This article considers the current state of closed captioning for online videos, in the U.S. context. As media access is foundational to cultural citizenship, captions and similar accessibility features are essential to forming an inclusive participatory culture, online and off. Drawing on the history of television closed captioning and theatrical film captioning, it argues that captions and deafness have long been associated with the private, complicating their advancement under civil rights laws concerned with the public sphere and facilitating advancement through telecommunications laws and notions of consumer choice. This article cautions that such neoliberal solutions cannot be relied on to meet the needs—and civil rights—of deaf and hard-of-hearing Americans, and might in fact damage the coalitional identity politics on which civil rights for people with disabilities depend, unless such politics can be reinvigorated through emphasis on unification around shared goals.
AmayaH.2010. Citizenship, diversity, law and Ugly Betty. Media, Culture & Society32 (5): 801-17.
2.
Anon. 1977. Excerpts from the “Educational Captioned Films Depository manager’s handbook.”Bloomington, IN: Special Office for Materials Distribution. www.dcmp.org/caai/nadh91.pdf.
3.
AschA.2001. Critical race theory, feminism, and disability: Reflections on social justice and personal identity. Ohio State Law Journal62:391.
4.
AscheidA.1997. Speaking tongues: Voice dubbing in the cinema as cultural ventriloquism. Velvet Light Trap40 (Fall): 32-41.
5.
AufderheideP.1991. Public television and the public sphere. Critical Studies in Mass Communication8 (2): 168.
ClassenSteven D.2004. Watching Jim Crow: The struggles over Mississippi TV, 1955-1969. Durham: Duke University Press.
16.
DahlgrenP.2005. The internet, public spheres, and political communication: Dispersion and deliberation. Political Communication22 (2): 147-62.
17.
DahlgrenP.2010. Television, the public sphere and civic cultures. In A companion to television, ed. WaskoJ.New York: John Wiley.
18.
DowneyG. J.2008. Closed captioning: Subtitling, stenography, and the digital convergence of text with television. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
GilroyP.1996. British cultural studies and the pitfalls of identity. In Black British cultural studies: A reader, ed. BakerH. A.DiawaraM.LindeborgR. H., 223-39. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
26.
GirouxH. A.2011. The crisis of public values in the age of the new media. Critical Studies in Media Communication28 (1): 8-29.
27.
GogginGerardNewellChristopher. 2003. Digital disability: The social construction of disability in new media. Critical media studies. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
28.
GomeryD.1992. Shared pleasures: A history of movie presentation in the United States. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
29.
GranthamB.MillerT.2010. The end of neoliberalism. Popular Communication8 (3): 174-7.
KirkpatrickA.2010. President Obama signs Accessibility Act. Adobe Accessibility, October8.
41.
LaneH.2006. Construction of deafness. In The Disability studies reader, ed. DavisL. J., 79-92. 2nd edition.New York: Routledge.
42.
De LindeZ.KayN.1999. The semiotics of subtitling. Manchester, UK: St. Jerome.
43.
LongmoreP. K.2000. Disability policy and politics. Journal of Disability Policy Studies11 (1): 36-44.
44.
LongmoreP. K.GoldbergerD.2000. The League of the Physically Handicapped and the Great Depression: A case study in the new disability history. Journal of American History87 (3): 888-922.
VaidhyanathanS.2011. The Googlization of everything. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
68.
VanderheidenG.2000. Fundamental principles and priority setting for universal usability. ACM Conference on Universal Usability: Proceedings on the 2000 conference on Universal Usability; 16-17 Nov. 2000, 32-37.
