Is sign language really necessary?

So low and behold, my Sky+ búggered up so I missed last week's Gadget Show on Five. Luckily enough, they've reintroduced their Saturday morning repeats, so I was happy. That's until I realised some pillock was making shapes with their hands in the corner of the screen throughout the show, or as some people call it, "sign language".

I know in some cases, it's necessary, but in this new digital age, do we really need sign language when we will have (or already do) have access to subtitles?

its a different language than subtitles

I can't say, as I'm not deaf, and I don't know if it's more useful than subtitles.

However, I find it annoying to an extent that the picture is reduced to a fraction of what it should be. Then I get used to it. It only annoys you for as long as you let it.

While the "big five" remain on analogue, the amount of signed output that by law they have to provide must be accessible to all. So not until switchover will it become a "press red" option.

Sign language is generally preferred by deaf people. Sign languages are as rich and complex as any oral language, despite the common misconception that they are not "real languages". Subtitles are just words on the screen, whereas "some pillock" as you so nicely put it is able to convey much more to a deaf viewer than subtitles ever could.

When the new Digital Era does dawn, it may be possible (on Sky at least) to provide separate feeds, one with sign language, one without, and for somebody to toggle the two in some fashion. Bearing in mind current targets for subtitling programmes as it stands now are so high, it can only be a matter of time before targets for sign-language are introduced.

Fortunately I am lucky not to need the use of a signer or subtitles to enjoy TV programming. However I don't think calling signers "pillocks" is a very good move if you want to strengthen your argument.

Even then it's a long way from becoming an optional thing. It's not like pressing a button and subtitles appearing. To have a seperate video stream with a signer and super-imposing it onto the picture in the set top box is a very complicated and expensive thing to do. It's more likely on satellite than DTT because of the bandwidth such a thing would need

There was a system developed or an electronic graphical version of sign language but it's totally diffrent to having a real human doing it.

Surely it's easier to have a seperate 'channel' than to have the box do complicated things like CSO? Sure, it's still expensive, but easier to do?

If they did it alá The Community Channel where the vast majority of broadcasters all contribute something, then I don't see why this cannot be done.

I'm sure that most Deaf people probably find it a nuisance setting to Record something on BBC One at 3.05am until 3.50am or something, surely wouldn't they want it to be on in prime time likewise with anything else.

I don't mind the Sign Language, the only time I cannot bear it is when they have it on Sky News during the day, for me it's rather distracting and I usually switch over, but for the said reasons above, you've got to be fair to all audiences.

Hollyoaks is the most annoying - and it's strange they opt to use it on their Sunday omnibus considering it provides upto half the shows audience.


What really annoys me though is they use a full screen picture, meaning the signer really does obscure what is going on behind it.


It's still annoying when they reduce the picture, but it doesn't impact so much upon the non-deaf viewer that way.


Definitely though where possible the signing should be offered via the red button on a different stream, rather than on the main channel.

Sky News already sign behind the red button on satellite.

When they put it behind the red button on satellite, the sign language feed is still carried on Freeview.

Signing isn't voluntary, all broadcasters with a 1% or greater audience share have to provide at least 5% of their output with sign language. Although there is a 10 year period for broadcasters to reach this level, this year saw an interim target of 1% of output signed by qualifying channels.

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/signing/signing/