<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel> 

	<title>Comments on: Closed-captioning and cable TV.</title>
	<link>http://ask.metafilter.com/77091/Closedcaptioning-and-cable-TV/</link>
	<description>Comments on Ask MetaFilter post Closed-captioning and cable TV.</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 08:31:42 -0800</pubDate>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 08:31:42 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-us</language>
	<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
	<ttl>60</ttl>

	<item>
		<title>Question: Closed-captioning and cable TV.</title>
		<link>http://ask.metafilter.com/77091/Closedcaptioning-and-cable-TV</link>	
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/closedcaption.html&quot;&gt;The FCC&lt;/a&gt; seems to indicate that broadcasters are required to include closed captioning, at least for new programming, but I have purchased several very recent movies on cable that lack closed captioning.  How are the cable companies getting around these requirements? Why is closed captioning so inconsistent?  &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; If I rent a recent movie (last 10 years) from the local video store, it will almost always be closed-captioned. If I watch it on regular cable TV, there is a very good chance it will be captioned. If I PAY for it on cable TV (Comcast&apos;s On Demand service), it&apos;s a total crapshoot. What the heck? Lack of captioning makes the movie essentially worthless to me (I am hearing-impaired).</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">post:ask.metafilter.com,2007:site.77091</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 08:28:27 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>desjardins</dc:creator>
		
			<category>closedcaptioning</category>
		
			<category>tv</category>
		
			<category>cable</category>
		
			<category>FCC</category>
		
			<category>hearingimpaired</category>
		
	</item> <item>
		<title>By: Tomorrowful</title>
		<link>http://ask.metafilter.com/77091/Closedcaptioning-and-cable-TV#1145397</link>	
		<description>For the very simple reason that cable is not &apos;broadcasted,&apos; and the FCC doesn&apos;t regulate it.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:ask.metafilter.com,2007:site.77091-1145397</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 08:31:42 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomorrowful</dc:creator>
	</item><item>
		<title>By: Tomorrowful</title>
		<link>http://ask.metafilter.com/77091/Closedcaptioning-and-cable-TV#1145413</link>	
		<description>...and since I didn&apos;t read the link, I may be completely wrong about that. My bad.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:ask.metafilter.com,2007:site.77091-1145413</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 08:42:43 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tomorrowful</dc:creator>
	</item><item>
		<title>By: aerotive</title>
		<link>http://ask.metafilter.com/77091/Closedcaptioning-and-cable-TV#1145449</link>	
		<description>&quot;Cable video-on-demand services are considered channels by the FCC, yet they have a spotty track record on captioning. A Comcast representative said its VOD offerings are exempt from FCC requirements, citing the four-year exemption for new channels.&quot;&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
From:&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
http://www.tvweek.com/news/2007/06/closed_captioning_excluded_dig.php&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
In other words, more Comcast bullshit.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:ask.metafilter.com,2007:site.77091-1145449</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 09:12:54 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>aerotive</dc:creator>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
