First the definition:
Article 19 (stylized ARTICLE 19) is a British human rights organization with a specific mandate and focus on the defense and promotion of freedom of expression and freedom of information worldwide founded in 1987. The organization takes its name from Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states:
“Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; the right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers. ”
But there are rumblings of dissent in that cultural deaf are distorting free speech and self-promotions to suggest EVERYONE with a hearing loss belongs to their community and uses sign language. If it is not done via exploiting grey areas of decibel loss degree, it is denying equal access to others like themselves who are also deaf, but are not part of their assumed cultural belief or use their communications.
Only yesterday ATR had to draw attention to an inaccessible deaf vlog entirely in sign language and inaccessible to those who need captions, who consistently used the term 'deaf' as if that sector was the same as the one she was in. The idea is the less than subtle use of the term 'deaf' to promote issues of the 'Deaf' culture instead, since the access/image was only designed for that area. A false and cynical portrayal of inclusion.
The idea is to promote the 'Image' of deafness as a cultural phenomenon, and not a disability, (or even a perceived one), and we were all one and the same sharing that view. They are entitled to promote their ways of life, they are not entitled to say we share it, or belong to it.
We read especially from the very active USA area, widespread abuses of the term deaf/Deaf via tagging e.g. YouTube video output, which when accessed by HI/deaf contain neither content or access designed for them, but still claiming/inferring we are the same people.
They believe as sign language is used, mainstream know the differences, but mainstream doesn't, it is swallowing the hype of culture as are systems of support, and this, in turn, affects how support is delivered to areas NOT cultural or signing. There is already total inequality of communication support provision in the UK.
Many leading charities, public health/LA and other system areas themselves, are producing inaccessible output to HI/deaf because THEY believe (A) We are all the same, or (B) Do not want to challenge the concept of cultural output, even when they see it is inaccurate and misleading. They are still failing then to provide the equality of access afterward. There has never been a promotional public health video that was lip-spoken. or designed for 'deaf' only. They are fobbed off with text, and told 'go look for the information yourself'.
'False News' reporting must include clarification as to WHOM the news is about... It was a master-stroke in retrospect the cultural deaf used the capitalization because it would appear the internet cannot then separate the differing areas, making e.g. accurate search impossible or difficult.. Be that as it may, there is NO EXCUSE for cultural Deaf to add 'deaf' to their tagged output, because it isn't inclusion, it is propaganda. An attempt to deceive people especially if the access format isn't there.
'Deaf' output should be about 'Deaf' areas with sign, any other should be tagged appropriately and labeled properly. It should not be for the 'deaf' to sift through dozens of inaccessible videos/files only to find out there is nothing of relevance in them for their area, but the tags say it is, this has to change. Many government sites are impossible to search for information because there are 16 definitions of what a deaf person IS. When you query we get the "Deaf have a culture and sign, and deaf use hearing aids etc..' But you still cannot narrow down specific areas. You cannot either type in the term 'deaf' capitalized or not, to determine specifics. Mostly you are referred to signing areas.
The Deaf activists are exploiting the grey areas where some sign and many don't, to suggest the very opposite, and the access then becomes entirely random, misleading, or incomplete.
50,000 being portrayed as 11,000,000 shows their maths are pretty poor as well !