zuckerberg’s motivations for creating Facebook in his dorm room in 2004 (Vogelstein)—resulting in a wide agency of activity on the Web. Running through this development of first the Internet and then the Web as a place for a variety of agents to share information has been the hackers’ ethic that sharing information is a powerful, positive good (Raymond 234), that information should be free (Levey), and that to achieve these goals will often involve working around intended information access protocols, sometimes illegally and normally anonymously. From the hacker culture comes the digerati, the elite of the digital world, web users who stand out by their contributions, success, or status in the development of digital technology. In the context of access to information for people with disabilities, we describe those who find these workarounds—providing access to information through mainstream online platforms that are not immediately apparent—as the disability digerati.An acknowledged mainstream member of the digerati, Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web, articulated a vision for the Web and its role in information sharing as inclusive of everyone:Worldwide, there are more than 750 million people with disabilities. As we move towards a highly connected world, it is critical that the Web be useable by anyone, regardless of in idual capabilities and disabilities … The W3C [World Wide Web Consortium] is committed to removing accessibility barriers for all people with disabilities—including the deaf, blind, physically challenged, and cognitively or visually impaired. We plan to work aggressively with government, industry, and community leaders to establish and attain Web accessibility goals. (Berners-Lee)Berners-Lee’s utopian vision of a connected world where people freely shared information online has subsequently been embraced by many key in iduals and groups. His emphasis on people with disabilities, however, is somewhat unique. While maintaining a focus on accessibility, in 2006 he shifted focus to who could actually contribute to this idea of accessibility when he suggested the idea of “community captioning” to video bloggers struggling with the notion of including captions on their videos:The video blogger posts his blog—and the web community provides the captions that help others. (Berners-Lee, cited in Outlaw)Here, Berners-Lee was addressing community captioning in the context of video blogging and user-generated content. However, the concept is equally significant for professionally created videos, and media savvy users can now also offer instructions to audiences about how to access captions and subtitles. This shift—from user-generated to user access—must be situated historically in the context of an evolving Web 2.0 and changing accessibility legislation and policy.In the initial accessibility requirements of the Web, there was little mention of captioning at all, primarily due to video being difficult to stream over a dial-up connection. This was reflected in the initial WCAG 1.0 standard (W3C, “Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0”) in which there was no requirement for videos to be captioned. WCAG 2.0 went some way in addressing this, making captioning online video an essential Level A priority (W3C, “Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0”). However, there were few tools that could actually be used to create captions, and little interest from emerging online video providers in making this a priority.As a result, the possibility of user-generated captions for video content began to be explored by both developers and users. One initial captioning tool that gained popularity was MAGpie, produced by the WGBH National Center for Accessible Media (NCAM) (WGBH). While cumbersome by today’s standards, the arrival of MAGpie 2.0 in 2002 provided an affordable and professional captioning tool that allowed people to create captions for their own videos. However, at that point there was little opportunity to caption videos online, so the focus was more on captioning personal video collections offline. This changed with the launch of YouTube in 2005 and its later purchase by Google (CNET), leading to an explosion of user-generated video content online. However, while the introduction of YouTube closed captioned video support in 2006 ensured that captioned video content could be created (YouTube), the ability for users to create captions, save the output into one of the appropriate captioning file formats, upload the captions, and synchronise the captions to the video remained a difficult task.Improvements to the production and availability of user-generated captions arrived firstly through the launch of YouTube’s automated captions feature in 2009 (Google). This service meant that videos could be uploaded to YouTube and, if the user requested it, Google would caption the video within approximately 24 hours using its speech recognition software. While the introduction of this service was highly beneficial in terms of making captioning videos easier and ensuring that the timing of captions was accurate, the quality of captions ranged significantly. In essence, if the captions were not reviewed and errors not addressed, the automated captions were sometimes inaccurate to the point of hilarity (New Media Rock Stars). These inaccurate YouTube captions are colloquially described as craptions. A #nomorecraptions c aign was launched to address inaccurate YouTube captioning and call on YouTube to make improvements.The ability to create professional user-generated captions across a variety of platforms, including YouTube, arrived in 2010 with the launch of Amara Universal Subtitles (Amara). The Amara subtitle portal provides users with the opportunity to caption online videos, even if they are hosted by another service such as YouTube. The captioned file can be saved after its creation and then uploaded to the relevant video source if the user has access to the location of the video content. The arrival of Amara continues to provide ongoing benefits—it contains a professional captioning editing suite specifically catering for online video, the tool is free, and it can caption videos located on other websites. Furthermore, Amara offers the additional benefit of being able to address the issues of YouTube automated captions—users can benefit from the machine-generated captions of YouTube in relation to its timing, then download the captions for editing in Amara to fix the issues, then return the captions to the original video, saving a significant amount of time when captioning large amounts of video content. In recent years Google have also endeavoured to simplify the captioning process for YouTube users by including its own captioning editors, but these tools are generally considered inferior to Amara (Media Access Australia).Similarly, several crowdsourced caption services such as Viki (ommunity) have emerged to facilitate the provision of captions. However, most of these crowdsourcing captioning services can’t tap into commercial products instead offering a service for people that have a video they’ve created, or one that already exists on YouTube. While Viki was highlighted as a useful platform in protests regarding Netflix’s lack of captions in 2009, commercial entertainment providers still have a responsibility to make improvements to their captioning. As we discuss in the next section, people have resorted extreme measures to hack Netflix to access the captions they need. While the ability for people to publish captions on user-generated content has improved significantly, there is still a notable lack of captions for professionally developed videos, movies, and television shows available online.User-Generated Netflix CaptionsIn recent years there has been a worldwide explosion of subscription video on demand service providers. Netflix epitomises the trend. As such, for people with disabilities, there has been significant focus on the availability of captions on these services (see Ellcessor, Ellis and Kent). Netflix, as the current leading provider of subscription video entertainment in both the US and with a large market shares in other countries, has been at the centre of these discussions. While Netflix offers a comprehensive range of captioned video on its service today, there are still videos that do not have captions, particularly in non-English regions. As a result, users have endeavoured to produce user-generated captions for personal use and to find workarounds to access these through the Netflix system. This has been achieved with some success.There are a number of ways in which captions or subtitles can be added to Netflix video content to improve its accessibility for in idual users. An early guide in a 2011 blog post (Emil’s Celebrations) identified that when using the Netflix player using the Silverlight plug-in, it is possible to access a hidden menu which allows a subtitle file in the DFXP format to be uploaded to Netflix for playback. However, this does not appear to provide this file to all Netflix users, and is generally referred to as a “soft upload” just for the in idual user. Another method to do this, generally credited as the “easiest” way, is to find a SRT file that already exists for the video title, edit the timing to line up with Netflix, use a third-party tool to convert it to the DFXP format, and then upload it using the hidden menu that requires a specific keyboard command to access. While this may be considered uncomplicated for some, there is still a certain amount of technical knowledge required to complete this action, and it is likely to be too complex for many users.However, constant developments in technology are assisting with making access to captions an easier process. Recently, Cosmin Vasile highlighted that the ability to add captions and subtitle tracks can still be uploaded providing that the older Silverlight plug-in is used for playback instead of the new HTML5 player. Others add that it is technically possible to access the hidden feature in an HTML5 player, but an additional Super Netflix browser plug-in is required (Sommergirl). Further, while the procedure for uploading the file remains similar to the approach discussed earlier, there are some additional tools available online such as Subflicks which can provide a simple online conversion of the more common SRT file format to the DFXP format (Subflicks). However, while the ability to use a personal caption or subtitle file remains, the most common way to watch Netflix videos with alternative caption or subtitle files is through the use of the Smartflix service (Smartflix). Unlike other ad-hoc solutions, this service provides a simplified mechanism to bring alternative caption files to Netflix. The Smartflix website states that the service “automatically downloads and displays subtitles in your language for all titles using the largest online subtitles database.”This automatic download and sharing of captions online—known as fansubbing—facilitates easy access for all. For ex le, blog posts suggest that technology such as this creates important access opportunities for people who are deaf and hard of hearing. Nevertheless, they can be met with suspicion by copyright holders. For ex le, a recent case in the Netherlands ruled fansubbers were engaging in illegal activities and were encouraging people to download pirated videos. While the fansubbers, like the hackers discussed earlier, argued they were acting in the greater good, the Dutch antipiracy association (BREIN) maintained that subtitles are mainly used by people downloading pirated media and sought to outlaw the manufacture and distribution of third party captions (Anthony). The fansubbers took the issue to court in order to seek clarity about whether copyright holders can reserve exclusive rights to create and distribute subtitles. However, in a ruling against the fansubbers, the court agreed with BREIN that fansubbing violated copyright and incited piracy. What impact this ruling will have on the practice of user-generated captioning online, particularly around popular sites such as Netflix, is hard to predict however, for people with disabilities who were relying on fansubbing to access content, it is of significant concern that the contention that the main users of user-generated subtitles (or captions) are engaging in illegal activities was so readily accepted.ConclusionThis article has focused on user-generated captions and the types of platforms available to create these. It has shown that this desire to provide access, to set the information free, has resulted in the disability digerati finding workarounds to allow users to upload their own captions and make content accessible. Indeed, the Internet and then the Web as a place for information sharing is evident throughout this history of user-generated captioning online, from Berner-Lee’s conception of community captioning, to Emil and Vasile’s instructions to a Netflix community of captioners, to finally a group of fansubbers who took BRIEN to court and lost. Therefore, while we have conceived of the disability digerati as a conflation of the hacker and the acknowledged digital influencer, these two positions may again part ways, and the disability digerati may—like the hackers before them—be driven underground.Captioned entertainment content offers a powerful, even vital, mode of inclusion for people who are deaf or hard of hearing. Yet, despite Berners-Lee’s urging that everything online be made accessible to people with all sorts of disabilities, captions were not addressed in the first iteration of the WCAG, perhaps reflecting the limitations of the speed of the medium itself. This continues to be the case today—although it is no longer difficult to stream video online, and Netflix have reached global dominance, audiences who require captions still find themselves fighting for access. Thus, in this sense, user-generated captions remain an important—yet seemingly technologically and legislatively complicated—avenue for inclusion.ReferencesAnthony, Sebastian. “Fan-Made Subtitles for TV Shows and Movies Are Illegal, Court Rules.” Arstechnica UK (2017). 21 May 2017 ech-policy/2017/04/fan-made-subtitles-for-tv-shows-and-movies-are-illegal/ .Amara. “Amara Makes Video Globally Accessible.” Amara (2010). 25 Apr. 2017. n/ 2010 .Berners-Lee, Tim. “World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Launches International Web Accessibility Initiative.” Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) (1997). 19 June 2010. www.w3.org/Press/WAI-Launch.html .Bush, Vannevar. “As We May Think.” The Atlantic (1945). 26 June 2010 agazine rint/1969/12/as-we-may-think/3881/ .CNET. “YouTube Turns 10: The Video Site That Went Viral.” CNET (2015). 24 Apr. 2017 ews/youtube-turns-10-the-video-site-that-went-viral/ .Downey, Greg. Closed Captioning: Subtitling, Stenography, and the Digital Convergence of Text with Television. Baltimore: John Hopkins UP, 2008.———. “Constructing Closed-Captioning in the Public Interest: From Minority Media Accessibility to Mainstream Educational Technology.” Info: The Journal of Policy, Regulation and Strategy for Telecommunications, Information and Media 9.2/3 (2007): 69–82.Ellcessor, Elizabeth. “Captions On, Off on TV, Online: Accessibility and Search Engine Optimization in Online Closed Captioning.” Television & New Media 13.4 (2012): 329-352. ontent/early/2011/10/24/1527476411425251.abstract?patientinform-links=yes& legid=sptvns v1 .Ellis, Katie. “Television’s Transition to the Internet: Disability Accessibility and Broadband-Based TV in Australia.” Media International Australia 153 (2014): 53–63.Ellis, Katie, and Mike Kent. “Accessible Television: The New Frontier in Disability Media Studies Brings Together Industry Innovation, Government Legislation and Online Activism.” First Monday 20 (2015). js/index.php/fm/article/view/6170 .Emil’s Celebrations. “How to Add Subtitles to Movies Streamed in Netflix.” 16 Oct. 2011. 9 Apr. 2017 /10/16/how-to-add-subtitles-to-movies-streamed-in-netflix/ .Google. “Automatic Captions in Youtube.” 2009. 24 Apr. 2017 googleblog.blogspot.com.au/2009/11/automatic-captions-in-youtube.html .Jaeger, Paul. “Disability and the Internet: Confronting a Digital Divide.” Disability in Society. Ed. Ronald Berger. Boulder, London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2012.Levey, Steven. Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution. North Sebastopol: O’Teilly Media, 1984.Media Access Australia. “How to Caption a Youtube Video.” 2017. 25 Apr. 2017 mediaaccess.org.au/web/how-to-caption-a-youtube-video .New Media Rock Stars. “Youtube’s 5 Worst Hilariously Catastrophic Auto Caption Fails.” 2013. 25 Apr. 2017 /05/youtubes-5-worst-hilariously-catastrophic-auto-caption-fails/ .Outlaw. “Berners-Lee Applies Web 2.0 to Improve Accessibility.” Outlaw News (2006). 25 June 2010 age-6946 .Raymond, Eric S. The New Hacker’s Dictionary. 3rd ed. Cambridge: MIT P, 1996.Smartflix. “Smartflix: Supercharge Your Netflix.” 2017. 9 Apr. 2017 www.smartflix.io/ .Sommergirl. “[All] Adding Subtitles in a Different Language?” 2016. 9 Apr. 2017 /netflix/comments/32l8ob/all_adding_subtitles_in_a_different_language/ .Subflicks. “Subflicks V2.0.0.” 2017. 9 Apr. 2017 subflicks.com/ .Vasile, Cosmin. “Netflix Has Just Informed Us That Its Movie Streaming Service Is Now Available in Just About Every Country That Matters Financially, Aside from China, of Course.” 2016. 9 Apr. 2017 ews/how-to-add-custom-subtitles-to-netflix-498579.shtml .Vogelstein, Fred. “The Wired Interview: Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg.” Wired Magazine (2009). 20 Jun. 2010 icenter/2009/06/mark-zuckerberg-speaks/ .W3C. “Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0.” W3C Recommendation (1999). 25 Jun. 2010 www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/ .———. “Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0.” 11 Dec. 2008. 21 Aug. 2013 www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/ .WGBH. “Magpie 2.0—Free, Do-It-Yourself Access Authoring Tool for Digital Multimedia Released by WGBH.” 2002. 25 Apr. 2017 bout/news r_05072002 .YouTube. “Finally, Caption Video Playback.” 2006. 24 Apr. 2017 googlevideo.blogspot.com.au/2006/09/finally-caption-playback.html .
Disability, higher education and e-learning
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 12-12-2018
Looking to the future for critical disability studies
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 12-12-2018
Chinese Social Media Today
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 27-09-2017
Trauma and Disability in Mad Max
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Date: 2019
Complicating a Rudimentary List of Characteristics: Communicating Disability with Down Syndrome Dolls
Publisher: Queensland University of Technology
Date: 12-10-2012
DOI: 10.5204/MCJ.544
Abstract: Apparently some people upon coming across [Down Syndrome dolls] were offended. […] Still, it’s curious, and telling, what gives offense. Was it the shock of seeing a doll not modeled on the normative form that caused such offense? Or the assumption that any representation of Down Syndrome must naturally intend ridicule? Either way, it would seem that we might benefit from an examination of such reactions—especially as they relate to instances of the idealisation of the human form that dolls […] represent. (Faulkner) IntroductionWhen Joanne Faulkner describes public criticism of dolls designed to look like they have Down Syndrome, she draws attention to the need for an examination of the way discourses of disability are communicated. She calls, in particular, for an interrogation of people’s reactions to the disruption of the idealised human form that most dolls adopt. The case of Down Syndrome dolls is fascinating, yet critical discussion of these dolls from a disability or cultural studies perspective is conspicuously lacking. To address this lack, this paper draws upon theories of the cultural construction of disability, beauty, and normalcy (Garland-Thompson, Kumari C bell, Wendell), to explore the way ideas about disability are communicated and circulated. The dominant discourse of disability is medical, where people are diagnosed or identified as disabled if they meet certain criteria, or lists of physical impairments. These lists have a tendency to subsume the disparate qualities of disability (Garland-Thompson) and remove people considered disabled from the social and cultural world in which they live (Snyder and Mitchell 377). While Down Syndrome dolls, produced by Downi Creations and Helga’s European Speciality Toys (HEST) in the US and Europe respectively, are reflective of such lists, they also perform the cultural function of increasing the visibility of disability in society. In addition, the companies distributing these dolls state that they are striving for greater inclusion of people with Down Syndrome (Collins, Parks). However, the effect of the dominance of medicalised discourses of disability can be seen in the public reaction to these dolls. This paper seeks also to bring an interrogation of disability into dialogue with a critical analysis of the discursive function of lists.The paper begins with a consideration of lists as they have been used to define disability and organise knowledge within medicine, and the impact this has had on the position of disability within society. In order to differentiate itself from medical discourses, the emerging social model also relied on lists during the 1980s and 1990s. However, these lists also decontextualised disability by ignoring certain factors for political advantage. The social model, like medicine, tended to ignore the ersity of humanity it was apparently arguing for (Snyder and Mitchell 377). The focus then shifts to the image of Down Syndrome dolls and the ensuing negative interpretation of them focusing, in particular, on reader comments following a Mail Online (Fisher) article. Although the dolls were debated across the blogosphere on a number of disability, special needs parenting, and Down Syndrome specific blogs, people commenting on The Mail Online—a UK based conservative tabloid newspaper—offer useful insights into communication and meaning making around disability. People establish meanings about disability through communication (Hedlund 766). While cultural responses to disability are influenced by a number of paradigms of interpretation such as superstition, religion, and fear, this paper is concerned with the rejection of bodies that do not ascribe to cultural standards of beauty and seeks to explore this paradigm alongside and within the use of lists by the various models of disability. This paper interrogates the use of lists in the way meanings about disability are communicated through the medical diagnostic list, the Down Syndrome dolls, and reactions to them. Each list reduces the disparate qualities and experiences of disability, yet as a cultural artefact, these dolls go some way towards recognising the social and cultural world that medicalised discourses of disability ignore. Drawing on the use of lists within different frameworks of disability, this paper contrasts the in idual, or medical, model of disability (that being disabled is a personal problem) with the social model (that exclusion due to disability is social oppression). Secondly, the paper compares the characteristics of Down Syndrome dolls with actual characteristics of Down Syndrome to conclude that these features aim to be a celebrated, not stigmatised, aspect of the doll. By reasserting alternative notions of the body, the dolls point towards a more erse society where disability can be understood in relation to social oppression. However, these aims of celebration have not automatically translated to a more erse understanding. This paper aims to complicate perceptions of disability beyond a rudimentary list of characteristics through a consideration of the negative public response to these dolls. These responses are an ex le of the cultural subjugation of disability.Lists and the Creation of Normative Cultural ValuesFor Robert Belknap, lists are the dominant way of “organizing data relevant to human functioning” (8). While lists are used in a number of ways and for a variety of purposes, Belknap ides lists into two categories—the practical and the literary. Practical lists store meanings, while literary lists create them (89). Belknap’s recognition of the importance of meaning making is particularly relevant to a cultural interrogation of disability. As Mitchell and Snyder comment:Disability’s representational “fate” is not so much dependant upon a tradition of negative portrayals as it is tethered to inciting the act of meaning-making itself. (6)Disability unites disparate groups of people whose only commonality is that they are considered “abnormal” (Garland-Thompson). Ableism—the beliefs, processes, and practices which produce the ideal body—is a cultural project in which normative values are created in an attempt to neutralise the fact that all bodies are out of control (Kumari C bell). Medical models use diagnostic lists and criteria to remove bodies from their social and cultural context and enforce an unequal power dynamic (Snyder and Mitchell 377).By comparison, the social model of disability shifts the emphasis to situate disability in social and cultural practices (Goggin and Newell 36). Lists have also been integral to the formation of the social model of disability as theorists established binary oppositions between medical and social understandings of disability (Oliver 22). While these lists have no “essential meaning,” through discourse they shape human experience (Liggett). Lists bring disparate items together to structure meaning and organisation. According to Hedlund, insights into the experience of disability—which is neither wholly medical nor wholly social—can be found in the language we use to communicate ideas about disability (766). For ex le, while the recent production of children’s dolls designed to reflect a list of the physical features of Down Syndrome (Table 2) may have no inherent meaning, negative public reception reveals recognisable modes of understanding disability. Down Syndrome dolls are in stark contrast to dolls popularly available which assume a normative representation. For Blair and Shalmon (15), popular children’s toys communicate cultural standards of beauty. Naomi Wolf describes beauty as a socially constructed normative value used to disempower women in particular. The idealisation of the human form is an aspect of children’s toys that has been criticised for perpetuating a narrow conception of beauty (Levy 189). Disability is likewise subject to social construction and is part of a collective social reality beyond diagnostic lists (Hedlund 766).Organising Knowledge: The Social vs. Medical Model of DisabilityDisability has long been moored in medical cultures and institutions which emphasise a sterile ideal of the body based on a diagnosis of biological difference as deviance. For ex le, in 1866, John Langdon Down sought to provide a diagnostic classification system for people with, what would later come to be called (after him), Down Syndrome. He focused on physical features:The hair is […] of a brownish colour, straight and scanty. The face is flat and broad, and destitute of prominence. The cheeks are roundish, and extended laterally. The eyes are obliquely placed, and the internal canthi more than normally distant from one another. The palpebral fissure is very narrow. The forehead is wrinkled transversely from the constant assistance which the levatores palpebrarum derive from the occipito-frontalis muscle in the opening of the eyes. The lips are large and thick with transverse fissures. The tongue is long, thick, and is much roughened. The nose is small. The skin has a slight dirty yellowish tinge, and is deficient in elasticity, giving the appearance of being too large for the body. (Down)These features form what Belknap would describe as a “pragmatic” list (12). For Belknap, scientific classification, such as the description Langdon Down offers above, introduces precision and validation to the use of lists (167). The overt principle linking these disparate characteristics together is the normative body from which these features deviate. Medicalised discourses, such as Down’s list, have been linked with the institutionalisation of people with this condition and their exclusion from the broader community (Hickey-Moody 23). Such emphasis on criteria to proffer diagnosis removes and decontextualises bodies from the world in which they live (Snyder and Mitchell 370). This world may in fact be the disabling factor, rather than the person’s body. The social model emerged in direct opposition to medicalised definitions of disability as a number of activists with disabilities in the United Kingdom formed The Union of Physically Impaired Against Segregation (UPIAS) and concluded that people with disability are disabled not by their bodies but by a world structured to exclude their bodies (Finkelstein 13). By separating disability (socially created) from impairment (the body), disability is understood as society’s unwillingness to accommodate the needs of people with impairments. The British academic and disability activist Michael Oliver was central to the establishment of the social model of disability. Following the activities of the UPIAS, Oliver (re)defined disability as a “form of social oppression,” and created two lists (reproduced below) to distinguish between the social and in idual (or medical) models of disability. By utilising the list form in this way, Oliver both provided a repository of information regarding the social model of disability and contextualised it in direct opposition to what he describes as the in idual model. These lists present the social model as a coherent discipline, in an easy to understand format. As Belknap argues, the suggestion of order is a major tool of the list (98). Oliver’s list suggests a clear order to the emerging social model of disability—disability is a problem with society, not an in idual. However, this list was problematic because it appeared to disregard impairment within the experience of disability. As the “impersonal became political” (Snyder and Mitchell 377), impairment became the unacknowledged ambiguity in the binary opposition the social model was attempting to create (Shakespeare 35). Nevertheless, Oliver’s lists successfully enforced a desired order to the social model of disability. The in idual modelThe social modelPersonal tragedy theorySocial oppression theoryPersonal problemSocial problemIn idual treatmentSocial actionMedicalisationSelf helpProfessional dominanceIn idual and collective responsibilityExpertiseExperienceAdjustmentAffirmationIn idual identityCollective identityPrejudiceDiscriminationAttitudesBehaviourCareRightsControlChoicePolicyPoliticsIn idual adaptation Social changeTable 1 The In idual v Social Model of Disability (Oliver)The social model then went through a period of “lists,” especially when discussing media and culture. Positive versus negative portrayals of disability were identified and scholars listed strategies for the appropriate representation of disability (Barnes, Barnes Mercer and Shakespeare). The representations of impairment or the physical markers of disability were discouraged as the discipline concerned itself with establishing disability as a political struggle against a disabling social world. Oliver’s lists arrange certain “facts” about disability. Disability is framed as a social phenomenon where certain aspects are emphasised and others left out. While Oliver explains that these lists were intended to represent extreme ends of a continuum to illustrate the distinction between disability and impairment (33), these are not mutually exclusive categories (Shakespeare 35). Disability is not simply a list of physical features, nor is it a clear distinction between in idual/medical and social models. By utilising lists, the social model reacts to and attempts to move beyond the particular ordering provided by the medical model, but remains tied to a system of classification that imposes order on human functioning. Critical analysis of the representation of disability must re-engage the body by moving beyond binaries and pragmatic lists. While lists organise data central to human functioning, systems of meaning shape the organisation of human experience. Down Syndrome dolls, explored in the next section, complicate the distinction between the medical and social models.Down Syndrome DollsThese dolls are based on composites of a number of children with Down Syndrome (Hareyan). Helga Parks, CEO of HEST, describes the dolls as a realistic representation of nine physical features of Down Syndrome. Likewise, Donna Moore of Downi Creations employed a designer to oversee the production of the dolls which boast 13 features of Down Syndrome (Velasquez). These features are listed in the table below. HEST Down Syndrome Dolls Downi CreationsSmall ears set low on head with a fold at the topSmall ears with a fold at the topEars set low on the headSmall mouthSmall mouthProtruding tongueSlightly protruding tongueShortened fingers Shortened fingersPinkie finger curves inwardAlmond shaped eyesAlmond-shaped eyesHorizontal crease in palm of handHorizontal crease in palm of handGap between first and second toeA gap between the first and second toesShortened toesFlattened back of headFlattened back of headFlattened bridge across nose Flattened bridge across noseOptional: An incision in the chest to indicate open-heart surgery Table 2: Down Syndrome Dolls (Parks, Velasquez) Achieving the physical features of Down Syndrome is significant because Parks and Moore wanted children with the condition to recognise themselves:When a child with Down’s syndrome [sic.] picks up a regular doll, he doesn’t see himself, he sees the world’s perception of “perfect.” Our society is so focused on bodily perfection. (Cresswell)Despite these motivations, studies show that children with Down Syndrome prefer to play with “typical dolls” that do not reflect the physical characteristics of Down Syndrome (Cafferty 49). According to Cafferty, it is possible that children prefer typical dolls because they are “more attractive” (49). Similar studies of erse groups of children have shown that children prefer to play with dolls they perceive as fitting into social concepts of beauty (Abbasi). Deeply embedded cultural notions of beauty—which exclude disability (see Morris)—are communicated from childhood (Blair & Shalmon 15). Notions of bodily perfection dominate children’s toys and Western culture in general as Cresswell comments above. Many bodies, not just those deemed “disabled,” do not conform to these cultural standards. Cultural ideals of beauty and an idealisation of the human body according to increasingly narrow parameters are becoming conflated with conceptions of normality (Wendell 86). Recognition of disability as subject to cultural rejection allows us to see “beauty and normalcy [as] a series of practices and positions [taken] in order to avoid the stigmatization of ugliness and abnormality” (Garland-Thompson). The exaggerated features of the doll problematise the idea that people with disability should strive to appear as nondisabled as possible and in turn highlights that some people, such as those with Down Syndrome, cannot “pass” as nondisabled and must therefore navigate a life and community that is not welcoming. While lists of the features of Down Syndrome store associated medicalised meanings, the discussion of the dolls online (the medium through which they are sold) provides insight into the cultural interpretation of disability and the way meaning is made. The next section of the paper considers a selection of negative responses to the Down Syndrome dolls that followed an article published in Mail Online (Fisher). What Causes Offence? Prior to Down Syndrome dolls, the majority of “disability dolls” were constructed through their accessories rather than through the dolls’ physical form and features. Wheelchairs, white canes, guide dogs and harnesses, plastic walkers, leg braces, and hearing aids could be purchased for use with dolls. Down Syndrome dolls look different as the features of impairment are embedded in the dolls’ construction. While accessories have a more temporary feel about them, the permanence of the impairments attributed to the doll was problematic for some who felt it projected a negative image of disability. Listed below are several negative comments following an article published in Mail Online (Fisher):What a grim world we are living in. No longer are dollies for play, for make believe, or for fun. Now it all about self image and psychological “help.” We “disabled” know we are “disabled”—we don’t need a doll to remind us of that! Stop making everything PC let children be children and play and laugh once again!I think it’s sick and patronising.Who on earth are those education “experts?” Has nobody told them that you don’t educate children by mirroring their defects/weaknesses/negative traits but by doing exactly the opposite, mirroring back the BEST in them?The Downs Syndrome doll looks like they took the physical traits and presented them in an exaggerated way to make them more noticeable. That doll does not look attractive to me at all. If someone has a child that WANTS such a doll, fine. I can’t really see how it would help many of them, it would be like a huge sign saying “You are different.”The terminology used (grim, sick, patronising, defect, weak, negative, unattractive, different) to describe disability in these posts is significant. These descriptions are ideological categories which disadvantage and devalue “bodies that do not conform to certain cultural standards” (Garland-Thompson). Implicit and explicit in all of these comments is the sense that disability and Downs Syndrome in particular is undesirable, unattractive even. When listed together, like Belknap’s literary lists, they are not random or isolated interpretations they form part of a larger system of meaning making around disability.These responses are informed by the notion that in order to gain equality in society, people with disability must suppress their difference and focus instead on how they are really just like everybody else. However, this focus ignores barriers to inclusion, such as in the rejection of bodies that do not ascribe to cultural standards of beauty. An increasing visibility of impairment in popular culture such as children’s toys advances an understanding of disability as ersity through difference and not something inherently bad. ConclusionPeter Laudin of Pattycake Doll, a company which sells Black, Hispanic, Asian, and Disabled dolls, has found that children “love all dolls unconditionally whether it’s special needs or not” (Lee Adam). He suggests that the majority of the negative responses to the Down Syndrome dolls stem from prejudice (Lee Adam). Dolls popularly available idealise the human form and assume a normative representation. While this has been criticised for communicating damaging standards of beauty from childhood (Levy, Blair and Shalmon), critiques about disability are not as widely understood. The social and medical models of disability focus attention on certain aspects of disability through lists however, the reduction of diagnostic criteria in the form of a list (whether medical or social) decontextualises disability from the social and cultural world. Thus, the list form, while useful, has elided the disparate qualities of disability. As Belknap argues, lists “ask us to make them meaningful” (xv). Although the dolls discussed in this paper have been criticised for stereotyping and emphasising the difference between children with disability and those without, an inclusion of the physical features of Down Syndrome is consistent with recent moves within critical disability studies to re-engage the body (Shakespeare 35). As Faulkner notes in the epigraph to this paper, an examination of negative reactions to these dolls reveals much about the cultural position of people with disability. References Abbasi, Jennifer. “Why 6-Year Old Girls Want to be Sexy.” Live Science 16 July (2012). 30 Aug. 2012 ‹1609-self-sexualization-young-girls.html›. Barnes, Colin. Disabling Imagery and the Media: An Exploration of the Principles for Media Representations of Disabled People. Krumlin Halifax: Ryburn Publishing, 1992. 5 Aug. 2012 www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies/archiveuk/Barnes/disabling%20imagery.pdf.Barnes, Colin, Geoff Mercer, and Tom Shakespeare. Exploring Disability: A Sociological Introduction. Malden: Polity Press, 1999.Belknap, Robert. The List: The Uses and Pleasures of Cataloguing. New Haven: Yale U P, 2004.Blair, Lorrie, and Maya Shalmon. “Cosmetic Surgery and the Cultural Construction of Beauty.” Art Education 58.3 (2005): 14-18.Cafferty, Diana De Rosa. A Doll Like Me: Do Children with Down Syndrome Prefer to Play with Dolls That Have the Physical Features Associated with Down Syndrome? MS thesis. U of California, 2012. C bell, Fiona Kumari. Contours of Ableism: The Production of Disability and Abledness. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.Collins, Allyson. “Dolls with Down Syndrome May Help Kids.” ABC News. 27 Jun. 2008. 4 Oct. 2012 ‹abcnews.go.com/Health/Parenting/story?id=5255393& age=1#.UGzQXK6T-XP›. Cresswell, Adam. “Dolls with Disability Divide Opinion.” The Australian 12 Jul. 2008. 26 Dec. 2008 ‹www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24000338-23289,00.html›.Down, John Langdon. “Observations on an Ethnic Classification of Idiots.” Neonatology on the Web. 1866. 3 Aug. 2012 ‹lassics/down.html›.Faulkner, Joanne “Disability Dolls.” What Sorts of People? 26 Jun. 2008. 29 Aug. 2012 ‹008/06/26/disability-dolls/›.Finkelstein, Vic. “Representing Disability.” Disabling Barriers—Enabling Environments. Ed. John Swain, et al. Los Angeles: Sage, 2004. 13-20.Fisher, Lorraine. “Parents’ Fury at ‘Down's Syndrome Dolls’ Designed to Help Children Deal with Disability.” Mail Online 7 Jul. 2008. 26 Dec. 2008. ‹www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1032600/Parents-fury-Downs-Syndrome-dolls-designed-help-children-deal-disability.html›. Garland-Thomson, Rosemarie. “Re-Shaping, Re-Thinking, Re-Defining: Feminist Disability Studies.” The Free Library 1 Jan. 2008. 3 Aug. 2012. ‹www.thefreelibrary.com/Re-shaping, Re-thinking, Re-defining: Feminist Disability Studies.-a084377500›.Goggin, Gerard and Christopher Newell. Disability in Australia: Exposing a Social Apartheid. Sydney: U of New South Wales, 2005.Hareyan, Armen. “Using Dolls to Reduce the Stigma of Down Syndrome.” EMax Health. 4 Dec. 2008. Jan 2009 ‹/22865.html›.Hedlund, Marianne. “Disability as a Phenomenon: A Discourse of Social and Biological Understanding.” Disability & Society. 15.5 (2000): 765-80.Hickey-Moody, Anna. Unimaginable Bodies. Netherlands: Sense Publishers, 2009.Lee Adams, William. “New Dolls on the Block.” Time Magazine 19 Mar. 2009. 13 Dec. 2009. ‹ime/magazine/article/0,9171,1886457,00.html›.Levy, Ariel. Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture. Collingwood: Black Inc. 2010.Liggett, Helen. “Stars are not Born: An Interpretive Approach to the Politics of Disability” in Disability Studies: Past Present and Future. Ed. Len Barton and Mike Oliver. Leeds: The Disability Press, 1997. 178-194.Mitchell, David and Sharon Snyder. Narrative Prosthesis: Disability and the Dependencies of Discourse. Ann Arbor, The U of Michigan P, 2000.Morris, Jenny “A Feminist Perspective.” Framed. Ed. Ann Pointon & Chris Davies. London: British Film Institute, 1997. 21-30. Oliver, Michael. Understanding Disability: From Theory to Practice. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 1996.Parks, Helga. “New Doll Is Child’s Best Friend.” HEST Press Release, 2005. Shakespeare, Tom. Disability Rights and Wrongs. London: Routledge, 2006.Snyder, Sharon, and David Mitchell. “Re-Engaging the Body: Disability Studes and the Resistance to Embodiment.” Public Culture 13.3 (2001): 367-89.Velasquez, Leticia. “Downi Creations.” 2007. 4 Dec. 2009. ‹007/08/downi-creations.html›.Wendell, Susan. The Rejected Body: Feminist Philosophical Reflections on Disability. New York: Routledge, 1996.Wolf, Naomi. The Beauty Myth: How Images of Beauty Are Used against Women. New York: Harper Perennial, 2002 [1991].
People with disability and new disaster communications: access and the social media mash-up
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 16-03-2015
Disability Media Work
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 31-10-2019
The Pandemic Preferred User
Publisher: University of Texas at Arlington Libraries
Date: 09-2020
Disability and Social Media
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 30-10-2013
From Bondi to Fairfield: NSW COVID-19 press conferences, health messaging, and social inequality
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 18-03-2023
DOI: 10.1177/1329878X221087732
Abstract: The use of media sources increases exponentially during a health crisis or disaster. Similarly, digital health information and misinformation can spread quickly through social media. From the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the press conference has been one of the federal, state, and territory governments’ key outlets for providing updates, containing misinformation, reassuring constituents, and articulating public health measures. This article focuses on NSW press conferences relating to the major Delta outbreak in Australia. The article looks at the press conferences as they pertain to the NSW government's controversial targeting of the lower socioeconomic and ethnically erse south-west ‘hotspot’ or ‘LGA of concern’, Fairfield, which turned the LGA into an area of intense policing. We argue strategic manoeuvring in the press conferences, through the in idualisation of responsibility and blame shifting, formed part of the NSW government's attempts to minimise political fallout.
Moving Pictures: Raising Awareness of Dementia in CALD Communities Through Multimedia
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 11-2019
DOI: 10.1093/GERONI/IGZ038.1693
Abstract: Limited awareness of dementia in people from culturally and linguistically erse (CALD) backgrounds often results in delayed diagnosis, poorer prognosis, and a higher burden of care on families and health systems. Given the rapidly ageing and multicultural populations in migrant-receiving countries such as Australia and the United States, this disparity needs to be addressed urgently. This project aimed to inform and educate people from five linguistically erse backgrounds – Hindi, Tamil, Mandarin, Cantonese, and Arabic – about dementia. A mixed methods, multimedia design comprising video-interviews with 76 participants including carers from the five language groups and key service providers was employed. Data were gathered nationally across Australia in 2018 and thematically analysed. Data were used to co-produce 15 short films, comics, and a mobile-optimised website from which data analytics were measured. The films and comics focused on dementia detection and timely diagnosis, how to navigate the aged care system, and the importance of self-care. Analytics data is currently being collected online and via community forums. In conclusion, co-production methods in tandem with digital multimedia are fundamental to developing culturally salient interventions to address dementia disparities in CALD populations in Australia and internationally.
Disability media work: Opportunities and obstacles
Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan US
Date: 2016
Television's transition to the Internet: Disability accessibility and broadband-based TV in Australia
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 11-2014
DOI: 10.1177/1329878X1415300107
Abstract: Whereas entertainment has featured negatively in the broader NBN debate currently occurring in Australia, within the disability sector it has been recognised as revolutionary. Government, industry and technical analysts describe digital television, particularly that delivered via broadband, as potentially enabling to people with vision and hearing impairments through the more widespread provision of accessibility features such as audio description and closed captions. This article interrogates the approach to accessibility taken by two case studies of broadband-based television: Netflix and catch-up TV. Netflix, which is not officially available in Australia, is often presented as the future of television, while catch-up services provide an ex le of the current broadband-based television paradigm in this country. Although accessibility features may be available on broadcast television or DVD release, each of these forms of broadband-based television has either previously (Netflix) or currently (catch-up) stripped accessible functions to stream online. The discussion reflects on both activist interventions of people with disability and the industry standards.
Related Organisations
Related Funding Activities
Navigating Urban Spaces
Start Date: 2017
End Date: 2019
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityDisability And Digital TV: Access, Representation And Reception
Start Date: 2013
End Date: 2015
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityMoving Pictures: Using Digital Media To Improve Dementia Care In India
Start Date: 2020
End Date: 2024
Funder: Alzheimer's Association
View Funded ActivityThe Evolution Of Disability Arts In Australia: Practices, Legacies, And Cultural Heritage
Start Date: 2020
End Date: 2023
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityDiscovery Early Career Researcher Award - Grant ID: DE130101712
Start Date: 04-2013
End Date: 04-2018
Amount: $369,706.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivitySpecial Research Initiatives - Grant ID: SR200200003
Start Date: 04-2021
End Date: 03-2025
Amount: $227,131.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityDiscovery Projects - Grant ID: DP170104875
Start Date: 2017
End Date: 07-2020
Amount: $187,222.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded Activity