Signing at Little Mix concert

proggy

sev112 said:

proggy said:

If I had to sit through a Little Mix concert I'd be wishing that I was deaf.

But not blind;)

I would probably end up going blind though....... if you know what I mean.

axisus

FelineGuitars said:

Mind you some Hip Hop /rap would be challenging to sign for just in terms of speed of delivery

Royal mail should employ some rappers when their careers go down the pan.

Guitar_Slinger

In the early 90s, I hung around with a girl who worked for Roadrunner Records who'd get us on the guest list at The Marquee. Trouble is, it was always six thrash metal bands called "Dark Black Cross Angel of Morbid Lawnmower Corrosion Death" (or some variation of those words. I've seen 'em all, on a school night, and had no fucking idea what they were on about. Who should I sue?

AlexC

sev112 said:

The vitriol to a professional very talented band on here is hilarious from a bunch of amateur fat over 50s group of prog rockers who for the most part play an occasional pub gig looking like they a really having an orgasm while playing a guitar solo, badly

hubris, what me mate ? 

Just a few thoughts regarding your very articulate post -
1) Vitriol? I’ve seen some humorous comments and some genuine concerns over the sexual nature of the lyrics and whether that is suitable content for children.
2) Talented band? They are a group, not a band. A band plays instruments. Could be a string quartet, could be a country and western band. Little Mix do not play anything. They are a vocal pop group. 
3) A bunch of amateur fat over 50s prog rockers...etc? What has anyone’s age or body shape got to do with anything? Also, Prog Rock tends to require a high level of musicianship so being a bad guitarist ain’t gonna hack it... and Prog doesn’t really go down well in a pub. So where are you getting this idea from? TFB seems to me to be full of a diverse range of players of all capabilities who like and play all sorts of music.
4) Are You connected to Little Mix in any way?

Oh, and just for the record, I am neither in my 50s or fat or play in a Prog Pub Rock Band. Anyway, great post and not at all opiniated. Nice one.

DefaultM

At first I thought it was a kid that was deaf. That would have been bad enough...

Philly_Q

FelineGuitars said:

I'd like to see someone doing sign language for Steel Panther......

Or Cannibal Corpse.


Until today I had no idea there was such a thing as people signing at concerts.  So presumably they stand by the stage, above and facing the crowd, trying to convey the sense (word used loosely) of the lyrics to hundreds or thousands of people, 99% of whom find them an annoying distraction? 

Not a job for the self-conscious.

WezV

Gassage said:

Just took my blind mate to the Louvre.

Bloody Mona Lisa still has no braille subtitles.

I'm suing the bastards.

In all seriousness this is what I was thinking.

do art galleries need to do something so blind people can enjoy ALL of their exhibits.

does a city like Chester or York need to rip down all its historical buildings to allow disabled access.  

Or, just maybe, if you’re disabled should you accept there are some experiences you may not be able to fully enjoy? Reasonable adaptation is fine, but that can only do so much.

This woman had a win.  It was a worthy cause.  Her continued action makes it seem like she is taking the piss.

GoldenEraGuitars

When I read the article I was going to post about it. But, in this PC world we live in I thought I’d get shot down in flames.

Tbh, it reads like she was goading someone for a fight. The bigger issue for me is that this made the main news. She didn’t get an interpreter for a pic n mix support act? Where do you even start with that?

hywelg

I'd like to bet she didn't watch the signer most of the time. It would be meaningless anyway and the visual show would have been distracting her from the signer. She's made her point and now she comes across as attention seeking.

munckee

Yeah but it could have been as good as this:

jonnyburgo

None of us is deaf AFAIK  so maybe we arent quite so qualified to talk on it.I think that there should be signing at gigs, The promoters can afford it, after all they charge silly money for tickets.

It s not unreasonable for big gigs to make provision. Obviously if its  a gig down the Dog and Duck then it's unreasonable to fund an interpreter , that's just common sense. Of course she couldnt hear the music but she would have felt it at some level ( we've all felt the rumble of bass and the kick of a drum) and felt the atmosphere, so should be able to "hear" what the lyrics are, however banal they may be.

The need to sue does stick in my throat though. She says it is to raise awareness and get the law tightened up (I may be wrong but a concert should provide an interpreter by law, to not do this is to deny access to certain individuals based on their disability). This company flatly refused to uphold the law until threatened.

I trust that if she gets some money that once shes gives herself the ticket money back the rest will be going to charity?

Nitefly

About 20 years ago, I was in a covers outfit, and an agent got us a gig at a caravan site clubhouse in Milnthorpe, near the Lake District.

Up we go, set up, check sound, all good, grab a quick pint and off we go.  Quite a few folk in the room, all ages including loads of kids.  All the kids took to the dance floor, but we got no reaction at all from the adults.


A quick word with the DJ at half-time revealed it was the annual deaf & dumb caravanners weekend...

Still, at least nobody sued us 

Garthy

I hope she's awarded two thirds of her tickets costs, but has to pay all legal costs for both sides.

bodhi

Let's ignore disabilities, girl bands, possible attention seekers, and press article fluff for a second and consider just this:

The organising company refused to uphold its obligations as stipulated by the law, until someone stood up to them and threatened legal action.

And even then they (apparently) didn't meet those obligations fully.

Col_Decker

Saw this on my twitter last night ..

bodhi

That's great and looks impressive.

I do wonder if it actually did take a threat of legal action before they took these steps, though.

"She was initially offered carer tickets and told that she could bring her own interpreter, but she didn't consider that met her needs or amounted to full access.

Speaking exclusively to the BBC, Sally explained: "We asked two or three times, please can you provide the interpreter for us, and the explanation we got back was just a 'no'."

I don't think all the details are clear enough.

Heartfeltdawn

bodhi said:

I do wonder if it actually did take a threat of legal action before they took these steps, though.

According to the BBC article:

"Under the Equality Act 2010, any organisation supplying a service to the public is under a duty to make reasonable adjustments to ensure that a disabled person's experience is as close as possible to that of someone without a disability.

With just days to go before the concert, and no interpreter in place, Sally took an unprecedented legal step.

She decided to instruct lawyers to apply for a court injunction to force LHG Live to provide a British Sign Language interpreter.

It worked. Hours before the hearing was due to take place, LHG Live agreed."

So it would appear that legal action did spur them on. 

Ravenous

Well it implies they started asking around for an interpreter on 1st sept and tried to hire a commercial interpreter after that point. (Which may indicate they hung around for 2 months before starting.)

From their side, it sounds impossible for them to get an interpreter as the support wasn't confirmed for quite a while.

As usual the truth is a little different to the original story (as I thought the moment I heard about it.)

Be interesting to see if it gets to court.  I think they have a case.

bodhi

Heartfeltdawn said:

So it would appear that legal action did spur them on. 

Well, yes - but I think it's fair to say that we don't know how factually correct the BBC article is.  Or the statement released by LHG Live, for that matter.

bodhi

Ravenous said:

As usual the truth is a little different to the original story (as I thought the moment I heard about it.)

Indeed.

I didn't know or think that the interpreter would actually have to learn the lyrics beforehand.  I thought it would be a case of listen and interpret on the spot, but I guess it's more complicated than that, then.

If that's the case, though, then it's fair enough that there was no interpretation provided for the support acts.  Totally reasonable.