Passive Users and TV
I was watching TV the other night at the bar, Redsox game 6 no less, and I noticed the closed captioning which was on had something different about it. The CC feed was displayed underneath the score and stat bar, and only went half way across the screen. This was great for being able to read along with the announcers, while not being interrupted by the closed captioning.
Then I realized, most of my exposure to captioning involved large delayed lettering awkwardly appearing over what I want to see.
I guess I just appreciate someone trying to design a modified method of TV absorption while also considering issues of accessibility for television users.
Tangent:
Now I call them users, but watching TV is a fairly passive activity, right? User implies an interaction; I engage it. Well, users of TV are presented with choices, to either agree, or disagree with the content they are presented (seems like some form of communication binary). Unfortunately there are some people who understand this, while the majority seemingly doesn’t and takes what they see on TV for fact.
Rant:
Maybe it’s just the pending election, but there is too much passive engagement going on with media nowadays.
I was also reading watching SNL later the same night and found myself slightly concerned with a Weekend Update joke where they interviewed Independent party candidate Tim Calhoun; a chance for him to get some exposure which he doesn’t regularly receive from the media (this was a total fabrication as far as I can tell, but if Tim Calhoun does exist then I’m worried).
Why is it we don’t represent other candidates in other parties during out “national” debates? Shouldn’t every party candidate get a shot on a big stage to talk out their issues?
Maybe this goes back to communication binary (mentioned above), but is it possible for the TV watching masses to be faced with more than two options (pepsi:coke, yes:no, black:white, Barak:John, etc)?
Just some thoughts to stir the pot.