Is there a reason the sensibilities of the hard-of-hearing are more delicate than those with no difficulties? I don't understand why, if they're clutching their pearls over written dialogue, they don't seem to care about the oral equivalent.
--Dave Sikula On Apr 3, 9:24 pm, Jim Ellwanger <[email protected]> wrote: > On Apr 3, 2011, at 6:59 PM, Jon Delfin wrote: > > > But I'll bet they don't have a prudish captioner like "The Killing" > > does. It's beyond weird to hear "damn" and "bastard" while reading > > D--- and B-------. > > > When we did return to the Eisenhower administration? > > If we were in the Eisenhower administration, the captioning wouldn't have > been there in the first place. > > I think it was another forum where someone asked the captioning company about > that same ridiculousness on "Mad Men," and got the response that it was not > due to prudishness on their part, it was a client request (i.e., AMC wanted > it that way). > > If I were still working as a captioner and were asked to do something like > that, I would have pushed back as hard as possible against it. Which probably > would have resulted in the salesperson saying, "Because they want it that way > and that's that," and my manager saying, "Caption it that way or you're > fired." > > What I would be interested to know as a former captioner is whether AMC gave > them an official list of words to replace with dashes, or just gave them > guidance along the lines of "everything that's remotely a swear word." > > -- > Jim Ellwanger <[email protected]> > <http://www.ellwanger.tv> -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
