Pittsburgh Arts, Regional Theatre, New Work, Producing, Copyright, Labor Unions,
New Products, Coping Skills, J-O-Bs...
Theatre industry news, University & School of Drama Announcements, plus occasional course support for
Carnegie Mellon School of Drama Faculty, Staff, Students, and Alumni.
CMU School of Drama
Friday, January 26, 2018
Deaf Woman Sues UK Concert Promoter For Failing To Supply Concert Interpreter
Pollstar: A deaf mother is suing British concert promoter Liz Hobbs Group (LHG Live), because it failed to provide an interpreter for the support acts at a Little Mix concert in 2017.
3 comments:
Rachel Kolb
said...
Sign language interpretation to music is so beautiful. Music is an interesting thing to sign because it is all metaphors and figurative language, what the artist is sating is usually said with their tone of voice, therefore the interpreter has to capture that emotion in their signing. I found a video on Facebook about two years ago that was all about signing to be an interpreter for concerts. Having an interpreter at big public events like a concert is so important. Like the article said, the people payed for their tickets just like all of their hearing people did so they should get as close to the same experience as everybody else, which in this case means that they need an interpreter. What I thought was most interesting about this article was the part that motioned putting announcements on big screens. I would think that if a concert, with a large about of people, didn’t have that it would be a safety hazard for deaf people because in the case of an emergency they might not know what is going on because they were unable to hear the announcement.
Whenever I see articles like this it always makes me question how things like this happen. To me, it would be common sense and common courtesy that a concert venue would provide ways for all people to attend and enjoy the event. If this article were about someone in a wheelchair being unable to access the venue, everyone would likely be in agreement that that treatment is not fair and should be remedied immediately. While I do think the performing industry has come a long way in terms of accessibility and accommodation, I think there is always more left to do. People should be able to attend and enjoy performances of all kinds should they want to, regardless of disability. The other part, to me, that is frustrating about this article is why the venue only supplied accommodations for a part of the concert. If an interpreter was present for a part, it makes me wonder why they could not be there for the rest of the performance.
I always find myself disappointed when I read articles like these. This article reads like something out of reddit's r/ malicious compliance community, which takes semantics to an extreme. The promoter promised to supply an interpreter for the Little Mix concert, and thus supplied that interpreter for ONLY that portion of the concert. Pardon my french, but what a crock of horse shit! The promoter is required by law to provide support for accessibility when it is required to. Circumventing the spirit of the law in this manner is not only bad press, but morally disgusting. There's no question as to whether the promoter acted in good faith over a misinterpretation! I am shocked that such ableism still permeates the world. Is it really that hard to make very reasonable accommodations that will actually increase your available pool of consumers? I personally plan to never spend a dime that will go to the Liz Hobbs Group because of the manner in which they treat their paying customers.
3 comments:
Sign language interpretation to music is so beautiful. Music is an interesting thing to sign because it is all metaphors and figurative language, what the artist is sating is usually said with their tone of voice, therefore the interpreter has to capture that emotion in their signing. I found a video on Facebook about two years ago that was all about signing to be an interpreter for concerts. Having an interpreter at big public events like a concert is so important. Like the article said, the people payed for their tickets just like all of their hearing people did so they should get as close to the same experience as everybody else, which in this case means that they need an interpreter. What I thought was most interesting about this article was the part that motioned putting announcements on big screens. I would think that if a concert, with a large about of people, didn’t have that it would be a safety hazard for deaf people because in the case of an emergency they might not know what is going on because they were unable to hear the announcement.
Whenever I see articles like this it always makes me question how things like this happen. To me, it would be common sense and common courtesy that a concert venue would provide ways for all people to attend and enjoy the event. If this article were about someone in a wheelchair being unable to access the venue, everyone would likely be in agreement that that treatment is not fair and should be remedied immediately. While I do think the performing industry has come a long way in terms of accessibility and accommodation, I think there is always more left to do. People should be able to attend and enjoy performances of all kinds should they want to, regardless of disability. The other part, to me, that is frustrating about this article is why the venue only supplied accommodations for a part of the concert. If an interpreter was present for a part, it makes me wonder why they could not be there for the rest of the performance.
I always find myself disappointed when I read articles like these. This article reads like something out of reddit's r/ malicious compliance community, which takes semantics to an extreme. The promoter promised to supply an interpreter for the Little Mix concert, and thus supplied that interpreter for ONLY that portion of the concert. Pardon my french, but what a crock of horse shit! The promoter is required by law to provide support for accessibility when it is required to. Circumventing the spirit of the law in this manner is not only bad press, but morally disgusting. There's no question as to whether the promoter acted in good faith over a misinterpretation! I am shocked that such ableism still permeates the world. Is it really that hard to make very reasonable accommodations that will actually increase your available pool of consumers? I personally plan to never spend a dime that will go to the Liz Hobbs Group because of the manner in which they treat their paying customers.
Post a Comment