On Tue, 7 Jul 1998, Kelly Ford wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I'm by no means against the serendipitous accessibility that happens all
> the time.  The point of things like audio description is that you don't
> have to rely on serendipity to enjoy a movie.
>
> Peter, what do you think your attitude would have been had you not been
> able to get any descriptions.  Would the movie have been as enjoyable?
> What if you knew you could go to any movie any time and would be guaranteed
> of the description being there?

I would certainly enjoy this, but I don't want my particular needs to
translate into a mandate for movie companies and theaters. If the benefits
of making this accommadation exceed the costs, it will get done. That is a
given of the free market.

If, however, the economic benefits do not exceed the costs, the free
market is unlikely to provide it, although it might for the sake of public
image.

When the government steps in and imposes an additional cost, that cost
must come out of some other expenditure or out of the profit margin. Will
fewer films get made? Will ticket prices go up for everybody, which would
cause a drop in attendence and revenue to the movie business? There is no
free lunch.
 >
> The NFB attitude seems to be that serendipity and learning to ask are good
> enough.  Well you know what sometimes there's not someone around to ask
> about a movie or maybe you'd like to talk about something else other than
> the descriptions.
>

What would work for me would be if a blind movie-goer group would form. We
could decide on a flim to see and choose a date and theater. Then, we
could hire a decriber who has seen the movie and, equipped with our own
transmitter and headphones, go to the movies. Afterward, we could all talk
about the film over dinner. Here, we have taken the matter into our own
hands instead of imposing our demands on others, and we get a nice
serendipitous experience, as well.

Any takers?