Tory TV ads discriminate against deaf: Advocate

[mirror]

Tory TV ads discriminate against deaf, says advocate

Wed Sep 14 2005

OTTAWA -- A Nova Scotia man is sounding the alarm that a series of television advertisements promoting the federal Conservative party as hard-working, diverse and sensitive to the needs of Canadians actually discriminate against the deaf.

Mike O'Halloran is threatening to file a human rights complaint against Stephen Harper and his Tory party because the commercials are not closed captioned and prevent his wife, Nancy, from following along.

"Either fix it, or I will become your worst nightmare," warned O'Halloran, who first took aim at the oversight of political parties in 1998, leading to a 2003 agreement between a provincial advocacy group and the three provincial parties to boost close-captioning and translation for the deaf.

The 41-year-old Dartmouth resident sent a letter to Harper, NDP Leader Jack Layton, Justice Minister Irwin Cotler, Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe and several other politicians Tuesday outlining his complaint.

"I want this commercial removed from being shown on any television station until the closed captioning or script is included. Also, no other commercials are to run without having closed captioning or script," O'Halloran wrote, adding that he has already been in contact with the Canadian Human Rights Commission, the Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission and the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission.

William Stairs, Harper's director of communications, said he was unaware of the complaint, but was looking into it. -- CanWest News service

This is a complaint made by a man in Nova Scotia whose wife is deaf. You have to be so careful whatever you do these days otherwise people will get offended. Good for him to speak up though on behalf of his wife.

[kimmy]

Based on the less-than-gripping content, and acting that makes Rob Schneider look like Tom Hanks, they might provide closed captioning that says "Relax, Mrs O'Halloran, you're not missing much."

An oversight, obviously. But a human rights violation? To me, sounds more like somebody who was looking for an opportunity to bring attention to a cause, or more likely, looking for an opportunity to create bad publicity for the Conservatives.

A legitimate complaint, but I doubt the sincerity of Mr O'Halloran's motivation.

-k

[Cartman]

I voted that they do discriminate, but I am not sure that it should be up to the individual parties to perform this service. I would have thought the stations that play them would need to close caption them. After all, businesses are expected to ensure their stores are wheelchair accessible. Either way, it is probably a good thing that this is being brought up for all parties to consider.

[cybercoma]

I think it's less discrimination and more of an unfortunate oversight.

[theloniusfleabag]

I think that this is utter silliness. Just as the claim (by a lawyer no less!) that CBC, failing to have commentary on a CFL game, was a violation of Human Rights for a blind 'viewer'. Television is not a 'basic human right', nor should it ever be. There are many ways for the 'differently abled' to access information.

If the Conservatives lose that one vote (or several) for lack of closed-captioning, it should be their loss, one they can either ignore or amend, whatever they choose.

[Cartman]

I think it's less discrimination and more of an unfortunate oversight.

That could very well be and I will accept this providing they add the captioning in subsequent commercials. I think they will add them in future.

If the Conservatives lose that one vote (or several) for lack of closed-captioning, it should be their loss, one they can either ignore or amend, whatever they choose.

I don't accept that tlf and I am surprised to hear this from you. I might just give you the frowning of a lifetime. :angry: If we all took this attitude towards minority rights, there would be none. I am astonished by the number of people in society with some sort of disability (real ones too). I think all parties can agree that if anyone deserves social support, it is the disabled.

And hey, I know it is not easy. I was the manager for a company that had to revamp our wheelchair accessibility and it sucked. With all of the changes, it took about $8,000. out of my proft margin (about 1.5-2 days profit). That really hurt when you must compete with other stores in and outside of the chain. I was kinda miffed at first (too much government regulation and all that jazz), but I was really surprised when the added business made it worthwhile in the end.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Cartman,

I might just give you the frowning of a lifetime.

Somehow I don't think that we'll ever hear any nation's army (except, perhaps, Canada's underfunded military) adopt the war cry: "Send in the frowns!"

I am astonished by the number of people in society with some sort of disability (real ones too). I think all parties can agree that if anyone deserves social support, it is the disabled.

Seriously, I think that the 'disabled' are really the only ones that do deserve social support (or, at least should be entitled to the bulk of it).

If we all took this attitude towards minority rights, there would be none.

It depends on what you consider a 'right' should be, and to whom everyone should be equal.

Again, I do not feel TV is a 'basic human right', (partly because I abhor it) and there are other avenues to get info for all. The text of the ads is available on the website that was linked here, (I do believe) and I expect newspaper ads will also be made. Don't radio ads discriminate against the deaf? I don't think those political 'lawn posters' at election time should have to be in Braille, either.

[PocketRocket]

A legitimate complaint perhaps, but I must agree with those who see it as a simple oversight.

[plusgood]

I think there is a definate importance in providing closed captioning for political advertisements. I think his complaint is valid and by making such a fuss over it hopefully it'll be prevented from happening again. But I also agree it wasn't conscious discrimination, simply an oversight.

[Argus]

I think there is a definate importance in providing closed captioning for political advertisements.  I think his complaint is valid and by making such a fuss over it hopefully it'll be prevented from happening again.  But I also agree it wasn't conscious discrimination, simply an oversight.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Do all commercials have closed captions? Or even all or most television? I know I occasionally see a sign "this program is closed captioned" but I can't say I see it that often.

The complaint is spurious nonsense, of course. You can't require someone to provide closed captions. Anyone who gets indignant over something like this is almost certainly an NDP supporter anyway.

[Riverwind]

---

[I Miss Trudeau]

The complaint is spurious nonsense, of course. You can't require someone to provide closed captions. Anyone who gets indignant over something like this is almost certainly an NDP supporter anyway.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A perfectly good post ruined by a childish partisan barb.

[Argus]

The complaint is spurious nonsense, of course. You can't require someone to provide closed captions. Anyone who gets indignant over something like this is almost certainly an NDP supporter anyway.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A perfectly good post ruined by a childish partisan barb.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It was not partisan. It was an honest belief that if one is a wld-eyed raving politically correct nutbar one is more likely to support the NDP than other parties.

[Guest eureka]

So our resident wil eyed etc. threesome are probably NDP supporters in drag!