But isn't it interesting that one of the broadcaster's main arguments 
against mandated descriptive programming was that since digital TV was 
coming, why should they reinvent the wheel when in a few years they'd have 
the carriers to do both foreign language programming and described 
programming?  Well, guess what happened.  Now that digital TV is here, new 
networks have sprung up to occupy the subcarrier digital channels and we 
have no more described programming than we had before.  I like some of those 
networks, but the point is that we didn't get what we were promised.

In 1971 when the FCC cut back on primetime network programming to created 
additional time for more news and public affairs programming, all that did 
was create a market for syndicated programming.  So we've been lied to time 
and time again.
Harvey
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Dresser" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 9:11 PM
Subject: Re: blindness sucks and more


> Butch,
>
> Perhaps you should talk with some of the people who are pushing for more
> access (as I have).  It's a very complicated knotty problem, often with 
> one
> group working at cross purposes with another, and I'm talking about the
> groups that want the access, not even considering the broadcasters and 
> cable
> providers, all of whom have their own issues.  For example, if you have
> audio description and Spanish language running on SAP, which one takes
> precedence if a show has both?  According to the law as it now stands,
> Spanish language.  This is not easy to fix.
>
> Steve