Negotiating quality assessment in media accessibility: the case of live subtitling

Abstract

AbstractGiven the recent shift in scholarly attention from the quantity to the quality of media accessibility (MA), this paper aims to provide an account of how the assessment of quality in MA may be negotiated across researchers, regulators, companies and users. Taking as an example the use of the NER model to assess live subtitling quality, it focuses on what each party needs to do and compromise on, so that a consensus can be reached and quality in MA can be assessed. It covers firstly the role played by researchers, who are normally expected to develop rigorous models of assessment while, at the same time, ensuring that they are transferable to the industry. The focus is then placed on media regulators, which must often make a choice between adopting a soft or a hard approach. The former tackles quality only superficially and may have little effect on professional practice or on the viewers’ experience. The latter requires investing time and resources to conduct research, but it also results in tangible improvements in quality. As for companies, they must be willing to accept external reviews and even to modify their training, but they can also benefit from the improved performance of their staff. Finally, in order to have a voice in this area, the users may be expected to engage with the method and the results of the quality assessment. This can enable them to have more informed and realistic demands that can lead to effective changes and, ultimately, to better access.