Subtitles

As someone with hearing loss I have used subtitles for many years. My favourite "mis-match" was the subtitle that was shown for "Jeremy Paxman" It read "Jerry the taxman".

We have subtitles on as hubby uses them. They irritate me, so I knit/sew/crochet and listen and glance up rather than actually watching.
Sadly more and more channels when you record them go the the player, iplayer if you record casualty and hubby finds the subtitles smaller on these apps therefore more difficult to read. If he put his hearing aids in or his glasses on would solve some of the issues.

I have subtitles on where possible, DH's hearing is pretty good and he gets exasperated when I can't hear the TV, or him! Yes, some interpretations are quite funny, but can make me 'lose the track'

The one thing I can’t stand is why no sub titles when a note is written or an envelope shown with writing on it etc

I use Subtitles all the time for everything
I used to watch foreign films and got into the habit and now can’t watch without them

We have sub titles on all the time. Love them.
However after many many years of subtitles I now miss them at the cinema.

We rely on subtitles, but sometimes they are very small or white, which makes it impossible to see.

Way back when Charles and Diana got married, there were experiments with automatic subtitling. Not always good, Diana was Djana throughout, but on the return to Buckinghamshire Palace, we were treated to "udder members of the royal family: Princess Anne, Princess Margaret" – excuse me, are you calling Princess Anne a cow?

My favourite (before AI) was ‘cue the family wedding-stall’. It should have been Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall.

I don't know if this still applies, but sub-titles used to have only to contain a certain number of words or letters, so that they could be read swiftly.

And for some odd reason the people writing sub-titles were not issued with a manuscript, so unfamiliar names or concepts could quite easily be misunderstood - especially if the writer was unfamiliar with the speaker's dialect.

Next problem leading to mistakes was that it was piece-work and badly paid, so the faster you worked the more you earned.

And another unacountable idea was that programmes were submitted to the text writers very late, which was understandable enough with the News, but less so with a series, or Heaven forbid a play by Shakespeare, or a Restoration playwright.

People might like to watch Series 3 Episode 3 of W1A (from 2017) when the BBC’s new subtitling system isn’t getting names right. Theresa May was Tweezer May and Dame Maggie Smith was Dame Baggy Smith.

Clips at 10 and 20 minutes:

www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p05dpdyz/w1a-series-3-episode-3

I had a young man lodging with me for a while, who liked to use subtitles. I can't stand them and had to keep reminding him to remove them when he stopped watching as I didn't know how. Most of the time they don't help me at all, but hadn't realised they could be very inaccurate! But sometimes actors don't speak very clearly. It never used to be like that - and my hearing is fine!

My favourite was a discussion about Twelfth Night where Malvolio was rendered, "mild polio"

Subtitles always really bad on live TV

Worst are on YouTube home page

However as noted above, good for a laugh and I for one cannot cope without them, have had to stop watching American progs without subtitles

Try watching the news with subtitles they are so often inappropriate as I believe they do it phonetically but it always gives us a laugh. Here is a photo from BBC south today news!!!

That’s because they are increasingly using AI.

We always have subtitles on now too and have noticed similar mistakes. Your example made me smile. 😃