Lohman's Audio Description wiki
Overstream which hosts captions but not videos
NCAM on Audio Descriptions
CaptionTube YouTube captioning interface for videos you own/post
CapScribe captioning
Courtesy of Thom Lohman, Valerie H's Audio Description
Showing posts with label z5386. Show all posts
Showing posts with label z5386. Show all posts
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Foucault Sports Training Project
Somehow, I'm working on using Foucault and some disability theorists to support the notion that greater access to physical training videos on the web should take place. So, that's sort of my goal. In the mean time, I need to actually gather some useful data about physical training sites and that sort of thing. In order to accomplish this, there are several steps necessary.
First, I must select a specific type of training videos online. At this point, I do not want to select intense or specialized training knowledge or trianing which requires normal bodies or bodies that are already trained. This enables me to work with materials which I think are more accessibility to disabled folks as well as agining communities. Similarly, this enables me to test out my current ideas of disability/ability and how it could be defined as an individual's ability or level of success in meeting their current potential. That means, if they have a normal body, but they are stiff, inflexible, and unable to move well, they are more disabled. If they are in a chair, but they are able to use their body to maximal capacities, meeting their potentials to 90 percent or more, then they are able bodied. Measuring by ability to meet potential is a far more effective, realistic, and accurate form of measurement than dealing with general norms, whiach forces the flock of humanity to move towards center and gives dominance to herd thinking and mediocrity while worshipping ideals--forms which few people will ever obtain. Instead, I am more interested in a culture that drives and works towards fulfilling individual potential. As a culture, community, and individuals, we would benefit by the increased rate of self-fulfillment and achievement as well as the reduction in unproductive competetition. Competition has its role, but it is not the end all be all. Instead, by asserting this sort of potential measure of disability, I think there's the potential to at least reassess,, if not critique, current norms in a meaningful and beneficial way. And this way also offers room for me to do some potentially interesting scholarly work. Then again, this proposed crtieria of ability could easily have already been tested and sunk--I don't know.
"Ich trinke auf gute Freunde!"
The end result, is that I am going to seek out training videos which center on flexibility and/or joint mobility. I don't want to do yoga or martial arts; instead, I am looking for things that people can do from simply sitting in a chair or standing up. This provides criteria for the greatest potential audience, and this strikes me as very important.
Once I have selected the basic movement exercises, I need to find three vendors.
Steve Maxwell at Amazon
Dragon Door article on "What is Joint Mobility"
Ultimate Joint Mobility nutrition product
I've also searched flexibility dvds. I went to google and looked at the top hits--not the sponsored links--as well as at the top sales numbers at Amazon. I figured these results would give me a good sense of what is moving in the market.
Rodney Yee's Power Yoga Flexibility
From google, TRX Essentials: Flexibility
Functional Flexibility at allegro medical site
My tentative starts are:
TRX
Rodney Yee
Scott Sonnon/RMAX
Make sure that I have clear criteria for selecting these. At this point, here they are:
came up high in rankings at google, youtube, and/or amazon
I am familiar with all three of them
TRX does TV ads--I think Yee might
Each of these has flexibility/ joint mobility as part of their larger fitness program
Two are centered around personalities: Sonnon & Yee
The products are represented as open to novices/beginners--anyone can do them
There are laddered or increased levels of expertise available to the pracititioners
After the three vendors, I need to run a brief accessibility study on their sites.
This is NOT done yet. Need to generic basic heuristics.
In the mean time, I need develop an argument that grounds my work in a lot of "persuasive facts about people with disability" [quote from Sean]
Then, once I have collected the information which is available, I need to:
examine YouTube and see what kinds of materials are available there & at Hulu for free
examine the accessibility of the materials at this site
write up and include my personal bias/involvement with the RMAX/Sonnon materials
Then, work on composing video, audio, and text to present a persuasive argument.
After that, construct the background scholarly document which provides an explanation of the theory which informs the position as well as the engaged academic involvement.
off the top of my head:
first, dA studies as an activist practice in and of itself
second, the G-A readings about/including discussions of Mullins, I think, where you can work for change while being assimmilated into the market place--the complex and conflicting natures
third, foucault and the already punished state of disability and working to redo that, to present disability as priviliged or base line assumed
fourth?
First, I must select a specific type of training videos online. At this point, I do not want to select intense or specialized training knowledge or trianing which requires normal bodies or bodies that are already trained. This enables me to work with materials which I think are more accessibility to disabled folks as well as agining communities. Similarly, this enables me to test out my current ideas of disability/ability and how it could be defined as an individual's ability or level of success in meeting their current potential. That means, if they have a normal body, but they are stiff, inflexible, and unable to move well, they are more disabled. If they are in a chair, but they are able to use their body to maximal capacities, meeting their potentials to 90 percent or more, then they are able bodied. Measuring by ability to meet potential is a far more effective, realistic, and accurate form of measurement than dealing with general norms, whiach forces the flock of humanity to move towards center and gives dominance to herd thinking and mediocrity while worshipping ideals--forms which few people will ever obtain. Instead, I am more interested in a culture that drives and works towards fulfilling individual potential. As a culture, community, and individuals, we would benefit by the increased rate of self-fulfillment and achievement as well as the reduction in unproductive competetition. Competition has its role, but it is not the end all be all. Instead, by asserting this sort of potential measure of disability, I think there's the potential to at least reassess,, if not critique, current norms in a meaningful and beneficial way. And this way also offers room for me to do some potentially interesting scholarly work. Then again, this proposed crtieria of ability could easily have already been tested and sunk--I don't know.
"Ich trinke auf gute Freunde!"
The end result, is that I am going to seek out training videos which center on flexibility and/or joint mobility. I don't want to do yoga or martial arts; instead, I am looking for things that people can do from simply sitting in a chair or standing up. This provides criteria for the greatest potential audience, and this strikes me as very important.
Once I have selected the basic movement exercises, I need to find three vendors.
Steve Maxwell at Amazon
Dragon Door article on "What is Joint Mobility"
Ultimate Joint Mobility nutrition product
I've also searched flexibility dvds. I went to google and looked at the top hits--not the sponsored links--as well as at the top sales numbers at Amazon. I figured these results would give me a good sense of what is moving in the market.
Rodney Yee's Power Yoga Flexibility
From google, TRX Essentials: Flexibility
Functional Flexibility at allegro medical site
My tentative starts are:
TRX
Rodney Yee
Scott Sonnon/RMAX
Make sure that I have clear criteria for selecting these. At this point, here they are:
came up high in rankings at google, youtube, and/or amazon
I am familiar with all three of them
TRX does TV ads--I think Yee might
Each of these has flexibility/ joint mobility as part of their larger fitness program
Two are centered around personalities: Sonnon & Yee
The products are represented as open to novices/beginners--anyone can do them
There are laddered or increased levels of expertise available to the pracititioners
After the three vendors, I need to run a brief accessibility study on their sites.
This is NOT done yet. Need to generic basic heuristics.
In the mean time, I need develop an argument that grounds my work in a lot of "persuasive facts about people with disability" [quote from Sean]
Then, once I have collected the information which is available, I need to:
examine YouTube and see what kinds of materials are available there & at Hulu for free
examine the accessibility of the materials at this site
write up and include my personal bias/involvement with the RMAX/Sonnon materials
Then, work on composing video, audio, and text to present a persuasive argument.
After that, construct the background scholarly document which provides an explanation of the theory which informs the position as well as the engaged academic involvement.
off the top of my head:
first, dA studies as an activist practice in and of itself
second, the G-A readings about/including discussions of Mullins, I think, where you can work for change while being assimmilated into the market place--the complex and conflicting natures
third, foucault and the already punished state of disability and working to redo that, to present disability as priviliged or base line assumed
fourth?
Foucault & Disability draft 2
Free writing rough draft
Just like the last draft, this comes from Foucault's Discipline & Punish, Vintage, 1995
Just after the other quote, there's this:
11
"Physical pain, the pain of the body itself, is no longer the constituent element of the penalty. From being an art of unbearable sensations punishment has become an economy of suspended rights. If it is still necessary for the law to reach and manipulate the body of the convict, it will be at a distance, in the proper way, according to strict rules, and with a much 'higher' aim. As a result of this new restraint, a whole army of technicians took over from the executioner, the immediate anatomist of pain: warders, doctors, chaplains, psychiatrists, psychologists, educationalists; by their very presence near the prisoner, they sing the praises that the law needs: they reassure it that the body and pain are not the ultimate objects of its punitive action."
When drawing parallels between this text and disability, there obviously has to be a distinction drawn between crime/ convicts and people with impairments. Then again, I have to wonder which do people fear more: disability/impairment or being convicted or being branded a criminal? That would make an interesting distinction and study. similarly, it would be interesting to see which position is regarded as having lower status within the culture--at least based upon stereotypes. Wow, that could be potentially very depressing. Which do you fear more happening to you: losing your sight or being convicted to five years in prison and being marked as a convicted felon?
On to Foucault:
"Physical pain, the pain of the body itself, is no longer the constituent element of the penalty."
This is perhaps one of the most important places to distinguish between convicts and impairment, and this point was made quite clearly in one of the readings we had (books not with me now) where people often overlook or ignore the veracity and very real nature of pain. In this text, Foucault is assuming the norm of able bodied people, people who do not suffer pain or limited access. This is a huge difference from and for people who have impairments and/or experience chronic pain. So I'm not sure to do with this qualifying statement.
"From being an art of unbearable sensations punishment has become an economy of suspended rights. If it is still necessary for the law to reach and manipulate the body of the convict, it will be at a distance, in the proper way, according to strict rules, and with a much 'higher' aim."
This I think is particularly usable in the discussion of disability and impairment. If an economy of suspended rights is seen as punishment, then what do we call the inability to access texts, physical spaces and places? Those things can easily be read as suspended rights--you cannot get to them right now. And since you cannot get to them, that is a form of punishment. I do not know if this is circular logic or not, but at least I think this is worth thinking about. Again, the built in antagonistic nature/attitude towards non-normatives.
"As a result of this new restraint, a whole army of technicians took over from the executioner, the immediate anatomist of pain: warders, doctors, chaplains, psychiatrists, psychologists, educationalists; by their very presence near the prisoner, they sing the praises that the law needs: they reassure it that the body and pain are not the ultimate objects of its punitive action."
This reminds me of all the trouble, doctors, experts, paperwork, etc., that is required for some students to get access to extra learning materials. Come, you must prove your lack of abilty. we must test you, we want to see exactly what it is you can and cannot do. ugh. Sometimes I wonder if we as a culture do not enjoy spending more time and resources performing as if we are concerned and making things more accessible--see, watch how much cash we spend on the process of certifying all these people as disabled--instead of actually investing the monies into resources, phsycial and staff and enforcement. what I mean is do we send resources that are meant to discuss/address the issue of disability/impairment proving to nondisabled people that we are generating accessible materials than we are in creating actually meaningful changes and adjustments so material, so structures actually are accessible. I don't know.
From personal experience, I do know that often people are far more interested in performing the socially acceptable, desired, or rewarded role so that they can make the claim that they are not sexist, racist, etc., instead of actually working towards changes which embody those values. "Reward me for my claims of equality while I continue to embody and perpetuate the problems I claim to have resolved." Or something like that.
This has something to do with hegemony. End post.
Just like the last draft, this comes from Foucault's Discipline & Punish, Vintage, 1995
Just after the other quote, there's this:
11
"Physical pain, the pain of the body itself, is no longer the constituent element of the penalty. From being an art of unbearable sensations punishment has become an economy of suspended rights. If it is still necessary for the law to reach and manipulate the body of the convict, it will be at a distance, in the proper way, according to strict rules, and with a much 'higher' aim. As a result of this new restraint, a whole army of technicians took over from the executioner, the immediate anatomist of pain: warders, doctors, chaplains, psychiatrists, psychologists, educationalists; by their very presence near the prisoner, they sing the praises that the law needs: they reassure it that the body and pain are not the ultimate objects of its punitive action."
When drawing parallels between this text and disability, there obviously has to be a distinction drawn between crime/ convicts and people with impairments. Then again, I have to wonder which do people fear more: disability/impairment or being convicted or being branded a criminal? That would make an interesting distinction and study. similarly, it would be interesting to see which position is regarded as having lower status within the culture--at least based upon stereotypes. Wow, that could be potentially very depressing. Which do you fear more happening to you: losing your sight or being convicted to five years in prison and being marked as a convicted felon?
On to Foucault:
"Physical pain, the pain of the body itself, is no longer the constituent element of the penalty."
This is perhaps one of the most important places to distinguish between convicts and impairment, and this point was made quite clearly in one of the readings we had (books not with me now) where people often overlook or ignore the veracity and very real nature of pain. In this text, Foucault is assuming the norm of able bodied people, people who do not suffer pain or limited access. This is a huge difference from and for people who have impairments and/or experience chronic pain. So I'm not sure to do with this qualifying statement.
"From being an art of unbearable sensations punishment has become an economy of suspended rights. If it is still necessary for the law to reach and manipulate the body of the convict, it will be at a distance, in the proper way, according to strict rules, and with a much 'higher' aim."
This I think is particularly usable in the discussion of disability and impairment. If an economy of suspended rights is seen as punishment, then what do we call the inability to access texts, physical spaces and places? Those things can easily be read as suspended rights--you cannot get to them right now. And since you cannot get to them, that is a form of punishment. I do not know if this is circular logic or not, but at least I think this is worth thinking about. Again, the built in antagonistic nature/attitude towards non-normatives.
"As a result of this new restraint, a whole army of technicians took over from the executioner, the immediate anatomist of pain: warders, doctors, chaplains, psychiatrists, psychologists, educationalists; by their very presence near the prisoner, they sing the praises that the law needs: they reassure it that the body and pain are not the ultimate objects of its punitive action."
This reminds me of all the trouble, doctors, experts, paperwork, etc., that is required for some students to get access to extra learning materials. Come, you must prove your lack of abilty. we must test you, we want to see exactly what it is you can and cannot do. ugh. Sometimes I wonder if we as a culture do not enjoy spending more time and resources performing as if we are concerned and making things more accessible--see, watch how much cash we spend on the process of certifying all these people as disabled--instead of actually investing the monies into resources, phsycial and staff and enforcement. what I mean is do we send resources that are meant to discuss/address the issue of disability/impairment proving to nondisabled people that we are generating accessible materials than we are in creating actually meaningful changes and adjustments so material, so structures actually are accessible. I don't know.
From personal experience, I do know that often people are far more interested in performing the socially acceptable, desired, or rewarded role so that they can make the claim that they are not sexist, racist, etc., instead of actually working towards changes which embody those values. "Reward me for my claims of equality while I continue to embody and perpetuate the problems I claim to have resolved." Or something like that.
This has something to do with hegemony. End post.
Foucault & Disability draft
Free Write idea generation
Foucault's Discipline & Punish Vintag 1995
11 "But the punishment-body relation is not the same as it was in the torture during public executions. The body now serves as an instrument or intermediary: if one intervenes upon it to imprison it, or to make it work, it is in order to deprive the individual of a liberty that is regarded both as a right and as a property. The body, according to this penalty, is caught up in a system of constraints and privations obligations and prohibitions. Physical pain, the pain of the body itself, is no longer the consituent element of the penalty. From being an art of unbearable sensations punishment has become an economy of suspended rights."
So, the body is a means or tool to leverage as an instrument--the body is no the end goal, but rather a means to achieve another goal.
That goal appears to be to reach an individual person's liberty--and, as stated above that liberty is regarded as both a right and property. If that liberty, right and property, is to be reached, then it must be reached through the body.
Okay, I have a couple concerns about this. First, how can a notion, liberty, be a right and a piece of property? If it is not possible to get it directly, then can it really be a piece of property? also, the next question which develops is, isn't this assuming that liberty is reliant upon the body? and if liberty is reliant upon the body, how can liberty actually be separated from the body? I'm not sure, but i don't like the ease of distinction of the idea of liberty from the body. Similarly, just because someone's body is free does not mean that they have liberty or that they will exercise it. But I may also be over riffing this part. If I understand what Foucault is saying, the end goal has little to do with the body, but the body is the vehicle in order to take some ability, idea, or notion away from the person being punished.
"The body, according to this penalty, is caught up in a system of constraints and privations, obligations, and prohibitions."
This one line seems to connect a great deal with disability and accessibility. In particular, the constraints and privations remind me of physical accessibility to specific sites and physical locations as wll as the in/ability to read/hear/respond to certain kinds of texts, visual/audio/printed, because of impairment. I do not know what this means, but the parallels between the prisoning, the punishment, seems a lot like what happens to many people who have impairments. If you have an impairment, that is perhaps seen as being a physical punishment. If you have been given that physical punishment--for whatever metaphysical or medical reasons--then that automatically qualifies you as a person who HAS already been punished. And since you have already been punished, perhaps that means then that you really have no right or reason to expect accessibility, to expect those things which would or could offer equal liberty of access to resources and activities. That's just one potential reading.
I'm just toying with potential ideas or remixes of F's ideas.
Foucault's Discipline & Punish Vintag 1995
11 "But the punishment-body relation is not the same as it was in the torture during public executions. The body now serves as an instrument or intermediary: if one intervenes upon it to imprison it, or to make it work, it is in order to deprive the individual of a liberty that is regarded both as a right and as a property. The body, according to this penalty, is caught up in a system of constraints and privations obligations and prohibitions. Physical pain, the pain of the body itself, is no longer the consituent element of the penalty. From being an art of unbearable sensations punishment has become an economy of suspended rights."
So, the body is a means or tool to leverage as an instrument--the body is no the end goal, but rather a means to achieve another goal.
That goal appears to be to reach an individual person's liberty--and, as stated above that liberty is regarded as both a right and property. If that liberty, right and property, is to be reached, then it must be reached through the body.
Okay, I have a couple concerns about this. First, how can a notion, liberty, be a right and a piece of property? If it is not possible to get it directly, then can it really be a piece of property? also, the next question which develops is, isn't this assuming that liberty is reliant upon the body? and if liberty is reliant upon the body, how can liberty actually be separated from the body? I'm not sure, but i don't like the ease of distinction of the idea of liberty from the body. Similarly, just because someone's body is free does not mean that they have liberty or that they will exercise it. But I may also be over riffing this part. If I understand what Foucault is saying, the end goal has little to do with the body, but the body is the vehicle in order to take some ability, idea, or notion away from the person being punished.
"The body, according to this penalty, is caught up in a system of constraints and privations, obligations, and prohibitions."
This one line seems to connect a great deal with disability and accessibility. In particular, the constraints and privations remind me of physical accessibility to specific sites and physical locations as wll as the in/ability to read/hear/respond to certain kinds of texts, visual/audio/printed, because of impairment. I do not know what this means, but the parallels between the prisoning, the punishment, seems a lot like what happens to many people who have impairments. If you have an impairment, that is perhaps seen as being a physical punishment. If you have been given that physical punishment--for whatever metaphysical or medical reasons--then that automatically qualifies you as a person who HAS already been punished. And since you have already been punished, perhaps that means then that you really have no right or reason to expect accessibility, to expect those things which would or could offer equal liberty of access to resources and activities. That's just one potential reading.
I'm just toying with potential ideas or remixes of F's ideas.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Fitness & Disability
Focused Free Write
All the readings about centering disability, eugenics, the ideal body, and centering in the normal have me rethinking fitness. I've been interested in physical training only the past couple years--before that, I resented the body, sports, and health (another post for another time). Currently, I am very interested in fitness, health, and the intersections between web-based training and accessibility and usability and disability studies. Given the aging population, health concerns, and how all these things intersect with issues of class and the web, it seems ripe for discourse. But, what I have to ask, is fitness?
What does it mean to be fit?
What is ability?
What is skill?
Is it the accomplishment of a specific task?
Is it fulfilling a specific range of motion?
From what I can tell, the most viable and reasonable approach to fitness or ability is fulfilling your potential--whatever your potential is. That makes it pretty difficult to compare competitively, but I don't know that competitition is necessary in all situations or for all folks. Competition is a great way for testing actual ability and for gauging progress in skill development, but I don't think it is the end all be all.
While I find that I agree with a lot of criticisms about the construction of health and fitness, I don't think that the endorphin release I experience or the sense of accomplishment from increased flexibility or agility are totally socially constructed. There is something that just feels right about being able to feel, use, and explore my body in a variety of different ways. It's visceral, and there's no amount of theory which can accurately or effectively address that.
If ability/disability is determined on how much of our potential we are--or are not--fulfilling, such as how great is our range of motion versus what our bodies in their current state are capable of, then I think we would find that a lot more people are impaired or incapable than we currently label as disabled. Similarly, I wonder how many people who are impaired and labeled as disabled are actually using or employing or fulfilling a greater level of their physical potentials than so-called able people.
Obviously, this is largely speculation. But I cannot continue to work with physical training, martial arts, and bodily training with fitness aspects and not consider how disability studies impacts them. If I tried to keep my own personal interests "safe" from the critical theories or investigations, then my work would be a sham. Thanks, but no thanks. If ideas and praxis cannot stand up when challenged, if they can't evolve and develop, then I see little point in continuing to invest in them.
If it's dead wood, cut bait.
All the readings about centering disability, eugenics, the ideal body, and centering in the normal have me rethinking fitness. I've been interested in physical training only the past couple years--before that, I resented the body, sports, and health (another post for another time). Currently, I am very interested in fitness, health, and the intersections between web-based training and accessibility and usability and disability studies. Given the aging population, health concerns, and how all these things intersect with issues of class and the web, it seems ripe for discourse. But, what I have to ask, is fitness?
What does it mean to be fit?
What is ability?
What is skill?
Is it the accomplishment of a specific task?
Is it fulfilling a specific range of motion?
From what I can tell, the most viable and reasonable approach to fitness or ability is fulfilling your potential--whatever your potential is. That makes it pretty difficult to compare competitively, but I don't know that competitition is necessary in all situations or for all folks. Competition is a great way for testing actual ability and for gauging progress in skill development, but I don't think it is the end all be all.
While I find that I agree with a lot of criticisms about the construction of health and fitness, I don't think that the endorphin release I experience or the sense of accomplishment from increased flexibility or agility are totally socially constructed. There is something that just feels right about being able to feel, use, and explore my body in a variety of different ways. It's visceral, and there's no amount of theory which can accurately or effectively address that.
If ability/disability is determined on how much of our potential we are--or are not--fulfilling, such as how great is our range of motion versus what our bodies in their current state are capable of, then I think we would find that a lot more people are impaired or incapable than we currently label as disabled. Similarly, I wonder how many people who are impaired and labeled as disabled are actually using or employing or fulfilling a greater level of their physical potentials than so-called able people.
Obviously, this is largely speculation. But I cannot continue to work with physical training, martial arts, and bodily training with fitness aspects and not consider how disability studies impacts them. If I tried to keep my own personal interests "safe" from the critical theories or investigations, then my work would be a sham. Thanks, but no thanks. If ideas and praxis cannot stand up when challenged, if they can't evolve and develop, then I see little point in continuing to invest in them.
If it's dead wood, cut bait.
Intervention 1
I encountered a variety of issues in the creation/generation of the captions for this project. In summary, here they are:
1. MAGpie does not work reliably. When it does work, it is cool. However, I will never sit down to work with MAGpie again unless I have many hours in a chunk--and then I will export and save the file in quick time and expect to never be able to access it in MAGpie again. No, this is not hyperbole. Perhaps it is a demonstration of my technical incompetence, but I'm only willing to invest so much time in learning a system before it is a waste--easier to move on to the next potential.
2. Jubler did not look friendly enough in terms of the instructions provided. I need to explore it more. However, it does open up qt files in a more friendly way than Subtitle Workshop. Jubler at least showed all of the captioned text, but it lost the line breaks and replaced them with spaces. Frustrating a bit, but it is nothing that can't be resolved eventually.
3. Subtitle Workshop has a great help menu, and it is superb for matching timeframes with captions. It took a little bit to get used to--not as intuitive as MAGpie--but I like it better. Plus SW opened up my files much more reliably than MAGpie. However, when I exported files into QT format with linebreaks, they were lost. Same thing happened when I imported files into SW that were in QT format. Again, a bit frustrating. However, for this project, I was able to generate exactly what I needed.
Please note, that the above version on YouTube does not feature the line breaks that I wanted--instead there are spaces and the lines run too long and layover with the YouTube logo. Obviously this is harder to read and it interferes with comprehension. So, it is not my best work--but it is functional. Frankly, I think just generating more material with decently done captions is a good aim. Then the work can be honed. At least that's what I think now.
4. Learning to use the text editor, not word processor, was vital.
Here ends the discussion of the various editors. Main point: when using free software, be willing and ready to shift software and file formats, and realize doing so will lose you some work--so save everything with a decent file naming protocol!
5. From this project I learned a bunch of things/did a bunch of things:
I zipped files (never did that before);
I hopped software platforms better than I ever thought I could with minimal panic (compared to normal gz response to stress);
I can follow directions;
Valuable resources exist out there--it's a matter of figuring out who knows how to access those resources most efficiently;
There is an endless ocean of material which needs to be made accessible;
There is something very cool about captioning somebody else's material;
I actually have a mild interest in possibly learning to code;
The easiest way to learn is by doing.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Caucus Notes
Caucus ADAPT article
Obama gets a D for disability rights
Floundering on who takes leadership role
Community Choice Act: pays to insitutionalize and pay for same level of care in people's homes
People from all over the nation: circa 500
Living in community is healthier
After arrest of 99, stair crawl
Potential alliance between SEIU, a home care union: desire for living wages for home care workers
Caucus: Stumps' Club
Multiple short videos/excerpts
Images largely focus on young females
A number of the videos center on the fitting of prostheses?
Attractive LHD:
what /why of the naming of video? Why/how videotaped
Narrative at the end: first person discussion
Sak female amputee at the beach:
Made no sense
Laura McClure
"You're given your leg"
Anne Quadamp female :
Footage of her in home
Horrible audio
What is the point of this channel?
Marissa Strock DBK
Female veteran
Horrible audio
News story--personal narrative
Positive views of medicine
Liane: a legless & armless amputee
Just shows the fitting of legs
Rehab of Pinter Timea
Dramatic/emo music in story
Non-US representation
Multiple short videos/excerpts
Images largely focus on young females
A number of the videos center on the fitting of prostheses?
Attractive LHD:
what /why of the naming of video? Why/how videotaped
Narrative at the end: first person discussion
Sak female amputee at the beach:
Made no sense
Laura McClure
"You're given your leg"
Anne Quadamp female :
Footage of her in home
Horrible audio
What is the point of this channel?
Marissa Strock DBK
Female veteran
Horrible audio
News story--personal narrative
Positive views of medicine
Liane: a legless & armless amputee
Just shows the fitting of legs
Rehab of Pinter Timea
Dramatic/emo music in story
Non-US representation
World Disability Day Rally II
Speaking in English
Signer is present--in what language is the signing
Frustration over no action
"A few more balloons, some banners?"
"Who are we trying to fool?"
"We are going to do what we can?"
Summoning/ appealing to others to come to Delhi from Jaipur, Bangalore, or wherever
"Take the trouble, take the ownership…"
"The time has come for the disabled people…the time has come to take ownership. We have got these tools…"
This is one of the most convincing and persuasive calls to activism I have seen in a number of years. Excellent rhetoric; powerful Ethos; concise presentation; solid vocabulary/diction.
Wants to ask all the political parties specific and critical questions and get answers with specific time frames.
Obama gets a D for disability rights
Floundering on who takes leadership role
Community Choice Act: pays to insitutionalize and pay for same level of care in people's homes
People from all over the nation: circa 500
Living in community is healthier
After arrest of 99, stair crawl
Potential alliance between SEIU, a home care union: desire for living wages for home care workers
Caucus: Stumps' Club
Multiple short videos/excerpts
Images largely focus on young females
A number of the videos center on the fitting of prostheses?
Attractive LHD:
what /why of the naming of video? Why/how videotaped
Narrative at the end: first person discussion
Sak female amputee at the beach:
Made no sense
Laura McClure
"You're given your leg"
Anne Quadamp female :
Footage of her in home
Horrible audio
What is the point of this channel?
Marissa Strock DBK
Female veteran
Horrible audio
News story--personal narrative
Positive views of medicine
Liane: a legless & armless amputee
Just shows the fitting of legs
Rehab of Pinter Timea
Dramatic/emo music in story
Non-US representation
Multiple short videos/excerpts
Images largely focus on young females
A number of the videos center on the fitting of prostheses?
Attractive LHD:
what /why of the naming of video? Why/how videotaped
Narrative at the end: first person discussion
Sak female amputee at the beach:
Made no sense
Laura McClure
"You're given your leg"
Anne Quadamp female :
Footage of her in home
Horrible audio
What is the point of this channel?
Marissa Strock DBK
Female veteran
Horrible audio
News story--personal narrative
Positive views of medicine
Liane: a legless & armless amputee
Just shows the fitting of legs
Rehab of Pinter Timea
Dramatic/emo music in story
Non-US representation
World Disability Day Rally II
Speaking in English
Signer is present--in what language is the signing
Frustration over no action
"A few more balloons, some banners?"
"Who are we trying to fool?"
"We are going to do what we can?"
Summoning/ appealing to others to come to Delhi from Jaipur, Bangalore, or wherever
"Take the trouble, take the ownership…"
"The time has come for the disabled people…the time has come to take ownership. We have got these tools…"
This is one of the most convincing and persuasive calls to activism I have seen in a number of years. Excellent rhetoric; powerful Ethos; concise presentation; solid vocabulary/diction.
Wants to ask all the political parties specific and critical questions and get answers with specific time frames.
Caucus Handout
Zobel Caucus
Social Model of Disability
June 15, 2009
Related Course Readings: DSR Ch2. 14, 16, 18
General Questions/Topics from Readings:
How are disability activists representing themselves online in words and image?
How do the specific artifacts mirror or differ from the models we read about for this week?
What similarities or differences can be seen between first-world (USA) and second-world (India) disability activism?
Groups:
1: Kim, Jessica, Lora, gz
2: Diane, Debra, Christine, Sean
Before going forward or reading/viewing the materials, please:
Review all readings (obviously), but pay close attention to Charlton’s discussions of class. Please think about/brainstorm around ideas of class, class privilege, and how those privileges are expressed in the experience of the disabled and non-disabled. Then, please consider how these same privileges impact the disabled and poor in non-first world countries that have no government support for the disabled. Finally, rather than focus on the identity, remember Siebers’ emphasis on the body and reread the Wade quote he cites on 179.
Activity 1
Both Groups:
Tom Shakespeare, in Chapter 16 of DSR, presents the basic pros and cons of the social model of disability. In brief, the social model of disability is that disability is something that society and culture impose upon people who have physical impairments—this disability prevents people with impairments from fully participating in their culture and society (198).
Here is a heuristic from Shakespeare’s pros and cons (199-202):
Strengths Weaknesses
Politically Effective Neglect of the significance of impairment on people’s lives
Identifies social barriers to remove Assumes that disabled people are oppressed
Psychologically effective—improves self-esteem “crude distinction between impairment (medical) and disability (social)” (201)
Utopian ideal of barrier free society
How does the following representation match up with the strengths and weaknesses as put forth by Shakespeare?
Disability activists in DC this past April
http://www.adapt.org/freeourpeople/cca09/report04.htm
To Prepare for Class:
Review the Heuristic
Read the article
In Class:
There should be a little discussion of this during group work; however, activity is designed for an all-class discussion. After we discuss this as a group, it will lead into activity 2.
Activity 2
In Chapter 18 of DSR, James Charlton discusses class and hegemony. Near the end of his piece, he writes, “Television shows depicting the helpless and angry cripple as a counterpoint to a poignant story about love or redemeption… Most despicable are the telethons “for” crippled people, especially, poor, pathetic, crippled children. These telethons parade young children in front of the camera while celebrities like Jerry Lewis pander to people’s goodwill and pity to get their money. In the United States surveys have shown that more people form attitudes about disabilities from telethons than from any other source” (225).
Group 1: Kim, Jessica, Lora, gz (both groups, please read and view the video)
This is a link to a disability activists’ rallying call in India. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ldg0Vkz5X8
When considering the benefits of class and privilege, it is vital to recognize that globalization and economic policies as well as activism have impacts around the globe. That is why I chose this video—how does it mirror modes of activism we have read about? What can we learn from the video? What does it mean that the activists are speaking in English?
Some additional questions to consider:
Where does this fit into the social model of disability and the activism we have read about?
How does the specific video or video channel your group is to review specifically challenge hegemony? Does it unintentionally reinforce hegemony?
What kind of consciousness or awareness of disability does it promote?
Group 2: Diane, Debra, Christine, Sean (both groups, please read and view the video)
Go to YouTube. Find user: stumpsclub.
Or, click this link: http://www.youtube.com/user/stumpsclub
Review two or three videos there. What is your response?
How is this person treating/representing disability?
What reifications of class and/or gender are represented?
How does the specific video or video channel your group is to review specifically challenge hegemony? Does it unintentionally refinforce hegemony?
What kind of consciousness or awareness of disability does it promote.
What, if any, connections are made to bodies and the pleasure or pain that bodies experience?
Do you regard this material empowering?
Social Model of Disability
June 15, 2009
Related Course Readings: DSR Ch2. 14, 16, 18
General Questions/Topics from Readings:
How are disability activists representing themselves online in words and image?
How do the specific artifacts mirror or differ from the models we read about for this week?
What similarities or differences can be seen between first-world (USA) and second-world (India) disability activism?
Groups:
1: Kim, Jessica, Lora, gz
2: Diane, Debra, Christine, Sean
Before going forward or reading/viewing the materials, please:
Review all readings (obviously), but pay close attention to Charlton’s discussions of class. Please think about/brainstorm around ideas of class, class privilege, and how those privileges are expressed in the experience of the disabled and non-disabled. Then, please consider how these same privileges impact the disabled and poor in non-first world countries that have no government support for the disabled. Finally, rather than focus on the identity, remember Siebers’ emphasis on the body and reread the Wade quote he cites on 179.
Activity 1
Both Groups:
Tom Shakespeare, in Chapter 16 of DSR, presents the basic pros and cons of the social model of disability. In brief, the social model of disability is that disability is something that society and culture impose upon people who have physical impairments—this disability prevents people with impairments from fully participating in their culture and society (198).
Here is a heuristic from Shakespeare’s pros and cons (199-202):
Strengths Weaknesses
Politically Effective Neglect of the significance of impairment on people’s lives
Identifies social barriers to remove Assumes that disabled people are oppressed
Psychologically effective—improves self-esteem “crude distinction between impairment (medical) and disability (social)” (201)
Utopian ideal of barrier free society
How does the following representation match up with the strengths and weaknesses as put forth by Shakespeare?
Disability activists in DC this past April
http://www.adapt.org/freeourpeople/cca09/report04.htm
To Prepare for Class:
Review the Heuristic
Read the article
In Class:
There should be a little discussion of this during group work; however, activity is designed for an all-class discussion. After we discuss this as a group, it will lead into activity 2.
Activity 2
In Chapter 18 of DSR, James Charlton discusses class and hegemony. Near the end of his piece, he writes, “Television shows depicting the helpless and angry cripple as a counterpoint to a poignant story about love or redemeption… Most despicable are the telethons “for” crippled people, especially, poor, pathetic, crippled children. These telethons parade young children in front of the camera while celebrities like Jerry Lewis pander to people’s goodwill and pity to get their money. In the United States surveys have shown that more people form attitudes about disabilities from telethons than from any other source” (225).
Group 1: Kim, Jessica, Lora, gz (both groups, please read and view the video)
This is a link to a disability activists’ rallying call in India. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ldg0Vkz5X8
When considering the benefits of class and privilege, it is vital to recognize that globalization and economic policies as well as activism have impacts around the globe. That is why I chose this video—how does it mirror modes of activism we have read about? What can we learn from the video? What does it mean that the activists are speaking in English?
Some additional questions to consider:
Where does this fit into the social model of disability and the activism we have read about?
How does the specific video or video channel your group is to review specifically challenge hegemony? Does it unintentionally reinforce hegemony?
What kind of consciousness or awareness of disability does it promote?
Group 2: Diane, Debra, Christine, Sean (both groups, please read and view the video)
Go to YouTube. Find user: stumpsclub.
Or, click this link: http://www.youtube.com/user/stumpsclub
Review two or three videos there. What is your response?
How is this person treating/representing disability?
What reifications of class and/or gender are represented?
How does the specific video or video channel your group is to review specifically challenge hegemony? Does it unintentionally refinforce hegemony?
What kind of consciousness or awareness of disability does it promote.
What, if any, connections are made to bodies and the pleasure or pain that bodies experience?
Do you regard this material empowering?
Accessible Bodies, Usable Bodies
More Textual Free Flow
This past May, I went through usability. One of the nice parts about usability was that there were actual users who went through and tested the text, the website, etc. Since I'm reading the accessibility material, I keep seeing parallels between usability and accessibility, and I really don't think that the two strands can be easily separated. Just like I think the break between disability studies and accessibility is artificial. Seems like a huge statement, I know, and I can be stomped for saying it, but I do not believe any theory worth its salt can be parted from practice, and I don't believe that any real or meaningful practice is without theory.
Back to usable Bodies. I wonder if we cannot draw from the manufacturing and/or testing process which designs ramps, wheel chairs, and other gear for disabled folks to find out exactly what their heuristics and criteria are for disabled bodies. That would be interesting to examine in and of itself. I think that could potentially be very instructive, not just in terms of rhetorically analyzing the representation of bodies and the discourse around disabilities, but the actual representation and expectations--the limits and pass fail points--for the bodies.
What happens when we see how these things are described? What is a bodily failure? How much can or will the flesh be forced or compressed in order to fit in the tool that is supposed to enable the flesh? How much of the physical identity must be compromised in order to be capable?
Has anyone ever done readings/discourse about shit/piss bags? That's crude, but how many hundreds of thousands of people endure the use of them? How are they designed? Are they even intended to be usable? Or are they simply a form of device that is created to suit the needs of the medical providers so that their task is easier? I don't know, but bodily fluids/releases are a very basic function practiced by everyone, and thus, it seems, that it could be a base line measure for comparing other practices.
This emphasis/centering on the body--and the generation or analysis of usability tenets--fascinates me. Then again, I'm totally obsessed at the moment with theory.
What I'd really like to find out is just how much of the criteria can be shared between usability and accessibility and between texts and flesh. Where is the heart of those four circles in a Venn diagram? What do they all share?
This past May, I went through usability. One of the nice parts about usability was that there were actual users who went through and tested the text, the website, etc. Since I'm reading the accessibility material, I keep seeing parallels between usability and accessibility, and I really don't think that the two strands can be easily separated. Just like I think the break between disability studies and accessibility is artificial. Seems like a huge statement, I know, and I can be stomped for saying it, but I do not believe any theory worth its salt can be parted from practice, and I don't believe that any real or meaningful practice is without theory.
Back to usable Bodies. I wonder if we cannot draw from the manufacturing and/or testing process which designs ramps, wheel chairs, and other gear for disabled folks to find out exactly what their heuristics and criteria are for disabled bodies. That would be interesting to examine in and of itself. I think that could potentially be very instructive, not just in terms of rhetorically analyzing the representation of bodies and the discourse around disabilities, but the actual representation and expectations--the limits and pass fail points--for the bodies.
What happens when we see how these things are described? What is a bodily failure? How much can or will the flesh be forced or compressed in order to fit in the tool that is supposed to enable the flesh? How much of the physical identity must be compromised in order to be capable?
Has anyone ever done readings/discourse about shit/piss bags? That's crude, but how many hundreds of thousands of people endure the use of them? How are they designed? Are they even intended to be usable? Or are they simply a form of device that is created to suit the needs of the medical providers so that their task is easier? I don't know, but bodily fluids/releases are a very basic function practiced by everyone, and thus, it seems, that it could be a base line measure for comparing other practices.
This emphasis/centering on the body--and the generation or analysis of usability tenets--fascinates me. Then again, I'm totally obsessed at the moment with theory.
What I'd really like to find out is just how much of the criteria can be shared between usability and accessibility and between texts and flesh. Where is the heart of those four circles in a Venn diagram? What do they all share?
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Susan Sontag's Illness & Disability
I wanted to use Sontag in my Monday caucus, but there's not enough room/time. She reminded me of how much I love theory.
These are free-flow drafts to play with ideas and get a sense of the landscape.
Sontag, Susan Illness as Metaphor
1989 Anchor Books
3
"My point is not physical illness itself but the uses of illness as a figure or metaphor. My point is that illness is not a metaphor, and that the most truthful way of regarding illness--and the healthiest way of being ill--is one most purified of, most resistant to, metaphoric thinking."
7
"The solution is hardly to stop telling cancer patients the truth, but to rectify the conception of the disease, to de-mythicize it."
I love this, and it seems like this is potential approach to handling and working with disA in a meaningful and healthy way to approach it. It also provides a way for non-disA folks to engage with the content in potentially meaningful ways.
Engage and discuss it, and you take away the stigma from it. Look at ads for Erectile Dysfunction: who in the 1970s would have thought a Senator would or could run an ad for ED? And it happened in the 90s. Why not assume we can have the same approach , but in a useful way, towards disA where a frank discussion is designed to lower the stigma and emotional gutting which terms like this often cause?
AIDS and Its Metaphors
1989 Anchor Books
100
"Twelve years ago, when I became a cancer patient, what particularly enraged me--and distracted me from my own terror and despair at my doctors' gloomy prognosis--was seeing how much the very reputation of this illness added to the suffering of those who have it."
How much of this do we see in disability? This mirrors much of the discussion about self-image disempowerment, etc. [I don't have my DSR or my notes with me, else I'd name drop] that we've read about. The very reputation of disability, the very power of the word changes how we deal with people.
Similar with passing--for disability or queerness, and now for health. We can't let people know that we're sick. We do not even want to name it. If we do, then we summon up all the power that is associated with it.
Perhaps this is one of the reasons why people are constantly changing names for disorders, diseases, and social problems--they are constantly trying to shift, to dodge, to avoid the stigma and associations that are connected to a specific word or intention.
119
"From the beginning the construction of the illness had depended upon on notions that separated one group of people from another--the sick from the well, people with ARc from people with AIdS, them and us--while implying the imminent dissolution of these distinctions."
Again, substitute in disability for illness, and how much difference is there? The domination of medicalization is incredible.
133
"The most feared diseases, those that are not simply fatal but transform the body into something alienating, like leprosy and syphilis and cholera and (in the imagination of many) cancer, are the ones that seem particularly susceptible to promotion to "plague.""
I wonder if we could take this short text and then explore how people react with they see disabled folks in chairs, having seizures, or with bodies that act outside of their control. As one of the DSR readings quoted an author, these are not just issues of interpretation or perception, these are very real physical things that happen to bodies--and it is is not deniable. And it impacts the disabled significantly, not just in social ways, emotions, or humiliation, or enduring paternalism. Instead, there is the very real experience of a convulsion, lost limb, or what have you.
How much of our disabling of those with impairments is rejection of the potential that such things could happen to us--our bodies could rebel, act autonomously, and force us to rely on caregivers in order to take care of basic needs?
These are free-flow drafts to play with ideas and get a sense of the landscape.
Sontag, Susan Illness as Metaphor
1989 Anchor Books
3
"My point is not physical illness itself but the uses of illness as a figure or metaphor. My point is that illness is not a metaphor, and that the most truthful way of regarding illness--and the healthiest way of being ill--is one most purified of, most resistant to, metaphoric thinking."
7
"The solution is hardly to stop telling cancer patients the truth, but to rectify the conception of the disease, to de-mythicize it."
I love this, and it seems like this is potential approach to handling and working with disA in a meaningful and healthy way to approach it. It also provides a way for non-disA folks to engage with the content in potentially meaningful ways.
Engage and discuss it, and you take away the stigma from it. Look at ads for Erectile Dysfunction: who in the 1970s would have thought a Senator would or could run an ad for ED? And it happened in the 90s. Why not assume we can have the same approach , but in a useful way, towards disA where a frank discussion is designed to lower the stigma and emotional gutting which terms like this often cause?
AIDS and Its Metaphors
1989 Anchor Books
100
"Twelve years ago, when I became a cancer patient, what particularly enraged me--and distracted me from my own terror and despair at my doctors' gloomy prognosis--was seeing how much the very reputation of this illness added to the suffering of those who have it."
How much of this do we see in disability? This mirrors much of the discussion about self-image disempowerment, etc. [I don't have my DSR or my notes with me, else I'd name drop] that we've read about. The very reputation of disability, the very power of the word changes how we deal with people.
Similar with passing--for disability or queerness, and now for health. We can't let people know that we're sick. We do not even want to name it. If we do, then we summon up all the power that is associated with it.
Perhaps this is one of the reasons why people are constantly changing names for disorders, diseases, and social problems--they are constantly trying to shift, to dodge, to avoid the stigma and associations that are connected to a specific word or intention.
119
"From the beginning the construction of the illness had depended upon on notions that separated one group of people from another--the sick from the well, people with ARc from people with AIdS, them and us--while implying the imminent dissolution of these distinctions."
Again, substitute in disability for illness, and how much difference is there? The domination of medicalization is incredible.
133
"The most feared diseases, those that are not simply fatal but transform the body into something alienating, like leprosy and syphilis and cholera and (in the imagination of many) cancer, are the ones that seem particularly susceptible to promotion to "plague.""
I wonder if we could take this short text and then explore how people react with they see disabled folks in chairs, having seizures, or with bodies that act outside of their control. As one of the DSR readings quoted an author, these are not just issues of interpretation or perception, these are very real physical things that happen to bodies--and it is is not deniable. And it impacts the disabled significantly, not just in social ways, emotions, or humiliation, or enduring paternalism. Instead, there is the very real experience of a convulsion, lost limb, or what have you.
How much of our disabling of those with impairments is rejection of the potential that such things could happen to us--our bodies could rebel, act autonomously, and force us to rely on caregivers in order to take care of basic needs?
Friday, June 12, 2009
Accessibility Project Brainstorming
My brain is rushing again. After a few days with the parents, which were good, I've been thinking about accessibility and physical training, but I've not been able to write or get much done. Forty-five minutes here and thirty minutes there. Anyhow, it's been nice having some time to write and think.
I am a bit frustrated because my searches for closed captioning are turning up squat at Google. I'm sure this is my lack of proper or specific terms. I am attempting to find specific details about the populations which use closed captioning. I also want to know what percentage of sports and physical training videos offer closed captioning. Finally, I am attempting to locate coaches and trainers who train athletes and clients via video over the web. All of this is information for the grist mill which is my brain.
I'm still looking for that information.
In the mean time, here's a rough idea for a final project: create a video appeal to commercial producers of physical and sports training videos--especially those who use YouTube, etc., to post samples of their training videos as sales comeons--to present their material in accessible formats. The video should be a concise, clean, and clear positioning of the arguments for closed captioning--and it should be tightly constructed. The rest of the final project would be a discussion of the rhetorical tools used in the video, how I appealed to what for the specific audience (ethos, etc.), and then why and how I constructed the accessibility of the video. The video would obviously be closed captioned and have an attached script. If there was time and motivation, perhaps even include the extended notes? We'll see.
But first, I need some numbers and data, and I cannot seem to find them. Searching sloppy style, I guess. Need to improve that.
The theoretical backing for this has several bases. First, the very nature of practice in much of Disability Studies is that academic research and discussion is a form of activism--while arguable, it is a potential position. By referring to self in the process as non-disabled, that would center the disabled instead of the "able" bodied. Third, I can position the call for the material not just to benefit people with disabilities, but that it benefits numerous users, and I can cite common YouTube and other social video sharing problems (bad volume, lack of clarity, etc.). I think one of the key points is to indicate that this is a largely untapped market with already huge sales--if 15% of the population is disabled, how much of a market is not being tapped?
How do I even locate the total sales of physical training videos, information products, or web based materials? I'm not used to researching businesses, so I'm not quite sure how to approach that angle.
Here's a side note: if we're so interested in shutting down sports, art, music, and "electives" in school, why doesn't the public at least demand that school districts or the federal government provide a specific amount of web-based education for children. This way, parents could attempt to expose their children to this kind of education at home or at libraries, and then the children would at least receive some exposure. I am not suggesting that distance or web based training can fully replace the in-person educational experience, but it would at least provide some form of public education for children. And if this project is currently underway, then what is needed to publicize or increase the interactive nature or appeal of educational web material for children?
I think even has potential for the US Gov't, or state gov't, to sponsor state and/or national fitness by providing very simple, clear, and safe exercises on a regular basis to the public through official sites.
I am a bit frustrated because my searches for closed captioning are turning up squat at Google. I'm sure this is my lack of proper or specific terms. I am attempting to find specific details about the populations which use closed captioning. I also want to know what percentage of sports and physical training videos offer closed captioning. Finally, I am attempting to locate coaches and trainers who train athletes and clients via video over the web. All of this is information for the grist mill which is my brain.
I'm still looking for that information.
In the mean time, here's a rough idea for a final project: create a video appeal to commercial producers of physical and sports training videos--especially those who use YouTube, etc., to post samples of their training videos as sales comeons--to present their material in accessible formats. The video should be a concise, clean, and clear positioning of the arguments for closed captioning--and it should be tightly constructed. The rest of the final project would be a discussion of the rhetorical tools used in the video, how I appealed to what for the specific audience (ethos, etc.), and then why and how I constructed the accessibility of the video. The video would obviously be closed captioned and have an attached script. If there was time and motivation, perhaps even include the extended notes? We'll see.
But first, I need some numbers and data, and I cannot seem to find them. Searching sloppy style, I guess. Need to improve that.
The theoretical backing for this has several bases. First, the very nature of practice in much of Disability Studies is that academic research and discussion is a form of activism--while arguable, it is a potential position. By referring to self in the process as non-disabled, that would center the disabled instead of the "able" bodied. Third, I can position the call for the material not just to benefit people with disabilities, but that it benefits numerous users, and I can cite common YouTube and other social video sharing problems (bad volume, lack of clarity, etc.). I think one of the key points is to indicate that this is a largely untapped market with already huge sales--if 15% of the population is disabled, how much of a market is not being tapped?
How do I even locate the total sales of physical training videos, information products, or web based materials? I'm not used to researching businesses, so I'm not quite sure how to approach that angle.
Here's a side note: if we're so interested in shutting down sports, art, music, and "electives" in school, why doesn't the public at least demand that school districts or the federal government provide a specific amount of web-based education for children. This way, parents could attempt to expose their children to this kind of education at home or at libraries, and then the children would at least receive some exposure. I am not suggesting that distance or web based training can fully replace the in-person educational experience, but it would at least provide some form of public education for children. And if this project is currently underway, then what is needed to publicize or increase the interactive nature or appeal of educational web material for children?
I think even has potential for the US Gov't, or state gov't, to sponsor state and/or national fitness by providing very simple, clear, and safe exercises on a regular basis to the public through official sites.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
