FCC Raises Closed Captioning Standards for Media Companies

Recently, the Federal Communications Commission voted to raise the standards of compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Specifically, the FCC unanimously decided to require broadcasters and program creators to work harder to improve the standards of closed captioning. The ruling coincides with recent consumer class action lawsuits filed by deaf and hard-of-hearing persons against companies like Redbox, which allegedly fail to provide closed captioning content or falsely advertise that closed captions exist.

Closed captions are captions that can be turned on and off by the consumer, and are designed to allow people with hearing difficulties to understand entertainment. This comes as evolving face of media struggles to cope with the needs of the hearing impaired, and faces legal action for allegedly falling short.

The FCC’s decision was a springboard for future, more specific legislation. The chairman of the FCC, Thomas Wheeler, has stated that this is not an “act it and forget it,” legislation, and that there will be additional follow-through on the matter to clarify the order and figure out the details.

Previous decisions by the FCC on the subject left unanswered questions. An FCC order in 1997 demanded that closed captions be made available by various media distributors. However, there are many points in the supply chain for media distributors, and there was enough ambiguity in the previous order that it wasn’t clear which step in the process required compliance. Media producers and distributors were not sure who bore the responsibility of carrying out the order. The fact that media has changed considerably since 1997 has further complicated the order.

The vote was held in response to a long-standing petition to the FCC to sort out the issues related to closed captioning and ADA compliance. The new ruling requires video distributors to make every effort to ensure that their products are fully captioned.

The FCC’s decision comes as certain media companies have come under scrutiny for their lack of closed captions. Media distributors like Redbox and companies that provide streaming movies have begun to face lawsuits and other challenges over their alleged lack of compliance with the ADA. The ADA requires that companies make reasonable accommodations for members of the public with disabilities. Closed captioning could be considered a reasonable accommodation.

In addition to complaints of falling short of ADA requirements, companies like Redbox and others have been accused of false advertisement. These accusations hinge on cases in which media is alleged to be advertised as having closed captions. In cases like this, companies may expose themselves to litigation, if they advertise that their products have closed captions when they in fact do not. Even outside of the ADA, false advertising is a serious charge.

If you’ve used a streaming video service or Redbox, and found your media to be without captions, you may be entitled to compensation. You can start to explore your options by visiting the Redbox Movies Closed Captioning Class Action Lawsuit Investigation. Here, you can enter information about your situation for a legal review by a trained expert with a background in this type of litigation. The review is completely free of charge, and from it, you can receive additional guidance on the best steps you can take in your specific situation.