President Obama signs Accessibility Bill for Increased Web Video Captioning

October 8th, 2010 by Josh Miller

This afternoon, President Obama is expected to sign the 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act.  The new law, originally introduced by Rep. Ed Markey as H.R. 3101, will mandate further captioning requirements for video online.  This is a very exciting step forward for the millions of Americans who are hearing impaired.

The legislation initially applies to any video content that originally aired as television programming.  As web video continues to grow, the push for expanded regulation will likely grow louder.  While the benefits of transcripts and captions are significant, regulation of such applications is a delicate matter.  For more of our thoughts, please read a recent post of ours on the new Accessibility Act.

What do you think?  Is this the beginning of more legislation to come?

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Online Video, Regulation | No Comments »

Breaking down the latest regulation for online video accessibility

August 6th, 2010 by Josh Miller

Today, the US Senate unanimously passed the Twenty-first Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act (S. 3304) with only slight modifications to the version passed in the House.  Last week, on the 20th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Twenty-first Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act (H.R. 3101), a watered-down version of the bill introduced by Representative Ed Markey (MA), with a convincing vote of 348 to 23.  The original Act led to the existing FCC regulation that requires most television programming to provide closed captions for the hearing impaired.  Any mandate that requires sweeping changes takes time to implement and enforce; and broadcast captioning was not fully enforced until 2006.

Captions provide a critical means of consuming video content for the 36 million people in the U.S. who are deaf or hard of hearing.  Captions also offer a method to watch the television in environments in which the sound cannot be used.

The two bills that have been passed will expand the requirement for web video captioning and accessibility services.  Specifically, they will require that any captioned television program be captioned when delivered over the internet; a completely reasonable requirement.  They also require all devices large enough for video to be equipped to support captioning functionality.

This news comes as a big step forward for accessibility.  However, the requirements have been significantly reduced from the initial version of the bill introduced in the House.  An emotional, yet accurate description of the exclusions in the new version of the bill can be found on CaptionAction2.  The original bill introduced earlier in the current House term called for all “television-type” programming distributed over the internet to be captioned.  In other words, any professional content created solely for internet distribution would also have to be captioned, not including user-generated content as seen on YouTube.  While a bit vague in what would have been included, it is clear that the mandate for captions would have been far more widespread than the simplified bills that got passed.

Nonetheless, this new legislation is a huge step forward for accessibility.  Even though the new law will be limited in scope, the far-reaching and open nature of the internet provides other means of pushing the cause forward.  It would be no surprise to think that the new bills passed got an extra boost in momentum when the internet’s largest online video platform, YouTube, became vocal about the need for and benefits of video captions.  And they’ve really walked the walk by launching a plethora of tools, including captions and interactive transcripts, to add to and support the corresponding video.

Captions have a far greater potential benefit to internet users than to television viewers.  The Internet is driven by text.  Since videos cannot be read, indexed, or navigated efficiently without the text equivalent, time-synchronized transcripts not only provide a worthwhile accessibility benefit, but they also have additional value that only the internet could unlock.  For starters, text provides a means for search – of the SEO variety and within a large archive.

The internet is all about distributing information, and then navigating it.  That means people all over the world are watching videos posted here in the U.S.  Captions provide a fantastic tool for ESL students or anyone trying to use video to improve their English.  Captions and transcripts also provide the most efficient means for translation to other languages.  With so much communication taking place in video form over the internet, such as webinars, webcasts and video conferences, accessibility solutions of all kinds are in high demand.

H.R. 3101 and S. 3304 may not have dramatically changed the legal requirements for online video, but they are a significant step forward.  Congratulations to all those who fought so hard to make this legislation happen!

So what do you think?  Is legislation necessary, or will organizations determine that transcription and captioning of web content has a worthwhile ROI regardless of any mandate?

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Online Video, Regulation | No Comments »

Google brings buzz to captions like never before

November 23rd, 2009 by Josh Miller

Just the other day Google announced its intentions to automatically generate closed caption files on a select group of YouTube files.  The story quickly made it to the NY Times and all over the blogosphere, as it rightfully should.  The idea is to eventually rollout the capability across YouTube for all users to test.  With 20 hours of video being uploaded to YouTube every minute, that’s a lot of text being created!

At its core, this is a brilliant move by Google to improve YouTube search (and advertising) capabilities.  But Google’s announcement, largely because it’s Google, also puts the accessibility issue in front of the entire country for a change.  Captions are mandated for much of television, but they are only beginning to get some attention on the internet, well until now.  Representative Ed Markey, the same Congressman who made the original push for closed captioning on television, introduced H.R. 3101, the Twenty-first Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2009, during this session of Congress, and it currently has 19 co-sponsors.  This is actually the second attempt at getting a bill passed that would mandate an improved user experience for the hearing impaired.

Thanks to one of the most talked about technology companies of our time, closed captioning is getting attention all over the internet.  Anyone who works with online video is now paying attention to closed captioning.  Not only are we empowering the hearing impaired, but in a virtual world that seems to be driven by search and discovery, video can now be made more “accessible” than ever.

So for a business that is centered on providing high quality, time synchronized transcripts, what does this announcement mean?

Well, it could mean a lot of things.  First, let’s look into this new Google service.  Google will deploy the same technology that powers Google Voice across YouTube to enable the creation of text.  This means they will be using automatic speech recognition (ASR) to create the caption files.  Using ASR on audio and video is not a new concept, but it’s new at this scale.  We’ve commented on our experiences with ASR capbilities in the past.  In fact, we’ve even played with the very engine that will be front and center for the YouTube initiative.

We’ve spoken with many people who have tested ASR solutions.  Usually, if they are talking to us, they weren’t satisfied!  The truth of the matter is that ASR will be good enough for some people, and it won’t be good enough for others.  80% accuracy (at its best and in studio quality recording conditions) leaves a lot to be desired.  In fact, Google even admits that results can be somewhat amusing when they’re off.  On the search front, the most critical keywords tend to be the most unique and, therefore, least common to be recognized accurately.  Google’s announcement does not change that, it just makes an ASR solution easier to use and free to consume.  In many cases, Google has likely provided a medium for people who may never have put captions on their video with the ability to do so with very little effort.  Google has also made the search benefits of captions glaringly obvious.

Ultimately, the organizations that require (or believe in) high quality output for captions and search will be willing to pay for cleaned up text.  There are significant benefits to the high-quality approach, whether it be accurate search results or truly legible transcripts.  Branding is also a critical issue for many organizations who add a text component to their video offering.

We at 3Play Media will continue building high quality solutions that make multimedia more accessible for everyone.  More people than ever are aware of the benefits of captions and time-synchronized transcripts now.  We have some new product launches on the way that will build off these very benefits, and we can’t wait to show the world how their online video experience can be changed forever.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in 3Play General, Josh, Online Video, Transcription, YouTube | No Comments »

Accessibility Act is Back At Bat

July 15th, 2009 by Josh Miller

We’re excited to say that Ed Markey (MA) is at it again.  Our local Representative has re-introduced the 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2009 (HR 3101).  The previous version died in the House due to a lack of co-sponsorship and little time to build support within that particular session of Congress.  The new bill has about a year and a half (January, 2011) to gain enough support and get passed in this session of Congress.

More importantly, what would the new bill actually change for the growing digital world?  The legislation aims to ensure that people with hearing or vision disabilities are given access to video programming and IP-based communications.  For video programming, this means video players will not only be required to support captioning functionality, but most content will also be required to offer captions and text aids.  The National Association of the Deaf’s (NAD) press release gives a good outline of what is actually required:

  • Requires closed captioning display capability in all video programming devices.
  • Extends closed captioning obligations to television-type video programming distributed over the Internet (not user-generated content).
  • Requires easy access to closed captions via remote control and on-screen menus, and requires easy access by blind people to television controls and program selection menus.
  • Restores video description rules and requires access to televised emergency programming for people who are blind or have low vision.

Basically, someone making a homemade video and uploading it to YouTube (user-generated content) would not be required to put captions on their video (although YouTube does support it).  Pretty much any other professionally produced content would require captions or text equivalents.

In the case of network programming re-purposed for web consumption, it seems reasonable to require content that already had captions to once again be available with captions online.  Then there is the reality of the digital media world of today.  More and more educational institutions, large corporations, and even help desks are utilizing video to teach and and instruct their pupils.  But if there are no captions, those with hearing impediments are completely left behind.  The Caption Action 2 blog gives a pretty clear example of what it’s like to sit in class and watch a video that you can’t hear or even understand.  The blog also references some of the applicable comments left on the NAD’s blog, highlighting more personal experiences.

In a recent interview Jenifer Simpson, senior director of government affairs at the American Association of People with Disabilities (AAPD), also noted that captions go beyond aids for the hearing impaired.  She notes that people initially complain about the cost of implementation, but ultimately once captions are available, they are enjoyed by many in healthclubs and noisy environments.  Similarly on the web, there are significant increases in retention and learning of video content that has text aids.  Plus, for users who don’t speak English as their native language, captions can go a long way to improve their comprehension of a video.  That’s where we come in – we’re making the caption implementation process more user friendly, more cost-effective, and we’re even adding value for those who may not directly benefit from captions.

The 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2009 is the logical next step for digital media regulation.  Compared to the overall expenditure on video production, text supplements are a minimal expense and can add significant value for site’s user experience as well as for society.

Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2009 (HR 3101

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in 3Play General, Online Video, Regulation | No Comments »

When are video captions mandatory?

May 8th, 2009 by Josh Miller

As you may have noticed, just about every program you watch on television offers closed captioning functionality.  However, videos online rarely have captions available.  At the same time, Federal agencies are forced to caption all of their online content.  Why is this the case?  A lot of it has to do with legislation.

Let’s start with where we are today.

Section 508 – Congress amended the Rehabilitation Act in 1998 to require all Federal agencies to make their IT accessible to people with disabilities.  Under this law, agencies must give disabled employees and the public access to information that is available to others.  This specifically applies to all media content published on Federal websites:

The standards also require captioning and audio description for certain training and informational multimedia productions developed or procured by Federal agencies. The standards also provide that viewers be able to turn captioning or video description features on or off. (Section 508 1194.24)

Stand alone audio does not require captions because it is not considered multimedia, but a full transcript or text equivalent must be available on the website.

States have the option of adopting their own policy with regards to accessibility.  Many are using much of the Section 508 guidelines to dictate their laws.  State funded universities in states with accessibility guidelines are subject to making all their web content accessible as well.  This includes captions and/or transcripts for all videos of lectures, guest speakers, and news clips that are posted online.  Due to budget constraints, educational institutions often prioritize price above other qualities when choosing a captioning vendor.

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the FCC – The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 requires that all businesses and organizations ensure that disabled individuals are not excluded from services due to a lack of auxiliary aids, which includes captions for video programming.

The FCC currently requires that all new television programming be captioned for the hearing impaired with few exemptions.  One of the main exemptions is for commercials less than 5 minutes in length.  As of January 1, 2006, all analog programming first aired on or after January 1, 1998, and all digital programming first aired on or after July 1, 2002, must be fully captioned with the same exemptions.  Starting in 2008, 75% of all programming first aired prior to 1998 must be captioned.  This calculation is made for each network airing such content.

Despite all this legislation, most online video is not included within the current captioning mandate.

The latest comScore Media Metrix states that 14.5 billion online videos were watched during the month of March.  Google sites, including YouTube, account for 40% of these videos.  One of the big stories in this data is the ascent of Hulu in the rankings, up to the number 3 spot with 380 million videos viewed.  But even on Hulu, a site filled with content that was once shown on network television with captions, only offers captions for select shows.

With a legitimate increase in professionally produced video, rather than user-generated content, online video advertising finally seems to have some legs.  But many sites have refrained from adding captioning capabilities due to the added cost.  Ironically, captions would likely help increase advertising effectiveness and revenues due to the rich data that it provides for each video.  In addition, many of the traditional caption providers for network television have had a difficult time shifting to the low cost model that web-based content has grown accustomed to.  Regardless, accessibility is a must for the 28 million Americans who suffer from hearing disabilities.

In June of 2008, Representatives Edward Markey (D-MA) and Heather Wilson (R-NM) introduced “The 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2008” (H.R. 6320) in June, 2008.  This bill, currently in the House, would amend the Communications act to significantly expand disability requirements for video programming over the internet.

The new bill would require that all video programming devices – televisions, PCs, mobile phones, iPods, etc. – be equipped with closed captioning capabilities.  Furthermore, it would extend captioning obligations to all television-type programming and up to all professional video other than user-generated content.  Any of the web-based video content portals will be forced to caption their content.  Finally, it also suggests that private universities will be forced to caption their content as well.

Kudos to the sites who have made a strong push to support online captions.  Even though user-generated content won’t be mandated, YouTube has launched one of the most public implementations of captioning capabilities.

It’s pretty amazing if you think about it.  Instead of sending messages during class or a meeting, with the addition of captions you’ll be able to watch reruns of “The Office” on your iPhone under your desk!

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in 3Play General | No Comments »