Thread Subject: Re: captioning programming on federal channels

From: Larry Goldberg
Date: Fri, Jan 12 2007 9:15 PM

• Return to this mailing list's archives
• View all messages in this thread
• Next message in thread: Hoffman, Allen: "Re: captioning programming on federal channels"
• Previous message in thread: geoff freed: "Re: captioning programming on federal channels"
• Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date

The exemption is for national security and applies to ALL of the section 508
regs. The exemption is written into the law and is embodied in this section
of the law itself:

5) EXEMPTION FOR NATIONAL SECURITY SYSTEMS.--This section shall not apply to
national security systems, as that term is defined in section 5142 of the
Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 (40 U.S.C. 1452).

In other words, we have no option to change the exemption unless we, or
someone, wants to go back to Congress and amend the law.

I'm kind of busy lately to take this on...

- Larry


geoff freed wrote:

>
> Interesting question. Why *should* there be an exemption for national
> security? What's the difference between hearing secrets and reading them as
> captions?
>
> Geoff
>
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Jim House (TDI)
> Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 4:49 PM
> To: TEITAC Audio/Video Subcommittee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-video] captioning programming on federal channels
>
>
> Hi there...
>
> This brings up an interesting question. Why do we even have to justify
> national security concerns to exempt captioning? Does that put any one of
> us at a disadvantage?
>
> Jim
>
> Larry Goldberg wrote:
>
> I would say that there's no doubt that this material should be captioned,
>
> under § 1194.24 ( c ) Video and multimedia products:
>
>
>
> "All training and informational video and multimedia productions which
>
> support the agency's mission, regardless of format, that contain speech or
>
> other audio information necessary for the comprehension of the content,
>
> shall be open or closed captioned."
>
>
>
>
>
> There is no language that exempts broadcast or cable or closed-circuit
>
> transmission of video productions, even though we often spend our time
>
> talking about web-based media for this provision. We can certainly add
>
> language in our rewrite that clearly indicates such productions and
>
> transmissions should be captioned (of course, with the national security
>
> exemption still applicable).
>
>
>
> - Larry
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Baquis David wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> A consumer once inquired about accessibility of programs offered through
>
> federal broadcast channels, such as:
>
> http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?storyID=123010575
>
>
>
> Do you think that it is covered under 508 and might the TEITAC consider
>
> an advisory note to clarify that?
>
>
>
> David
>
>
>
> David Baquis
>
> Accessibility Specialist
>
> U.S. Access Board
>
> 1331 F Street, NW, #1000
>
> Washington, DC 20004
>
> 800-USA-ABLE; (202) 272-0013 (voice)
>
> www.access-board.gov; = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>
>
>
>

• Next message in Thread: Hoffman, Allen: "Re: captioning programming on federal channels"
• Previous message in Thread: geoff freed: "Re: captioning programming on federal channels"