By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Personally, whilst I do sympathise with her situation, my gut instinct says she’s booked for a music experience, they’ve done everything they can do satisfy her but for her to still be suing because the two warm up acts didn’t have an interpreter is harsh.
Is she being over the top or should they have made sure she had an interpreter and set list for the warm up acts as well?
Personally, I believe a concert should be accessible for all and her needs are catered for. This young Little Mix fan, although deaf still enjoys her music and singing along to the tracks. Also, the support acts will have a similar appeal and sound to that of Little Mix - potentially they could acquire a new fan if she enjoys their performance, sound and lyrics.
Personally, I side with the parent on this one. Naturally, I don't know all the 'ins and outs' of the story, but they have paid good money for six tickets, they have also given advanced warning of the need of an interpreter. Yes, this young girl is deaf, but should that mean that she can't enjoy herself and the experience of going to a concert? Just believe showing some goodwill from the organisers would have been real good publicity, surprised that in this day and age it isn't standard practice.
Who’s in the right and who’s in the wrong here? on 07:43 - Jan 24 by christiand
Personally, I believe a concert should be accessible for all and her needs are catered for. This young Little Mix fan, although deaf still enjoys her music and singing along to the tracks. Also, the support acts will have a similar appeal and sound to that of Little Mix - potentially they could acquire a new fan if she enjoys their performance, sound and lyrics.
Personally, I side with the parent on this one. Naturally, I don't know all the 'ins and outs' of the story, but they have paid good money for six tickets, they have also given advanced warning of the need of an interpreter. Yes, this young girl is deaf, but should that mean that she can't enjoy herself and the experience of going to a concert? Just believe showing some goodwill from the organisers would have been real good publicity, surprised that in this day and age it isn't standard practice.
'This young Little Mix fan, although deaf still enjoys her music and singing along to the tracks.' read the article again.
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
1
Who’s in the right and who’s in the wrong here? on 07:59 - Jan 24 with 4867 views
Who’s in the right and who’s in the wrong here? on 07:43 - Jan 24 by christiand
Personally, I believe a concert should be accessible for all and her needs are catered for. This young Little Mix fan, although deaf still enjoys her music and singing along to the tracks. Also, the support acts will have a similar appeal and sound to that of Little Mix - potentially they could acquire a new fan if she enjoys their performance, sound and lyrics.
Personally, I side with the parent on this one. Naturally, I don't know all the 'ins and outs' of the story, but they have paid good money for six tickets, they have also given advanced warning of the need of an interpreter. Yes, this young girl is deaf, but should that mean that she can't enjoy herself and the experience of going to a concert? Just believe showing some goodwill from the organisers would have been real good publicity, surprised that in this day and age it isn't standard practice.
Agree with your sentiments it is just a shame you didn't read the article. It is the mother who is deaf.
Too many business pay little attention to their obligations. Enforced by law, towards those with disabilities. I have found this out since my wife has been in a wheelchair. Shops she can no linger get into is a good example. Did consider taking similar action over a musical festival on a caravan park in Cornwall. They didn't have any accomodation which was wheelchair accessible and refused to refund deposit.
Legally they have a duty to make reasonable adjustments, the warm up acts are part of the show and factored into the ticket price so they have no real excuse for not providing an interpreter for the first two acts.
Who’s in the right and who’s in the wrong here? on 07:59 - Jan 24 by Pinewoodblue
Agree with your sentiments it is just a shame you didn't read the article. It is the mother who is deaf.
Too many business pay little attention to their obligations. Enforced by law, towards those with disabilities. I have found this out since my wife has been in a wheelchair. Shops she can no linger get into is a good example. Did consider taking similar action over a musical festival on a caravan park in Cornwall. They didn't have any accomodation which was wheelchair accessible and refused to refund deposit.
It is a shame that many businesses will only sit up and listen when someone resorts to the suing culture. On a positive note it is good to hear that despite the difficulties life has thrown at you and d Mrs P you are still getting out there.
"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
Who’s in the right and who’s in the wrong here? on 06:48 - Jan 24 by Benters2
The World has gone nuts.
Why would you want to go to a popular music concert if you are deaf?
[Post edited 24 Jan 2018 8:26]
That was my first thought, live music is a special experience if the act you are watching can perform to a level above their recorded music. There are many bands who simply perform far better or far worse live, apart from that live performers bring emotion and feeling through their instruments and performance. How can a deaf person appreciate this aspect of live music? Knowing the words is not a part of enjoying a performance. One example off the top of my head was The Verve at Glastonbury 2008(?) They performed Love is Noise at the end of the set for the very first time, even the BBC cameraman panned back thinking that the set was over. They then produced an amazing end to brilliant set. I know we are talking about Little Mix here but they may well put together a decent live show, possibly. This is thinking about the case from enjoying a live music perspective.
0
Who’s in the right and who’s in the wrong here? on 09:23 - Jan 24 with 4748 views
Who’s in the right and who’s in the wrong here? on 08:36 - Jan 24 by christiand
You're right should have read the article first! However, still think that concert organisers should try and make the experience accessible for all.
It is a legal requirement to make public events accessible.
In practice, it can be challenging. I once showed a film in mental health training where it depended on being able to see - it was based on a great street theatre campaign.
I was given a telling off because a person without sight couldn't understand it, which I just hadn't thought about. Now I either don't use it or ask at the beginning about people's needs and adjust the materials I use accordingly. It's good to keep learning.
Here's the film, it's very short and quite cool but you can understand why someone with a visual impairment would feel excluded:
3
Who’s in the right and who’s in the wrong here? on 09:27 - Jan 24 with 4728 views
Who’s in the right and who’s in the wrong here? on 06:48 - Jan 24 by Benters2
The World has gone nuts.
Why would you want to go to a popular music concert if you are deaf?
[Post edited 24 Jan 2018 8:26]
She was taking her daughter. She'd paid for her ticket and should have been able to get the most possible out of the experience just like everyone else who bought a ticket.
Who’s in the right and who’s in the wrong here? on 06:48 - Jan 24 by Benters2
The World has gone nuts.
Why would you want to go to a popular music concert if you are deaf?
[Post edited 24 Jan 2018 8:26]
On the one hand most sensible people would say you are correct and that this woman is being a bit silly. On the other hand the law is the law. It may be that before long blind people are provided with units to listen to live commentary of football games for instance as part of the Equalities Act.
In the spirit of reconciliation and happiness at the end of the Banter Era (RIP) and as a result of promotion I have cleared out my ignore list. Look forwards to reading your posts!
Who’s in the right and who’s in the wrong here? on 09:23 - Jan 24 by TLA
It is a legal requirement to make public events accessible.
In practice, it can be challenging. I once showed a film in mental health training where it depended on being able to see - it was based on a great street theatre campaign.
I was given a telling off because a person without sight couldn't understand it, which I just hadn't thought about. Now I either don't use it or ask at the beginning about people's needs and adjust the materials I use accordingly. It's good to keep learning.
Here's the film, it's very short and quite cool but you can understand why someone with a visual impairment would feel excluded:
World's gone mad, unfortunately not everyone can do everything.
What if this was a band playing a gig in a local pub at £6 a ticket - that would then be a public event that isn't accessible but the band are probably barely covering their expenses so wouldn't be able to afford an interpreter.
The ladies point about not going to see a film and missing the first 20 minutes doesn't make sense either, the support acts aren't part of the main event - most people that go to concerts don't even watch them anyway.
I would have thought that being deaf at a Little Mix concert would be a definite advantage.
Less facetiously, providing a sign language interpreter for the main act but not the support acts is reasonable in my opinion. AS to suing the promoters, it depends whether she is doing that to raise awareness, because in that case she has been successful.
Who’s in the right and who’s in the wrong here? on 08:10 - Jan 24 by BanksterDebtSlave
It is a shame that many businesses will only sit up and listen when someone resorts to the suing culture. On a positive note it is good to hear that despite the difficulties life has thrown at you and d Mrs P you are still getting out there.
I don’t mean to sound insensitive but wouldn’t it be better if the lyrics came up on a screen rather than having a Sign Language interpreter? Surely this distracts you from the performance whereas on the screen you can see the performance and the lyrics.
Who’s in the right and who’s in the wrong here? on 09:28 - Jan 24 by chicoazul
On the one hand most sensible people would say you are correct and that this woman is being a bit silly. On the other hand the law is the law. It may be that before long blind people are provided with units to listen to live commentary of football games for instance as part of the Equalities Act.
I don't have a problem with any of this when it comes to big concerts and well profitable and resourced concert promoters, or top level football (a radio with the local commentary does the trick). but the law applies at all levels, and if enforced throughout it could kill smaller events and things done for fun rather than purely for money.
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
0
Who’s in the right and who’s in the wrong here? on 10:26 - Jan 24 with 4610 views
I think she'll lose. The promoters made an offer to give free tickets to an interpreter of their choice (but whom the customers would have had to pay). The customer refused this so they provided an interpreter for the main act, staging and lighting for the interpreter, and upgraded seats for the whole party. Was this a reasonable adhustment, bearing in mind it was in exchange for the money for only three seats.
Deaf culture is extremely feisty, and I'm not surprised she is suing, but I think the Court will decide the promoters acted reasonably.
The key to it all may come down to whether she requested an interpreter for Little Mix or explicitly stated that she wanted one for the support acts as well.
If the promoters lose this case then many small and medium sized venues may be forced to close, and I say that as a promoter of a medium sized venue.
1
Who’s in the right and who’s in the wrong here? on 10:42 - Jan 24 with 4566 views
Who’s in the right and who’s in the wrong here? on 10:35 - Jan 24 by connorscontract
I think she'll lose. The promoters made an offer to give free tickets to an interpreter of their choice (but whom the customers would have had to pay). The customer refused this so they provided an interpreter for the main act, staging and lighting for the interpreter, and upgraded seats for the whole party. Was this a reasonable adhustment, bearing in mind it was in exchange for the money for only three seats.
Deaf culture is extremely feisty, and I'm not surprised she is suing, but I think the Court will decide the promoters acted reasonably.
The key to it all may come down to whether she requested an interpreter for Little Mix or explicitly stated that she wanted one for the support acts as well.
If the promoters lose this case then many small and medium sized venues may be forced to close, and I say that as a promoter of a medium sized venue.
Do small and medium sized venues get a lot of deaf parents bringing their children to gigs?
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
However, still think that concert organisers should try and make the experience accessible for all. 
