February 14, 2004

Bush Administration Censoring Hearing-Impaired The Bush administraion has decided to not pay for "200 television programs inappropriate for closed-captioning and denying federal grant requests to make them accessible to the hearing-impaired."

The Department of Education is refusing to reveal the names of the panel members whose opinions determined the caption grants and also won't disclose the new guidelines. By every appearance, the government has changed its definition of what constitutes a caption-worthy program. But it's keeping the new rules secret. "They apparently used a panel of five individuals and then made the censorship decisions based on the individuals' recommendations," Mr. Brick says. "We have found the identity of one of the panelists. This individual tells us that he never knew he was on such a panel and that his views would be used for censorship. No panel was convened. The five panelists were contacted individually and separately." How under the Freedom of Information Act can the Bush administration keep the names of the panel members from citizens?

posted by Sullivan 20 years ago
  • Can we stop with the cries of "censorship"? I agree that it's silly to make these decisions in secret, but suggesting that the government has some hidden agenda which involves preventing deaf people from understanding Scooby-Doo is just the sort of thing which will make people not take us seriously on the important issues. I realize it was the author of the article who said it first, but that doesn't mean you have to use the same word in your title. Hell, it isn't even the Bush administration that's doing it, or if it is, the author presents no evidence to this effect. We have plenty of reasons to worry without having to resort to hysterics.
  • this is another in a long list of stupid things this administration has done. Here's more from the National Association for the Deaf on this, and the list itself.
  • exppii: Well, if a government body decides to cease translating shows for the deaf that it has in the past, it certainly smells like censorship. Of course, it may not be. It may simply be an issue around funding, or around available expertise, or any number of innocent explanations. But given that the decision making process is being kept secret, and the number of self-styled cultural warriors in the present administration, censorship doesn't seem an especially "hysterical" claim.