context->filename = 'n:\utility\503500258\5006214059\5006214059.pdf'

 *Pages 1--2 from  Microsoft Word - 6011055582.doc*
 Magalie  Roman  Salas 
 Office  of  the  Secretary 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  Twelfth  Street,  S.  W.,  TW-  A325 
 Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 Dear  Ms.  Salas: 
 RE:  COMMENTS  ON  NOTICE  OF  PROPOSED  RULEMAKING 
 IN  THE  MATTER  OF  VIDEO  DESCRIPTION  OF  VIDEO  PROGRAMMING 
 MM  Docket  No.  99-  339 


 I  welcome  the  opportunity  to  comment  on  the  above-  titled  Notice  of  Proposed 
 Rulemaking  (NPRM)  which  proposes  to  mandate  use  of  audio  description  of  visual 
 images  by 
 television  networks  and  stations  using  the  Secondary  Audio  Programming 
 (SAP)  channel.  I  support  continued 
 development  of  audio  description;  HOWEVER,  THIS  SHOULD  ONLY  BE  DONE  ON 
 a  voluntary  basis.  I  OPPOSE  MAKING  VIDEO  DESCRIPTION  MANDATORY  AS 
 THERE  ARE  OTHER  MORE  IMPORTANT  INFORMATION  ITEMS  NEEDED. 
 Video  description  is  like  dessert,  and  I’d  rather  have  the  main  course.  For  example, 
 weather  emergencies  are  flashed  across  the  tv  screen,  and  because  I  am  blind,  I  cannot 
 see  it.  I  purchased  a  weather  radio  which  I  leave  on  during  weather  changes  to  alert  me 
 to  weather  emergencies  such  as  severe  storm  warnings. 


 Also,  I  do  not  have  access  to  the  names  of  the  talking  heads  on  news  interview  programs, 
 or  nightly  news  for  that  matter,  because  they  are  flashed  across  the  screen.  Therefore,  I 
 am  less  informed  than  my  sighted  colleagues  about  a  particular  candidate  or  other  public 
 official  because  I  do  not  know  who  said  what.  Often,  when  many  persons  are  talking  on 
 a  panel,  I  get  so  confused  as  to  whom  is  speaking  that  I  give  up  and  turn  the  tv  off. 


 Too,  800  numbers  and  addresses  to  send  for  some  items  are  flashed  on  the  tv  screen. 
 Because  I  am  blind,  I  am  denied  the  opportunity  to  purchase  inexpensive  cd(  s)  or  to 
 donate  to  an  emergency  fund  which  I  would  have  wanted  to  do.  As  I  write  I  recall  the 
 urgings  for  donations  for  the  victims  of  hurricane  Andrew,  I  got  my  brailler  all  ready  to 
 write  down  the  800  number,  and  was  disappointed  and  frustrated  because  all  I  got  was 
 music.  Yes,  I  called  the  tv  station  and  the  announcer  provided  the  number  to  me, 
 however,  there  is  no  reason  why  I  should  have  had  to  go  to  the  extra  trouble  to  get  what 
 my  neighbors  had  readily  available. 


 Descriptive  video  is  fine  in  its  proper  place.  It  enhances  entertainment.  It  is  not 
 equivalent  to  open  or  closed  captioning.  Captioning  is  a  very  different  thing  as  deaf 
 persons  truly  need  to  get  the  words  of  a  broadcast;  however,  knowing  colors  of  clothes  or 
 what  the  visual  image  is  in  a  movie—  someone  walking  across  the  stage,  is  not  as 
 important  as  the  emergency  or  community-  relevant  information  I  currently  am  denied 
 access  to  hearing. 
1
 Technology  does  exist  to  make  the  screen-  flashed  words  audible,  please  make  this  the 
 priority  instead  of  descriptive  video.  The  media  will  not  see  that  we  get  access  to  these 
 important  messages  unless  it  is  mandated  by  your  agency. 


 Sincerely, 
 Seville  Allen  i 
2