3 ms·
> Berkeley had two choices: spend a fortune adding closed captioning to the videos, or remove them from public view. Cost-conscious administrators chose the lat
by inetknght 4y ago
> Berkeley had two choices: spend a fortune adding closed captioning to the videos, or remove them from public view. Cost-conscious administrators chose the latter option.
There's no kind of "attack" here. It's UC Berkley refusing to spend money to add subtitles.
- warkdarrior 4y agoIt was an attack on the non-disabled public, who lost access to those videos (or who would have had to pay for subtitles via taxes to fund UC Berkeley).
- CapsAdmin 4y agoIf your government asks you to delete your post or pay up a million dollars, is it your fault for choosing to delete the post? There is maybe something here if the law was active before they made all the videos, but that doesn't seem to be the case.