Subtitles (or lack of) on UHD programmes

[GeeMon]

@KevNewMedia 

that's great news, but could you please amend the size and location so that the subtitles are not taking up half the screen... I'm deaf not blind. 

[xenon81]

---

@AWHARR wrote:

@Grumpy+Gran @Annie+UK @xenon81 

All OFCOM will do is raise it with Sky and TNT..... they will then declare what they are doing to fix the issue and then it's case closed.

Ofcom won't do a thing; a channel which isn't required to provide subtitles, isn't providing subtitles. There is no case to answer sadly.

[AWHARR]

@xenon81 ok so are you saying the Equalities Act 2010 isn't worth the paper it's written on?

How do they get round that?

[Mark39]

---

@AWHARR wrote:

@xenon81 ok so are you saying the Equalities Act 2010 isn't worth the paper it's written on?

How do they get round that?

---

@xenon81 didn't mention the Equality Act.

[xenon81]

---

@AWHARR wrote:

@xenon81 ok so are you saying the Equalities Act 2010 isn't worth the paper it's written on?

How do they get round that?

---

You'd need to ask a lawyer about that, but broadcasters are only required by Ofcom to provide subtitling if they exceed a certain audience share. This is set out in Ofcom’s Code on Television Access Services, in accordance with the Communications Act 2003. 

At present UHD channels don't meet the level at which they're obliged to provide subtitles. So while TNT Sports 1, 2 and 3 must provide subtitles, TNT Sports 4 and the UHD channel don't. 

[AWHARR]

@Mark39  why would you need to?

It's enshrined in law, that's all you or anyone needs to know.

[Mark39]

---

@AWHARR wrote:

@Mark39  why would you need to?

It's enshrined in law, that's all you or anyone needs to know.

---

Why indeed.

[Annie+UK]

---

@AWHARR wrote:

@Mark39  why would you need to?

It's enshrined in law, that's all you or anyone needs to know.

---

I'm sure OFCOM would know what is required by law and have this inergrated into their rules

[GD1]

---

@AWHARR wrote:

@Mark39  why would you need to?

It's enshrined in law, that's all you or anyone needs to know.

---

Which law?  Anyone can quote it's the law etc, but is it?

[AWHARR]

@xenon81 ok so OFCOM have higher powers than the law.

At the end of the day, it's not just about the law it's about what right.

There is no reason at all to deny deaf customers access to programmes which they are forced by providers to pay at the same price as hearing viewers... bet you didn't know that!

Yes exactly that WHY should deaf customers pay the same price as hearing customers for a smaller fraction of Sky services... that's not OFCOMs doing is it, that's down to your beloved Sky.

Currently I have access to only Skys own and BBC produced Catchup services.... nothing else on Catchup is subtitled even though it was subtitled in full when it went to air! That is just ridiculous. Oh yes those mini Sky news bulletins... they are not subtitled either! 😡

[Annie+UK]

Why would ANYONE pay for and stay with a service that is not meeting their needs???????

[AWHARR]

@GD1

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/equality-act-2010-guidance#:~:text=The%20Equality%20Act%202010%20legally....

[GD1]

@AWHARR  The equalities act covers employment, not broadcasting.

It is intended to stop people being descrimanated against in the workplace (rightly so) based on a number of characteristics.

Race, Religion, Disabilities etc. to name a few

Nowhere does it cover broadcasting. nor is it intended to, that is Ofcoms remit.

[AWHARR]

@Annie+UK @unfortunately I live in a property where other people who live here elsewhere in the building and in an annex for example are dependent on the miniboxes. As far as I know BTTV and any other similar service offerings do not provision any mini boxes that includes Freeview.

Sky therefore have the monopoly on that.

[AWHARR]

@GD1 

The Equality Act 2010 legally protects people from discrimination in the workplace and in wider society.

Not just in the workplace....