Critical analysis on ASL access at the Grammys and Oscars

The Grammys and the Oscars, during their awards ceremonies this month, provided ASL interpreters. It made for some viral moments but were the ASL services truly accessible and beneficial to Deaf viewers?

I reached out to Sean Forbes of DPAN.TV, who is an expert on providing ASL access for big events such as the presidential debates, for insights. Check out this interview.

[Begin interview]

Alex: I’m curious of your perspectives on what was excellent and what was not satisfactory for the Deaf experience?

Sean Forbes: The first thing I want to say is that the interpreters that they picked are champ! I love and worked with many of them. The interpreting agencies are also champ. The people who are signing are great. They’re the right representatives, they’re the right picks. It’s a perfect fit for these types of awards shows. My biggest issue is the lack of viewing experience. The viewing experience was not that great. When I started providing access for ASL with livestreams, it was really important to me that people receive access simultaneously. It means that the video of the event itself, the captioning, and the ASL is shown at the same time, where I can view in one location rather than separate locations. That’s my biggest issue with the Grammys and Oscars. Both had interesting ways to provide access. But is it truly accessible? I feel it was not. The Grammys had a lineup of interpreters on the red carpet. But where could I watch it? I tried to watch on Grammys.com but I saw nothing. Then on the next day, I saw viral posts saying people “brought” their own interpreters, when we know they didn’t bring their own interpreters. The Grammys or whatever organization they partnered with brought the interpreters. Then they’ll ask, “Do you want to have an interpreter with you for an interview?” So it’s a little ill-conceived in my opinion. Secondly, for the Oscars, they provided a separate livestream but it had no audio on it. No captioning. Nothing. It’s just ASL signing. Understand this — when I watched it on TV, it depends on your TV station — for example if you have cable or attenta TV, or YouTube.TV or Hulu Live, these are not synced. If you turn on Channel 4 on your antenna, you may get the same broadcast timing as local channels, but if you turn on YouTube.TV, it’ll probably be delayed a bit. Now, if you add an ASL livestream in a separate channel, it might be even more delayed.

Alex: So your point is that it’s not presented at the same time with all elements there. The signing, the captioning, and the event.

Sean Forbes: You have to remember that Deafness is a spectrum. We have hard-of-hearing people, we have hard-of-hearing people who don’t know sign language, so they may want captioning with audio at the same time. Some people want all three at the same time. Some people just want ASL. It varies so I think it’s better to provide all at the same time rather than separate them.

I find it very interesting that the Grammys is represented by CBS. They typically have a contract with the Grammys to provide the show on CBS’ platforms. The Oscars is on ABC. Now, I want you to think about the NFL too. Because the NFL is showing it on a national platform. This year it was on FOX, I think? One of the big networks.

Alex: FOX, yes.

Sean: So think about that. FOX agreed to allow the halftime show to be shown on YouTube. So I really have to applaud Howard Rosenblum and Alexis (Kashar) because they’re able to get that kind of access, to have FOX’s broadcast be on YouTube. Now, when talking about the Grammys and the Oscars, it seems like they didn’t provide that kind of access for probably several reasons. CBS has a big contract with the Grammys to have nonexclusive — I mean exclusive rights to broadcast the awards. So it seems like a loophole to provide ASL access on their YouTube with no audio and no visuals of the awards. Again, who is making that decision? Who is sitting at the table who is saying, “Okay, fine, we can do it this way.” Why do you do it that way? It’s not effective. You’re spending money for ineffective access! Or do you just pull back and don’t do it? And argue with them? Again, I’m not the person sitting at that table. But if it was me, I wouldn’t do it. Why provide that kind of access if it is not accessible? I feel that the Grammys and the Oscars are in a position to negotiate with the networks to provide ASL access, but instead, they chose to maybe get consultation from disability organizations on what they think the best practices are. I mean, if you reach out to me about how to provide wheelchair access to a building, I would say I’m not the right fit for that. I would refer or just say, “It’s not our wheelhouse.” But someone is not making these decisions and making decision for the Deaf community and not involving the Deaf community. So the famous phrase, “Nothing about us without us” really applies in this situation.

[End interview]

Thank you, Sean, for sharing your perspectives. I reached out to the people behind the ASL access at the Grammys and Oscars and I will share.

The Grammys’ ASL access was provided in coordination by an organization called Recording Artists and Music Professionals with Disabilities (RAMPD), which was founded by Lachi, a Blind and hearing artist who is also on the Grammys New York Chapter board. RAMPD worked with a California interpreting agency called Pro Bono this year but have coordinated ASL interpreters at the Grammys with various agencies for the past four years.

I called Lachi and another RAMPD representative this morning with an interpreter and got their insights. You can read their responses here in the PIP and I’ll sign it in ASL.

Lachi said when the Recording Academy initially asked RAMPD what they wanted, they asked for “everything,” for interpreters to be there in the main ceremony, near the stage, and for a camera to be on them for a PIP screen. Lachi said RAMPD is limited in what they can get because they can only consult on the issue. It's up to the Recording Academy (Grammys) what they will push for, and ultimately, the Grammys has to answer to the broadcaster, which is CBS. She said what you see with the ASL interpreters is the amount that RAMPD has been able to do so far.

It is Lachi's opinion that some larger broadcasters may not make an announcement about things like the ASL interpreters on the red carpet in advance because they are afraid that there would be backlash if it didn’t pan out the way they wanted it to. Lachi said it’s more difficult because RAMPD's parnership is with the Recording Academy, so they don't have access to CBS’s inner workings of their broadcast, and the bureaucracy in place. On the red carpet, Lachi noticed that some of the press outlets weren’t very receptive to providing an interpreter, so “celebrity buy-in” to force the issue has so far been the most effective route.

Lachi said it was her goal to amplify this discussion on ASL and Deaf culture at the Grammys to the public and they feel they’ve achieved that through viral moments of ASL interpreters on the red carpet, but that there is much more work to be done. Lachi / RAMPD said they hope to eventually bring in members of the Deaf community to be on the Recording Academy board like she is, and be a part of the conversation to lay out requests for more ASL access, such as PIP access.

We ended the conversation by discussing an idea of a Deaf-led press outlet working on the red carpet with an interpreter to provide access to Deaf audiences.

Thanks Lachi/RAMPD for the dialogue.

The Oscars’ ASL access was provided in coordination by LaVant Consulting, which is led by Andraea Lavant, who is a disabled person who uses a wheelchair and is hearing. The Oscars’ access team included Deaf consultants and interpreters.

I reached out to them through an email and was connected to a representative from the Academy.

They explained that the Academy is not permitted to have a PIP showing the Oscars ceremony on their YouTube due to broadcast rights with ABC. They said their ASL livestream reached over 1.4 million views on YouTube and that it’s a work in progress. The Academy said they look forward to continuing conversations with the disability community as they continue to expand their efforts to support accessibility and inclusion at the Oscars and in other spaces in which the Academy operates.

Thanks to the Academy for the response.

That’s all that I have to share for now. Here’s hoping that during next year’s Grammys and Oscars — and for any other major event where ASL interpreters are provided — the broadcasters will allow the awards shows to provide a split-screen experience with interpreting and captioning, and ultimately for Deaf people to fully enjoy it and also be involved in every step of the process.