From:	Alice Ewing 
Sent:	Monday, 30 November 2009 6:10 PM
To:	disabdis
Subject:	Cinema captioning and audio-description - application for exemption from 
DDA complaints

 
  
Dear Commissioner Innes and Michael Small, 
  
  I am writing as a very concerned Australian, who happens to be profoundly deaf (since birth).  I also 
happen to love seeing a range of films - but am wholly limited to only those with captions or fully-
subtitled foreign films (which seem to be fewer now that many have English dialogue which is not 
incorporated into the subtitles).  Thank you for taking the time to read my submission in response to the 
application below.
  Re: Application for exemption under DDA section 55: Cinema captioning and audio description
I have recently become aware of an application by a collective of four major cinema organisations; Hoyts 
Corporation, Greater Union Organisation, Village Cinemas, and Reading Cinemas to gain exemption from 
complaints in relation to cinema accessibility for a period of two and a half years.   
 
I have read the application for exemption carefully, and it seems to me that the applicants say they will, 
during the two and a half year exemption period: 
 
1) increase the number of accessible cinemas from twelve to 35 cinemas throughout Australia, and 
2) continue to provide a minimum of three accessible screenings per week. 
 
I simply cannot see why there is a need for exemption from the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA)?  If 
there is progress being made, why does this cinema collective need exemption?  Certainly, if a clear 
move to improve access (and by 'accessible' I mean proper access, not just a very paltry minimum of 
three screenings of a single feature film per week at fringe (read: unpopular) screening times, at a range 
of cinemas across the country), there should be no fear of complaints or legal repercussions.  
 
We clearly need to improve transparency between cinema customers and organisations.  After all, 10% 
of the Australian population have a hearing loss of some degree.  But the 0.3% rate of accessibility does 
not reflect a potential cinema market of 10% of the population who would otherwise be able to access 
the cinemas.  Why is this so?  If there were more 'accessible' sessions (see definition above), more of 
this ten per cent of the population would go to the cinema, and thus, profit goes to the cinema 
organisations.  
 
It is also shamefully discriminatory that free tickets, discount ticket days, and ugrade/special tickets 
never fall on the days or locations where accessible screenings are offered!  How exciting it is to win a 
double gold-class ticket in a raffle, or as a thank you present, and then be crestfallen as to not be able to 
use it.   
 
But as many of the responses to this submission outline, it is the social isolation that is the most painful 
of all.  Deaf/hearing-impaired, and vision-impaired people have long been culturally cut-off from the 
wider community.  I remember the early days of captioned cinema, and being so excited that progress 
was being made.  I was just out of my teenage years then.  Now I am yet to see significant progress 
beyond what was originally provided in the 'trial period' days - in a way, the trial period days were better, 
as all the captioned screenings were in the CBD (in my case, Melbourne), and not out at the Jam Factory 
which is very, very difficult to get to from many areas, particularly at peak hour on Friday evenings. 
 
I ask the Human Rights Commission (HRC) to please recognise how the current guidelines in this 
application for temporary exemption is a serious backward-step in the scheme of progress and improved 
access, as although this collective of cinema chains have decreed they will increase the number of 
cinemas with accessible technology in this two and a half year period, they have made no show of 
commitment to actually improving accessibilty at all those cinemas beyond the minimum of *three* 
accessible screenings a week (these generally are of one feature film per week at the following times: 
Wednesday morning, Friday very early evening, and Sunday mid-afternoon - thus no real mainstream 
access).  At present, not all feature films shown at the cinemas concerned are provided with open 
captions/audio description, and those that are, are only shown for one week.  It makes it hard for those 
of us who like to see films with our hearing friends, sometimes the DVDs of these films come out before 
the captioned screenings themselves (or the friends have all already seen the film)! 
 
I would also like to remind the HRC that a key element of the Rudd Government’s National Arts and 
Disability Strategy is to: Explore opportunities to enhance accessibility and inclusive practices in the film, 
television and broadcast industry. This may include programs in Auslan and efforts to increase captioning 
and audio-description services, particularly for government funded films, and promoting international best 
practice models which support casting artists with a disability.  I don't believe that this exemption is in the 
full spirit of this strategy.  The time is ripe that the HRC, as part of the Australian Federal Government, 
can really contribute to strong expectations from corporations and the community on the whole.  Just as 
equality for men and women and those from different racial/cultural backgrounds is now expected 
everywhere, and there are laws in place to recognise these sub-groups within the community.  The DDA 
was created in 1992 to ensure equality for those of us who happen to have a disability. 
 
Let's make it a reality.  I believe the first step is for the HRC is to raise the bar to expect far more 
commitment to improving access in light of the status quo of bare minimum provision of access (and no 
clear steps for increased mainstream access) before even considering granting an exemption.  We 
cannot afford to become more lenient in this day and era if we wish to make cultural and social progress 
on the whole.  There is no clear reason for not having audio-description in every screening within the 
accessible cinema - the headphones should not have any effect on other cinema patrons?  Captioning is 
more of an issue, I concede, but there is no reason why there cannot be more screenings, and certainly 
there appear to be people attending captioned sessions who are not concerned about their presence at 
all, nor have they specifically gone to these sessions for the captions.  In this day and age, with DVD 
caption options and popularity of foreign films with subtitles, people are familiar with the presence of 
text on the screen. 

I trust this submission of my objection to the current application for exemption makes it clear that I 
believe there is a need for serious improvements in provision of access for Australians with disabilities, 
and that organisations and companies must be made more accountable in ensuring this is a reality above 
and beyond what they are currently proposing to ensure fair access in the near future.  It is the 
responsibility of everyone and every group to create the society we wish to live in.
 

I am more than willing to discuss my concerns further, and hope that further consultation between this 
cinema collective and the wider community takes place, as I believe this step was not sufficiently carried 
out prior to the reduction of time given for responses to this submission due to lack of awareness 
throughout the wider (and active) deaf community.  I have held a keen interest in captioned cinema issues 
for many years but did not hear any word about this through the deaf/arts access grapevine until late last 
week.
I look forward to the day where I can just ring up my hearing partner or friends to say, "Let's go and see a 
movie at the local cinema..." without having to plan week(s) ahead and on the actual day to see if it's still 
accessible for me, and whether I can get there in time from work!  What a treat - one that is taken for 
granted by many, but still a dream for many deaf/hearing-impaired, and vision-impaired people, who just 
wish to be part of everyday culture and life!  Please help make this a reality for all Australians who 
happen to need a little help with access.  Thank you.
Yours sincerely,
Alice Ewing.
Fitzroy North, VIC. 3068