I just wanted to respond to Steve on his continued call for the use of iPods/iPhones (or other portable devices) to watch captions at the cinemas.

To me, this is at best a “Plan B” approach. In any case, it certainly isn’t an equivalent experience to that of a hearing person at the cinema and I can’t see how it can be used to justify the cinema industry’s lack of action on accessibility for almost 20 years.

Whilst I have only tried it a couple of times, there still seems to be too many variables in play (such as the possibility of different caption versions existing in different countries, the quality and timing of captions, getting the positioning right and maintaining it without wrecking your neck and so on).

I applaud this forum and Gazza for continuing to take the fight up to the cinemas as it is the right thing to do!

Finally, if I can end with a question – there are a lot of statements made that using open captions at the cinema ruins the cinema experience for those without hearing loss. These are seemingly put forward as gospel. I have done a quick check of my family and immediate circle of friends and they would happily attend an open captioned screening with me.

Where is all of the evidence (research studies, independent surveys, etc) to support this statement which is advanced with monotonous regularity by those who are against this “easy” solution for accessibility?

Gazza; it’s difficult to know where to start when it comes to addressing your comprehensive failure to understand or address these issues. I do know what you do for a living, and it is not in any field that is relevant to handling logistics or processes in real businesses. This shows through in your approach, and it is a disaster.

The primary point, and one that cannot be bypassed, is that a press release was made without any fact checking, and incorrectly “quotes” Mr Sarfaty with words that were either not said or were out of context. Mr Sarfaty has been very generous in his response, but the fact remains that you could be sued. Mr Sarfaty would be well within his rights to take Dean Barton-Smith and Catherine Leos to a court of law and have the matter adjuciated in that realm.

That does not leave any room for responses where you make further demands. The only thing that should be done is an unqualified apology, and retraction of any and all materials that contribute to this fallacious “quote” being further disseminated. You should further publish the apology and note the gracious response from Mr Sarfaty and promise never to publish any press releases without following accepted standards for reporting.

Then, and only then, can you resume any dialogue towards resolving problems and that dialogue will be based entirely on what remaining goodwill exists. If I were in Mr Sarfaty’s shoes, I don’t think I would be as kind, and I can assure you that I think you’re a group of idiots who alternate between hearing skills to be big fish in a small pond, and your partial deafness as an excuse to avoid punishment for your egrarious mistakes.

If a hearing person or organisation had done the above, we wouldn’t be talking about it on the Internet. You would be slammed so hard with a lawsuit that you wouldn’t have the faintest idea how to pull your heads out of your butts. Just as well, because you’ve spent a lifetime in that position already.

I wish we had more pure deaf people runninng our Deaf organisations, not half-hearing people making up fights and using their better English skills to dominate and manipulate deaf people into useless protests that achieve nothing. Your attempted engagement with Mr Sarfaty in these responses are more of the same shit that has to stop.

Steve

You obviously haven’t fully understand what Jesse said. In addition what Gary also said. Mark’s comment whilst fair is flawed in many areas.

The cinema industry had 18 years + to get their act together. The last 5-6 years I hear has been a real struggle to get any sense through these cinema’s head. They are quick to install expensive 3D equipment but slow to adhere to their obligations under the DDA and more recently the Human Rights. Then we recieve their paltry proposal but want to be immuned from further action for 2.5 years.

I suggest you go to the AHRC website and read the 465 submissions that went against the cinema offering and then you tell us who is pissed off. I think you will find that the community has been tolerate for so long and now they have had enough.

If the cinema were REALLY helping we would have seen a far better offer than what they are proposing now. They would be sitting down with disability people directly affected and offer truly robust plans for the future. But they havent.

Why were they continously dogamtic in reducing the initial offer proposed by disability peaks and thereby making it more difficult than ever before.

Suggest you also read the cinema’s response to the AHRC question and it is laughable in a sense that we are to be blamed which is a major insult in itself.

So Steve, your comment is invalid and suggest you do the research before making such simplistic impluasible statement and offer a more constructive way to address this issue. Either that you are not deaf yourself to truly understand what the community and their immediate partner/family have had to endure for 18+ years.

Hi Mark

Thanks for taking the time to respond and can understand your concerns and the need to share your side of the story. It is simply great that someone in your calibre is able to come forward and outline the independent cinema position.

Firstly please be aware that this disability market rely on text based communication unlike hearing people who can easily raise debates and engage other freely. Hence email, blogs, sms are the best way to communicate between each other or pass on information about important matters pertaining to them.

There has been more than a number of occassions when contents portayed in the media incorrectly make reference to the disability sector or assumptions made that are false and misleading. The disabilty sector have to deal with these and constantly try and correct them before being stigmatised by the public further.

I don’t know if you are aware how extremely frustrated Deaf, hearing impaired, Blind and vision impaired Australians have been for sometime with the way the major cinemas having been addressing this issue. In fact I am unsure if you are aware how unresponsive they have been for so long despite the people like us trying to get sense through to them. You state there need to be cooperation and community yearns for this. But in fact this has not actually happening and the community do not think by giving 1% access to cinema is ‘cooperation’.

In fact I am unsure if you are aware of the contents within the 465 submissions made to the Australian Human Rights Commissioner (AHRC) and the most recent response from the cinema to the AHRC list of questions. The response made on behalf of the cinema clearly shows conflicting and unfactual answers that has only inflamed the situation between the community and the cinemas.

So one cant blame the community for having this feeling of mistrust with the cinemas if this is how they view the access issue and with doubtful reasons for their lack of action itself.

The fact remains is that 99% of cinemas are inaccessible yet since the Disability Discrimnation Act come into place in 1992 there has been 18 years for this industry it get it right. All we have seen is this very slow, avoidance process that had they acted as quickly as they have installed 3D equipment millions would have been in the cinemas coffers and a everyone is happy.

The fact that cinema heads rarely or wont respond to the disability community in an appropriate way or show real commitment to make things happen that will pleased the untapped market has only generate a build up of anger in the process. They feel and have been treated like 2nd class citizens. Please keep this in mind when this is happening.
You state that there need to be respect and I agree it need to work both ways.

The fact you have come forward and responded is great and applauded. I hope you have done same to Dean Barton-Smith as I know he would be more than willing to meet to over cuppa or two, having a real good dialogue and look at way forward in the best interest for all concerned.

If there were errors that you think need to be recified, and if they are valid, knowing Dean I know these will be addressed. Then again if what you have said is being misinterpreted differently then Im sure these can be addressed. We are are only human. The group are voluntary community people who have a disability wanting to do the best for people who have been denied, ignored and poorly treated for so long. Many years in fact.

But it need to be reminded that the community has been fed false / misleading information from the cinemas for so long that they need to know who within can see through this and lead the way forward whether for the independent cinema or the bigger cinema it is a matter leading by example.

Once again I commend you for coming forward and rebutting to the Rebuttal. In fact it is great you have taken the step further to explain the challenges at present. Why can’t the big cinemas come out and do same and meet with t he grass roots is beyond me.

It is all about open, transparent and honest communication. If the industry doesnt comunicate, the community can only make suspicion.

I am sure we all look forward to seeing what you think need to be done and how it should be done and your plans for the future.

In closing, I hope what has outlined above gives you an idea why the community feel the way they do at present (and it is not just Dean Barton-Smith but almost 4 million Ausralians directly affected) and hopefully we can see someone within the industry to be a champion (you?) who can bridge the gap and move mountains where everyone wins!

Look forward to your next post Mark.