Is it me or is the signing really irritating. It takes up nearly a third of the
TV screen due to the way the picture is manipulated to fit the signer in. Also because the signer has to fit in with the 4:3 safe areas, a lot of the screen to the righ is just a blue background showing nothing.
It was really irritating last week when the Hemel Hempstead blast news broke, and for 2 hours they kept the signer on screen! They probably lost quite a few viewers due to this.
I do not understand why they don’t use the signer on the overnights to make up there obligation, instead of during the day, like now (it’s 1pm.)
I understand this is a service for people hard of hearing, but wouldn’t subtitles be more effective?!
let me put it this way do you like watching an italian movie, not understanding a word of it and having to read subtitles to know whats going on. when you read the subtitles its gone off the screen before you have the sentance read and its impossible to follow the movie. isn’t it easier for you if they get interpreters to translate it into english. anyway its not like its on all day! go active if it doesn’t suit you
Yes but I wouldn’t want somebody on the screen during the Italian movie translating it for me.
Unfortunately I’m on NTL so can’t go active. Why don’t they put the signing on active?
I just don’t understand why they don’t put the signing on overnight; BBC and ITV do.
I think you are out of order.
You and myself are lucky, we have good hearing. Not everybody has. So why should they have to stay up till 3am, to see the news, because people like you, think Sky News is specifically for perfect sighted/hearing people.
Stop being a bigot, it isn’t for very long, and as was said above;
1) Watch Sky News Active
2) Don’t watch at all
And what would stop the deaf watching the Active service if there was signing on there? :rolleyes:
Sorry, but it is annoying along with all the banners and tickers that can take up as much as half of the screen. couple that with a 4:3 television and you may as well listen to the radio instead.
What the hell is the point in a couple of hour signing per day, and from what I can see only at the weekend? Do the hard of hearing only watch the news between those hours?
I have no issue with the hard of hearing, but I do have an issue with jamming the screen with crap when there are other options that would be of a greater service to those with the hearing issue that they could use whenever 24/7.
Well chaps I AM hard of hearing but cannot sign. I know people who are in the opposite boat where they can sign but cannot read subtitles fast enough. They have a right to be given signing.
Let me tell you that I can understand your predicament with regards to signing taking up too much space but us hard of hearing have rights to be able to follow the programme. I didnt ask to be hard of hearing and I didnt get a compensation package for losing the ability to hear. My sin was to get measels as a child which left me with a permanenet hearing loss. For years, I found it hard to follow tv but massive advances in the field of subtitling has meant that I can now enjoy most tv shows – even live Sky news.
People should remember one thing – there si always someone more worse off than yourselves and the next time your screen is filled with the so-called “cr*p”, spare a thought for me and millions of others.
In the future, perhaps a facility to put signing on programmes in the same way as we can dselect whether or not to watch subtitles may be developed – that way if a person wants to include the signing then a simple button on the remote shoudl be able to bring this on – proably a good idea but how long will it take to develop? meanwhile have some consideration.!!