[nfb-talk] The NFB itself (was: Losing DVS)

John G. Heim jheim at math.wisc.edu
Fri Jan 16 23:05:31 UTC 2009

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Hingson" <info at michaelhingson.com>
> For example, audible traffic signals are now viewed as the means by which 
> it
> has become safe for blind people to cross the streets of America.  Bull!
> Audible signals can be a help, but to say that not having them is
> discriminatory causes more harm than good.  If the public believes that we
> can only cross a street if there is an audible signal then those who 
> promote
> such devices are doing a disservice to all the blind by not educating the
> public and by putting these devices in prospective.  In fact I have not 
> seen
> audible signal proponents do this.
Well, by that logic, we can never ask for anything. You've made yourself a 
nice little tautology here. We can't imply that we actually need an 
accomodation because that would imply that we're helpless. But we'd better 
not ask for anything we don't need either.

> It is unfortunate that Wisconsin is not providing descriptive video John,
> but is it discriminatory?  I think not.  You can still watch tv.  Is 
> closed
> captioning, or rather the lack of it, discriminatory?  I am not a deaf
> expert.  However, I submit humanity gets more of its information through
> auditory means and so perhaps the lack of closed captioning is
> discriminatory.

First of all, I'd need to see some proof before I'd believe that. 
Otherwise, it'snothing but wild speculation. And seriously, saying the human 
race gets most of it's info via hearing rather than sight -- not very 

Secondly, it's irrelevant anyway. I'm not claiming I've been discriminated 
against. Only that the NFB's actions have been counter to my best interests. 
The NFB once again has failed to protect the interests of blind people as a 

More information about the nFB-Talk mailing list