Hacker News Reader

It's not quite as easy as it sounds - but Netflix are at least doing something, and starting with their original productions is a logical place to go, because they have complete control of the master copies and can commission an Audio Description soundtrack to run in sync with that.

Adding AD to third-party content is trickier, because for the most part it's not Netflix's content to audio describe in the first place. If the distributor has AD assets available, it's then a complex process of aligning those assets to the pre-existing copy of the asset which Netflix is using. That's not always just "drop and go" because the versions won't necessarily align, or even contain the same visual material (e.g. Cut versions, syndication edits, director's cuts, special editions, etc.)

At the same time, "just use the description from TV" is not that straightforward either - here in the UK, the audio description is almost always produced by the television channel showing the programme, and NOT the programme maker/distributor themselves. Accessing that content now becomes more complicated, both proceedurally and contracturally.

It's not trivial - but at the same time it's not impossible. And for all the stick they get, Netflix actually leads the way in accessible content - there are vast numbers of video on demand services which simply do not even support access technologies in the first place. (It's a bit better in the US, where the FCC lays down rules about availability of captions on online video, admittedly.)

But especially here in the UK, almost no VOD services support even basic subtitles, let alone multiple audio tracks. In contrast, Netflix is a breath of fresh air - they actively seek out and obtain subtitles/captions, and now AD, from the third party producers that they licence content from.

They deserve praise for their attitude in this area, in my view - they put some of the largest media companies in the world to shame. That might sound excessive, but I've lost track of the number of major, major media companies whose reps pass on the company line that accessible VOD is "not possible at the moment", when the reality is that it's perfectly possible, they just choose not to do it or to make it any kind of priority.

With that kind of competition, Netflix is an easy number one in the field. They know their stuff and they're doing what it takes - I've got nothing but respect for them.

Agreed that starting with their own content makes sense. As for the difficulty of adding existing AD assets, I'm unclear as to why this is any more difficult than adding more language tracks, something Netflix has been doing for years. As for procedural and contractual issues, advocates in the past have gone so far as to get the owners of the assets to agree to license to Netflix free of charge, to no avail.

It's sad that in the UK, VOD services are even further behind on accessibility. I do hope that Netflix is actively seeking out AD, but given their track record so far, I'll believe it when I see it.

Most of all though, I wanted to respond to one particular thing you said: "And for all the stick they get, Netflix actually leads the way in accessible content"

The lesson I've taken from this is that they don't get nearly enough, or perhaps the right kind of, stick. Advocates (and legislators in some countries) have been after Netflix on this issue for years, but what finally seems to have gotten Netflix to take action was when the mainstream media started picking up on the story. That action was swift and completely addressed the story that the media told. I therefore think it important to keep the story going in an attempt to ensure that Netflix keeps working on this problem.

Perhaps the issue just hit home more effectively at Netflix once it was their own content - and particularly content involving a blind central character. Who knows.

I agree that the issue needs to stay in the public eye, but not if it's just going to be bashing Netflix all the time. Don't give the other players like Amazon and Hulu a free pass - ask them where THEIR audio described content is, and when they say there isn't any, ask them why. When they say that they don't, or they can't, ask them why not. Check the On Demand on your cable box - is there any DVS there? Ask them why not. This is a vast issue and just focusing on Netflix alone will not solve the greater problem.

adding more language tracks, something Netflix has been doing for years

Netflix doesn't do that. Producers pay to have that done or take the language track in part-payment from an international distributor who pays to have it done. Also dubbing in new dialog is way easier because you replace existing dialog, you're not trying to fit in around it.

When I say that it seems no harder than adding more language tracks, what I'm talking about is adding pre-existing description tracks to Netflix. Of course producing new description is harder than adding existing language tracks.

Are you unclear as to why it's harder because you actually have some technical expertise or because you just feel some sort of outrage? Language tracks are usually same sourced, are ADs? I wouldn't know and wouldn't assume because I don't have the expertise nor the outrage.

>But especially here in the UK, almost no VOD services support even basic subtitles, let alone multiple audio tracks.

Sky Go and Now TV still don't support subtitles. It is infuriating.

Amazon Instant Video however, since very late last year, have subtitles for some of their content. They didn't even put out a press release as far as I can see. They just snuck it in there. The excellent flagship series "Bosch" has subtitles. "Alpha House" doesn't.

I've not had cause to check ITV player or check whatever 5's VoD service is called, but 4oD and iPlayer both have subtitles.

One thing that really pisses me off is that not all of the BBC originated content has subtitles on Netflix. Ridiculous.

Don't know how it is in English-speaking countries, but Netflix's laughable subtitle translations are as common a conversation topic as the weather and sports where I live. I have no idea why they don't bother stepping it up.

As someone who is only very slight of hearing - no problem talking with people in person - it is also immensely frustrating that I usually can't get English subtitles on Netflix instead of a translation. And when I can finally get it in English, it's closed captions, which kind of ruins my experience by captioning every sound effect in a movie or TV show.

I have no idea why this isn't a bigger focus at Netflix given there must be a whole iPod generation with some minor hearing problems.

You probably already know this, but the 'pirate' community has your interests well served. There are probably very well-written subtitle tracks for any major movie available in your native language. You won't be able to use them with a Netflix stream (thanks to DRM), but VLC lets you add subtitles to any video file.

> You won't be able to use them with a Netflix stream (thanks to DRM)

I think you're wrong, and to blame DRM is ridiculous.

You can load your own subtitles on Netflix, html5 or silverlight.

You don't even need a Chrome extension for the Silverlight one, it imports DFXP directly from the debug menu (alt+shift+click iirc).

There are even browser extensions that largely automate the process for HTML5. (Downloading the subtitle file and displaying it.)

I don't know about Super Netflix but fwih Netflix Subtitle Downloader also gives you a couple of buttons to adjust subtitle sync if you need it.

You can use an external subtitle player, that uses a semi-transparent window. You'd have to click the play button twice and be careful to keep in in sync when you pause/play, but it works well enough.

I think it's this one.

http://www.softpedia.com/get/Multimedia/Video/Other-VIDEO-To...

Yeah, I often "pirate" stuff because Netflix lacks subtitles. Or has idiotic things like Portuguese subtitles in Central America. Even on "Original Series" they lack subtitles, depending on where they think you are. It's very discriminatory and annoying.

A lot of Region 2 DVDs don't even have English subtitles. It's the dumbest thing.

I suppose they save a few cents licensing costs per DVD this way.

The hyper-regionalization is an odd construction; makes you wonder just how much there is to save by printing a bunch of different (sub-)region versions compared to just bundling most on one “English” printing.

Especially in the age of Amazon.

It was created before Amazon, right? And I'd imagine for many people, directly importing is not a daily purchasing habit. That way they can keep their "release windows" and other things to make them feel like they're getting every last drop off profit. Or maybe they think consumers want localized covers. It might even be true - someone must be demanding terrible dubbed products, so who knows.

I wouldn’t be surprised if it were because of the B&M companies.

British videogame retailers still wield a big influence over British and to some extent European release windows.

it's closed captions, which kind of ruins my experience by captioning every sound effect in a movie or TV show.

...which is what deaf disability advocates have demanded, and my understanding is that it's a requirement now by FCC rules[1]. If you don't have that stuff, guess what, no TV sale until you supply it. Again, Netflix relies on the producers to supply this stuff, and from the producers' standpoint, it's just another expense. It costs about $500-$!000 to get this done by a post house, last time I checked. I would expect this to go up a bit now that the FCC has promulgated detailed rules on the subject.

1. http://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-moves-upgrade-tv-closed-capt...

For a long time, I thought that maybe there was some great technical complication I just didn't understand that made this much harder than it seemed from the outside.

There is: Screenwriters often don't leave room for that narration to occur to when writing. So how are you going to fit all the narrative information into an audio track without breaking up the flow of dialog? This is especially problematic for situations where you you jump from one scene into a completely different one involving other times, places, characters or whatever for story reasons, and that scene's dramatic impact often depends on the abruptness or incongruity of the transition.

I'm looking over my current script in regards to this and while it would work fine for some scenes it would be hugely problematic for others. I have characters who show up unannounced and start talking before they appear on screen, characters who engage in important expository conversations immediately after they show up (but whose appearance differs significantly from how they looked previously), character that react to things that are not fully articulated to the audience, and things that are deliberately left ambiguous or paradoxical for aesthetic reasons.

I'm certainly not against making it easier for blind people to enjoy movies and would cheerfully work with someone one this, but just because you have a copy of the script doesn't mean you're going to have all the answers to convey those things to the audience. I think I would rather rewrite large chunks of it as a radio play than have someone trying to do an additional voice-over track explaining what's going on in the gaps between the dialog and this film has substantially less dialog than most (about a 3:1 action:dialog ratio, whereas most drama films are more like 1:1).

Besides all these factors, adding something like this isn't free or even cheap. Sure, Netflix can afford to throw money at the problem, but if this becomes a requirement for selling your film it's going to be an expensive overhead for indie producers. You basically have to write a second script, fit it in between the existing dialog and sound effects and music, and pay an actor (or multiple actors) to voice it, plus the studio rental and the sound editing. Doing this properly would add probably $10,000 to a film's production budget, Bear in mind that streaming revenue going to the producer from a service like Netflix is (estimated) about $0.25.

Also, as Kingett has said, "now comes the easy part." Adding description tracks on Netflix for all of the movies and TV shows for which they have been available all along.

Few people actually do this. I think it might be better if there were some open-source portal where volunteer 'readers' do this for blind people and upload them.

> Few people actually do this.

Is it everything? No. But according to WGBH's media access group, "All major studios now caption and describe all wide released features and nearly all independent studios caption all releases."[1] In 2014, that description was available on at least 88 films released on DVD or Blu-ray[2]. As for television, in the US, the networks and the 5 largest cable stations are required to air about 4 hours of programming a week with description[3].

My point is: The biggest problem is no longer a lack of described content, it's a lack of access, particularly through internet streaming services which have the potential to provide the most accessible experience of all.

[1] http://www.acb.org/adp/movies.html [2] http://www.acb.org/adp/dvds2014.html [3] http://www.fcc.gov/guides/video-description

That's true. The caption thing is a no-brainer for any size production and has been for years, due to the relatively low cost, but the narration's a much bigger hurdle for anyone other than a major studio.