Why Screen Subtitling Continues to be a Vital Service Despite the Rise of the Internet
At one stage, it was thought that practically everything that was once sacred in the broadcasting world would be lost to the undisciplined nature of the internet. From audio and video production standards to the expected dominance home video content, what people would watch and the quality of the content, would be vastly different to what professionals produce. And amongst the services to be lost would be screen subtitling.
The idea was that, with no apparent mode of quality control, standards would be bound to fall. However, the manner in which online video sites have developed has been something of a surprise. The fact is that subtitling and closed captioning services have found their way into the range of services provided by these site administrators. What is more, it arrives as a response to public demand.
If nothing else, this demand shows just how important these services are throughout the world. And, with the internet is now also used for live broadcasts, not just recorded footage, the need for live closed captioning services is also growing in strength.
It seems then that subtitling and captioning are here to stay, and there are several reasons that support this idea in more detail.
First of all, the internet is a truly international repository of information. Practically anything can be uploaded, either in audio or video files, and can then be accessed by anyone in the world that has an internet connection. True, they may need the right software to actually play a file, but this is in a shrinking number of cases. Soon, that problem will have disappeared completely.
What this means is that a Chinese arts student can upload a video of a local school play performance, and a retired insurance salesman in Idaho, USA can watch it the next day. Within days, that video footage may have been viewed by 20,000 people around the world, none of whom have any connection with another.
The problem, of course, is that the retired insurance salesman cannot speak Chinese, so cannot understand what is being said. The only way he can understand is if a captioning service is available, to translate for him. This service is currently available on Youtube, and though a rather crude speech recognition software is being utilised, it can make a difference. As the software develops in sophistication, the accuracy will improve dramatically.
The second reason is an obvious one, though it is easy overlooked. Put simply, the deaf and hard of hearing also use the internet, and also check out video sites. For them, it is not a matter of language spoken, but simply being able to read what is being said. In some cases, lip reading can be done, but this is not often possible.
Of course, the rise of audio pod casts, and online radio, means that there is also a need for captioning services to provide written content for the hard of hearing community to be able to take part in these broadcasts. And with the rise in the number of live online broadcasts with serious content, such as business or politics conferences, and even live news conferences, there is also a need to service those unable to understand.
A third reason does relate to the lack of quality control that exists overall on the world wide web. Since anyone can upload footage it can only be expected that content of poor quality will appear. This is not enough for users to click away, however, since often the actual content is interesting if only viewed. However, captions will certainly increase the effectiveness of the footage itself.
Just as poor quality news footage has been provided with captions on television, the internet is using closed captioning services to improve the experience for the viewer. Muffled speech, unexpected loud noises and general interference can make speech incomprehensible. Admittedly, the automatic speech recognition software struggles to identify the speech too, which is only logical. So, the need for manual insertion of captions is also still very much in existence.
However, thanks to the continuing development of that software, live closed captioning is much more possible. Television may still rely on the stenographer, but that reliance is lessening gradually.
The bottom line is that, unless the audio on all internet footage is completely clear, the array of global languages is suddenly reduced to just one that we all share, and the deaf and hard of hearing miraculously develop perfect aural skills, screen subtitling will continue to a necessary service.
The idea was that, with no apparent mode of quality control, standards would be bound to fall. However, the manner in which online video sites have developed has been something of a surprise. The fact is that subtitling and closed captioning services have found their way into the range of services provided by these site administrators. What is more, it arrives as a response to public demand.
If nothing else, this demand shows just how important these services are throughout the world. And, with the internet is now also used for live broadcasts, not just recorded footage, the need for live closed captioning services is also growing in strength.
It seems then that subtitling and captioning are here to stay, and there are several reasons that support this idea in more detail.
First of all, the internet is a truly international repository of information. Practically anything can be uploaded, either in audio or video files, and can then be accessed by anyone in the world that has an internet connection. True, they may need the right software to actually play a file, but this is in a shrinking number of cases. Soon, that problem will have disappeared completely.
What this means is that a Chinese arts student can upload a video of a local school play performance, and a retired insurance salesman in Idaho, USA can watch it the next day. Within days, that video footage may have been viewed by 20,000 people around the world, none of whom have any connection with another.
The problem, of course, is that the retired insurance salesman cannot speak Chinese, so cannot understand what is being said. The only way he can understand is if a captioning service is available, to translate for him. This service is currently available on Youtube, and though a rather crude speech recognition software is being utilised, it can make a difference. As the software develops in sophistication, the accuracy will improve dramatically.
The second reason is an obvious one, though it is easy overlooked. Put simply, the deaf and hard of hearing also use the internet, and also check out video sites. For them, it is not a matter of language spoken, but simply being able to read what is being said. In some cases, lip reading can be done, but this is not often possible.
Of course, the rise of audio pod casts, and online radio, means that there is also a need for captioning services to provide written content for the hard of hearing community to be able to take part in these broadcasts. And with the rise in the number of live online broadcasts with serious content, such as business or politics conferences, and even live news conferences, there is also a need to service those unable to understand.
A third reason does relate to the lack of quality control that exists overall on the world wide web. Since anyone can upload footage it can only be expected that content of poor quality will appear. This is not enough for users to click away, however, since often the actual content is interesting if only viewed. However, captions will certainly increase the effectiveness of the footage itself.
Just as poor quality news footage has been provided with captions on television, the internet is using closed captioning services to improve the experience for the viewer. Muffled speech, unexpected loud noises and general interference can make speech incomprehensible. Admittedly, the automatic speech recognition software struggles to identify the speech too, which is only logical. So, the need for manual insertion of captions is also still very much in existence.
However, thanks to the continuing development of that software, live closed captioning is much more possible. Television may still rely on the stenographer, but that reliance is lessening gradually.
The bottom line is that, unless the audio on all internet footage is completely clear, the array of global languages is suddenly reduced to just one that we all share, and the deaf and hard of hearing miraculously develop perfect aural skills, screen subtitling will continue to a necessary service.
Source...