we're not all deaf
 

Zero Tolerance wrote:

On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:23:16 GMT, Paul Heslop
wrote:

They also stated that
deaf viewers prefer sign language to subtitles.

That's interesting because that's not what deaf viewers say,
according to Ofcom's research.

(Then again, Ofcom require the channels to broadcast sign language
just the same..)
--

When I contacted SKY about the red dot during movies I was given the
same sort of flannel, that they had researched it and found people
actually wanted it. I think what they meant is they showed them
something like a huge banner across the screen saying NEW FILM AT
8.00PM!!! or the red dot and asked which they preferred.

--
Paul (Need a lift she said much obliged)
-------------------------------------------------------
Stop and Look
http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/

we're not all deaf
 

Paul Heslop wrote:
Zero Tolerance wrote:
On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:23:16 GMT, Paul Heslop
wrote:

They also stated that
deaf viewers prefer sign language to subtitles.
That's interesting because that's not what deaf viewers say,
according to Ofcom's research.

(Then again, Ofcom require the channels to broadcast sign language
just the same..)
--

When I contacted SKY about the red dot during movies I was given the
same sort of flannel, that they had researched it and found people
actually wanted it. I think what they meant is they showed them
something like a huge banner across the screen saying NEW FILM AT
8.00PM!!! or the red dot and asked which they preferred.


Seems to be sky answer for all criticism of their service 'people wanted
it' the people are presumably Sky board of directors.

Mike

we're not all deaf
 

Mike wrote:

Paul Heslop wrote:
Zero Tolerance wrote:
On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:23:16 GMT, Paul Heslop
wrote:

They also stated that
deaf viewers prefer sign language to subtitles.
That's interesting because that's not what deaf viewers say,
according to Ofcom's research.

(Then again, Ofcom require the channels to broadcast sign language
just the same..)
--

When I contacted SKY about the red dot during movies I was given the
same sort of flannel, that they had researched it and found people
actually wanted it. I think what they meant is they showed them
something like a huge banner across the screen saying NEW FILM AT
8.00PM!!! or the red dot and asked which they preferred.


Seems to be sky answer for all criticism of their service 'people wanted
it' the people are presumably Sky board of directors.

Mike

If you ask for proof they have the perfect reply, they only answer
once... or at least that's my experience, so i got the stock reply and
when i tried to ask for proof I was simply ignored
--
Paul (Need a lift she said much obliged)
-------------------------------------------------------
Stop and Look
http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/

we're not all deaf
 

Dave wrote:

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 20:13:43 GMT, (Zero
Tolerance) wrote:

On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:23:16 GMT, Paul Heslop
wrote:

They also stated that
deaf viewers prefer sign language to subtitles.

But why would anyone believe anything written in the letters page of
the Sky magazine?

some people probably do, but that's kind of my point. They just make
these statements then ignore us.

--
Paul (Need a lift she said much obliged)
-------------------------------------------------------
Stop and Look
http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/

we're not all deaf
 

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 20:13:43 GMT, (Zero
Tolerance) wrote:

On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:23:16 GMT, Paul Heslop
wrote:

They also stated that
deaf viewers prefer sign language to subtitles.

But why would anyone believe anything written in the letters page of
the Sky magazine?

"Sky is crap, I'm off to freeview or VM"

You would'nt expect that in the letters page either but lots of peope do ;-)

T.W.

we're not all deaf
 

Edster wrote:

Paul Heslop wrote in message

Dave wrote:

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 20:13:43 GMT, (Zero
Tolerance) wrote:

On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:23:16 GMT, Paul Heslop
wrote:

They also stated that
deaf viewers prefer sign language to subtitles.

But why would anyone believe anything written in the letters page of
the Sky magazine?

some people probably do, but that's kind of my point. They just make
these statements then ignore us.

When I told Bravo that I would no longer be watching because of all
the extra screen junk they have added recently, I told them not to
bother telling me they had proof that people like to be told when they
are watching a comedy, scifi or cowboy programme. They didn't reply at
all.

yep, they really don't seem to care. Was watching BBC3 with my son
late last night (Family Guy) and those little plasticine critters are
now being used during the program to appear at the lower section of
the screen and hold a large sign with whatever is coming next written
on it. Possibly the worst over use of an onscreen object I've seen for
a while.
--
Paul (Need a lift she said much obliged)
-------------------------------------------------------
Stop and Look
http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/

we're not all deaf
 

Paul Heslop wrote:
Mike wrote:
Paul Heslop wrote:
Zero Tolerance wrote:
On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:23:16 GMT, Paul Heslop
wrote:

They also stated that
deaf viewers prefer sign language to subtitles.
That's interesting because that's not what deaf viewers say,
according to Ofcom's research.

(Then again, Ofcom require the channels to broadcast sign language
just the same..)
--
When I contacted SKY about the red dot during movies I was given the
same sort of flannel, that they had researched it and found people
actually wanted it. I think what they meant is they showed them
something like a huge banner across the screen saying NEW FILM AT
8.00PM!!! or the red dot and asked which they preferred.

Seems to be sky answer for all criticism of their service 'people wanted
it' the people are presumably Sky board of directors.

Mike

If you ask for proof they have the perfect reply, they only answer
once... or at least that's my experience, so i got the stock reply and
when i tried to ask for proof I was simply ignored

8/10 cats prefer it!

Mike

we're not all deaf
 

Mike wrote:

Paul Heslop wrote:
Mike wrote:
Paul Heslop wrote:
Zero Tolerance wrote:
On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:23:16 GMT, Paul Heslop
wrote:

They also stated that
deaf viewers prefer sign language to subtitles.
That's interesting because that's not what deaf viewers say,
according to Ofcom's research.

(Then again, Ofcom require the channels to broadcast sign language
just the same..)
--
When I contacted SKY about the red dot during movies I was given the
same sort of flannel, that they had researched it and found people
actually wanted it. I think what they meant is they showed them
something like a huge banner across the screen saying NEW FILM AT
8.00PM!!! or the red dot and asked which they preferred.

Seems to be sky answer for all criticism of their service 'people wanted
it' the people are presumably Sky board of directors.

Mike

If you ask for proof they have the perfect reply, they only answer
once... or at least that's my experience, so i got the stock reply and
when i tried to ask for proof I was simply ignored

8/10 cats prefer it!

Mike

:O) I loved the old ones, now it's something like "8 out of 10 owners
of cats who expressed a preference preferred kit-e-kat"


--
Paul (Need a lift she said much obliged)
-------------------------------------------------------
Stop and Look
http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/

we're not all deaf
 

thank you, exactly my point. They could 'sign' every decent program, every
program for that matter, I don't want to be accused of questioning the
tastes of anybody, and imagine the job creation. Many more hearing people
or lip readers would be needed who could sign. Teachers who could teach
them, make up artists, producers agents, the list goes on.
As far as the technical side is concerned, I don't believe that we can
'press red' to see a playercam, or have a choice of news item, and they
can't make the signers switchable. I'm sure if the lobby was large enough
it would happen.

And by the way, I might not be a genious but neither am I an idiot thank
you. I know the world revolves around money and in the case of non BBC tv,
advertising revenue. the americans have a wonderful saying that covers it
perfectly. 'Money talks bull**** walks'


"Julian Richards" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 01:05:21 +0000, Eddy
wrote:

I think it is about time that we have sign on tv channels, and do think
it should be a prerequisite of all recorded tv shows to have them
signed, I do also agree that it should be switchable, the technology is
there it should be used, I would not turn away if there was sign unless
it is the BBC, as they for some strange reason decide to make the
picture smaller shove it over to the left side and stick a blue border
on the right.

I would have thought that it was technically possible to have a way
for the viewer to remove the signing. That way, far more programming
could then be signed.

My youngest child's disability is such that he uses limited signing
but the TV signing is of no use to him. Of far greater use is
CBeebies's "Something Special" programme, a work of genius by the BBC
and an example of public service broadcasting at its very best.
--

Julian Richards

www.richardsuk.f9.co.uk
Website of "Robot Wars" middleweight "Broadsword IV"

we're not all deaf
 

Paul Heslop wrote:
Edster wrote:

Paul Heslop wrote in message

Dave wrote:

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 20:13:43 GMT, (Zero
Tolerance) wrote:

On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:23:16 GMT, Paul Heslop
wrote:

They also stated that
deaf viewers prefer sign language to subtitles.

But why would anyone believe anything written in the letters page
of the Sky magazine?

some people probably do, but that's kind of my point. They just make
these statements then ignore us.

When I told Bravo that I would no longer be watching because of all
the extra screen junk they have added recently, I told them not to
bother telling me they had proof that people like to be told when
they are watching a comedy, scifi or cowboy programme. They didn't
reply at all.

yep, they really don't seem to care. Was watching BBC3 with my son
late last night (Family Guy) and those little plasticine critters are
now being used during the program to appear at the lower section of
the screen and hold a large sign with whatever is coming next written
on it. Possibly the worst over use of an onscreen object I've seen for
a while.

I hate those plasticine creatures, and using them within a programme is
unbelievably crass. One of my favourite BBC3 programmes is 'Pulling' and
they always seem to pop up at the worst possible moment, when something
moving or touching is happening in the story. It completely destroys the
moment.

Does anyone know which is the best email address to complain to? I certainly
want to let them know that this is not acceptable. I'm sure the programme
makers are angry too, it's such an insult to them and their actors.