|
|
Posted by William Davis on 12/31/05 04:02
In article <HNctf.4214$nu6.1354@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
"Steve Guidry" <steveguidry@earthlink.net> wrote:
> I don't believe the station is discriminating. This is the Bible belt.
> The church is one block from the station. Staff attends the church. The
> church has been a pillar of their Sunday morning programming for 25 years.
> The only preempt us twice a year - - Indy 500 and British Open. They had a
> chance to kick us off when we said "no dice" to their fee increase last
> year. But they kept us at the same rate and time. They value us.
>
> They've just got a bunch of ninnies in their corporate counsel's office who
> are playing it safe. Our lawyer will be eating their lunch next week.
>
>
> Steve
Since nobody's mentioned it before, has anyone considered that finding
the most affordable way to CAPTION the program might simply be the right
thing to do?
After all, the POINT of the Americans with Disabilities Act - which is a
part of what spawned this new rule change - isn't to hinder people, it's
to HELP people.
You're client is offering PRECISELY the type of programming that the
hearing impaired audience (a significant percentage of which I would
guess are elderly and likely also suffering from other health ailments)
would find of great benefit.
Change the debate.
Talk to your client about working WITH the station AND the local
community for finding ways to help serve the needs of those in the
community. Including the hearing impaired.
Maybe the church can come up with a hall full of volunteer typists
working in shifts on cheap computers to do a transcription themselves.
And maybe the station can help with the cost of a line encoder.
Bringing a community together in a giving spirit to meet the needs of
the least fortunate...
Isn't that precisely what churches are SUPPOSED to be all about in the
first place?
My 2 cents, anyway.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|