This House would protect braille out of respect for free speech

We know from the work of educational psychologists that different people acquire knowledge in different ways. For example, some sighted language learners learn more effectively visually, other aurally. The evidence mentioned in the introduction suggests that this is no less true for blind students with those without access to Braille scoring less well in exams than those with it.

This becomes an issue of free speech when by compelling people to acquire information in a certain way means that they either have less access to that information or less chance of effectively digesting it. For those for whom are proficient Braille is their preferred medium,[i] despite there being alternatives for communication[ii], it is their only medium for text, and is useful for using computers which may use a braille display.[iii]

However, even if this were just a matter of preference, it would be odd not to treat this as a free speech issue; allowing people access to information in a way that is not only possible but comfortable and convenient is at the heart of most forms of information distribution. A majority of people receive their news online but newspapers still exist because some people prefer them. It would be possible for readers to access information via microfiche but would be so inconvenient that it is rarely used.

It surely makes sense to see new delivery systems for information as an opportunity to expand, not reduce, the methods available for both imparting and receiving information.

[i] ‘Disabilities, Opportunities, Internetworking and Technology Did You Know?’, University of Washington, 2000, http://www.washington.edu/doit/Faculty/Strategies/Academic/Adaptive/dyk_computers_at_case_study.html

[ii] Deafblinduk.org.uk. Types of Communication.

[iii] Singh, Reeta, ‘Blind Handicapped Vs. Technology: How do Blind People use Computers?’, International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Vol. 3, Issue 4, April 2012, http://www.ijser.org/researchpaper%5CBLIND-HANDICAPPED-VS-TECHNOLOGY-HOW-DO-BLIND-PEOPLE-USE-COMPUTERS.pdf

Free speech may well be about the ability to receive ideas as well as express them but in neither case is it about how those ideas are expressed or received. To suggest that a state that refuses to provide a movie studio to any of its citizens who requests one is somehow suppressing their right of free expression would clearly be ridiculous. The state has a duty to guarantee the right, not the methodology.

The issue of the protection of minority languages is a difficult one for most governments as it is usually argued that most speakers of such languages also make use of the dominant language and, where they don’t, they should learn for their own good. For example French speakers in Canada must also learn English.[i] However, there are senses and experiences that are uniquely held within a community and expressed within those languages. In many ways Braille functions in similar ways, a shared experience between those who read it, a bond between users and, for the most part, denied to outsiders. By its nature, it is tactile and speaks in a way that is not true of audiobooks prepared for a wider market. In purely practical terms there is relatively little difference between reading speeds in Braille and listening to audiobooks (about 130 against 150 wpm).[ii] Learning Braille also has immense practical benefits, not least of which is being employable, 90% of those who are braille literate are employed compared to 33% of blind people who are braille illiterate.[iii]

It seems simply strange to insist that those who have already lost one form of access to the wider world – indeed the method most widely used in that world – should be denied another simply because it is deemed to be cheaper, easier or ‘better for them’. Indeed such an action is deeply redolent of the debate over minority languages. Although not all of the blind community prefers to use Braille, many of them do and that would seem sufficient reason to respect it as an important way in which they interact with the world, and receive and impart ideas – the twin pillars of free speech[iv].

[i] Burnaby, Barbara J., ‘Language Policy’, The Canadian Encyclopedia, 1996, http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/language-policy

[ii] Reading Braille. RIDB Crenwick Centre.

[iii] Ouellette, Matthew David, ‘Low Cost, Compact Braille Printing Head For Use in Handheld Braille Transcribing Device’, Mechanical Engineering Master's Theses. Paper 41. p.2 http://hdl.handle.net/2047/d20001224

[iv] Guidelines on the use of minority languages in the broadcast media. Minority Rights Group International.

The Opposition is perfectly happy to be attacked for making life easier for people with disabilities by taking down barriers that separate them from the wider population. There a parts of any community that prefer to do things in a certain way, however governments rarely commit to guaranteeing all preferences, instead they guarantee a basic level of service provision and then offer choice where possible and affordable. This is true in education and welfare right through to national defense – militaries, except the US, tend to specialise and rely on allies for other operations. 

The death of the book has been predicted with virtually every technological innovation and yet, it remains one of the most widespread and recognised means of communication in the world, with physical book sales representing about 80% of total book sales[i]. There are many reasons for this, its communicability, its physicality, it history and associations. Whatever the reasons for its enduring success, it remains one of the great design achievements of humanity as a species, comfortably alongside the wheel, the screw and cash.

Whatever the reason for this enduring success, it has it and the latest set of doomsayers may well go the way of the rest. Perhaps the greatest reason for its enduring success is that the book is silent. The reader gives voice to characters and charts their own way through fiction or selects their own phrases for emphasis in non-fiction.

There is nobody – actor or director – between the reader and the author.

If that applies to the printed word it applies equally or more to Braille. It is notable that the decline in braille literacy has led to a decline in poetry and literature output by the blind community.[ii] In turn, it is surely part of the author’s right to speak freely that they speak directly to their reader.

[i] Ebooks Popularity is Rewriting Sales History. Carol Memmet. 5 September 2011. USA Today.

[ii] Ouellette, Matthew David, ‘Low Cost, Compact Braille Printing Head For Use in Handheld Braille Transcribing Device’, Mechanical Engineering Master's Theses. Paper 41. p.2 http://hdl.handle.net/2047/d20001224

It is not a case of insisting that there are other or better options; there are other or better options. Equally, there is no need to ‘predict’ the death of the physical book; it is dying. Increasingly specialist publishers, such as Dorchester Publishing which focuses on paperbacks,[i] will only produce e-books as it cuts out the actual cost of printing and, therefore, the opportunity cost of remaindered copies.

[i] Trachtenberg, Jeffrey A., Mass Paperback Publisher Goes All Digital’, The Wall Street Journal, 6 August 2010, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703309704575413611289773690.html

We know from the work of educational psychologists that different people acquire knowledge in different ways. For example, some sighted language learners learn more effectively visually, other aurally. The evidence mentioned in the introduction suggests that this is no less true for blind students with those without access to Braille scoring less well in exams than those with it.

This becomes an issue of free speech when by compelling people to acquire information in a certain way means that they either have less access to that information or less chance of effectively digesting it. For those for whom are proficient Braille is their preferred medium,[i] despite there being alternatives for communication[ii], it is their only medium for text, and is useful for using computers which may use a braille display.[iii]

However, even if this were just a matter of preference, it would be odd not to treat this as a free speech issue; allowing people access to information in a way that is not only possible but comfortable and convenient is at the heart of most forms of information distribution. A majority of people receive their news online but newspapers still exist because some people prefer them. It would be possible for readers to access information via microfiche but would be so inconvenient that it is rarely used.

It surely makes sense to see new delivery systems for information as an opportunity to expand, not reduce, the methods available for both imparting and receiving information.

[i] ‘Disabilities, Opportunities, Internetworking and Technology Did You Know?’, University of Washington, 2000, http://www.washington.edu/doit/Faculty/Strategies/Academic/Adaptive/dyk_computers_at_case_study.html

[ii] Deafblinduk.org.uk. Types of Communication.

[iii] Singh, Reeta, ‘Blind Handicapped Vs. Technology: How do Blind People use Computers?’, International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Vol. 3, Issue 4, April 2012, http://www.ijser.org/researchpaper%5CBLIND-HANDICAPPED-VS-TECHNOLOGY-HOW-DO-BLIND-PEOPLE-USE-COMPUTERS.pdf

Free speech may well be about the ability to receive ideas as well as express them but in neither case is it about how those ideas are expressed or received. To suggest that a state that refuses to provide a movie studio to any of its citizens who requests one is somehow suppressing their right of free expression would clearly be ridiculous. The state has a duty to guarantee the right, not the methodology.

The issue of the protection of minority languages is a difficult one for most governments as it is usually argued that most speakers of such languages also make use of the dominant language and, where they don’t, they should learn for their own good. For example French speakers in Canada must also learn English.[i] However, there are senses and experiences that are uniquely held within a community and expressed within those languages. In many ways Braille functions in similar ways, a shared experience between those who read it, a bond between users and, for the most part, denied to outsiders. By its nature, it is tactile and speaks in a way that is not true of audiobooks prepared for a wider market. In purely practical terms there is relatively little difference between reading speeds in Braille and listening to audiobooks (about 130 against 150 wpm).[ii] Learning Braille also has immense practical benefits, not least of which is being employable, 90% of those who are braille literate are employed compared to 33% of blind people who are braille illiterate.[iii]

It seems simply strange to insist that those who have already lost one form of access to the wider world – indeed the method most widely used in that world – should be denied another simply because it is deemed to be cheaper, easier or ‘better for them’. Indeed such an action is deeply redolent of the debate over minority languages. Although not all of the blind community prefers to use Braille, many of them do and that would seem sufficient reason to respect it as an important way in which they interact with the world, and receive and impart ideas – the twin pillars of free speech[iv].

[i] Burnaby, Barbara J., ‘Language Policy’, The Canadian Encyclopedia, 1996, http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/language-policy

[ii] Reading Braille. RIDB Crenwick Centre.

[iii] Ouellette, Matthew David, ‘Low Cost, Compact Braille Printing Head For Use in Handheld Braille Transcribing Device’, Mechanical Engineering Master's Theses. Paper 41. p.2 http://hdl.handle.net/2047/d20001224

[iv] Guidelines on the use of minority languages in the broadcast media. Minority Rights Group International.

The Opposition is perfectly happy to be attacked for making life easier for people with disabilities by taking down barriers that separate them from the wider population. There a parts of any community that prefer to do things in a certain way, however governments rarely commit to guaranteeing all preferences, instead they guarantee a basic level of service provision and then offer choice where possible and affordable. This is true in education and welfare right through to national defense – militaries, except the US, tend to specialise and rely on allies for other operations. 

The death of the book has been predicted with virtually every technological innovation and yet, it remains one of the most widespread and recognised means of communication in the world, with physical book sales representing about 80% of total book sales[i]. There are many reasons for this, its communicability, its physicality, it history and associations. Whatever the reasons for its enduring success, it remains one of the great design achievements of humanity as a species, comfortably alongside the wheel, the screw and cash.

Whatever the reason for this enduring success, it has it and the latest set of doomsayers may well go the way of the rest. Perhaps the greatest reason for its enduring success is that the book is silent. The reader gives voice to characters and charts their own way through fiction or selects their own phrases for emphasis in non-fiction.

There is nobody – actor or director – between the reader and the author.

If that applies to the printed word it applies equally or more to Braille. It is notable that the decline in braille literacy has led to a decline in poetry and literature output by the blind community.[ii] In turn, it is surely part of the author’s right to speak freely that they speak directly to their reader.

[i] Ebooks Popularity is Rewriting Sales History. Carol Memmet. 5 September 2011. USA Today.

[ii] Ouellette, Matthew David, ‘Low Cost, Compact Braille Printing Head For Use in Handheld Braille Transcribing Device’, Mechanical Engineering Master's Theses. Paper 41. p.2 http://hdl.handle.net/2047/d20001224

It is not a case of insisting that there are other or better options; there are other or better options. Equally, there is no need to ‘predict’ the death of the physical book; it is dying. Increasingly specialist publishers, such as Dorchester Publishing which focuses on paperbacks,[i] will only produce e-books as it cuts out the actual cost of printing and, therefore, the opportunity cost of remaindered copies.

[i] Trachtenberg, Jeffrey A., Mass Paperback Publisher Goes All Digital’, The Wall Street Journal, 6 August 2010, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703309704575413611289773690.html

The introduction makes reference to the seventy-two volume ‘pocket’ dictionary. It’s an excellent example.[i] With printed text, many previously cumbersome physical books – the Complete OED, the Encyclopaedia Britannica and others – are now only available in digital format.[ii]

Nobody is suggesting banning Braille or even discouraging it, simply following the possibilities offered by technology for easier, cheaper and more portable formats.[iii]

If there were a huge market for Braille it would survive but clearly enough people are happy with other formats for it to require subsidy and support. This means, inevitably, that the taxpayer will end up footing the bill despite there being cheaper alternatives that are increasingly popular.

As with any technological change – or any major societal change for that matter – there are those who will find that change easy and others who will find it more difficult. For those who find it impossible – such as deaf and blind students – clearly other alternatives need to be provided but it seems sensible to look to the technologies of the future to fulfil those needs rather than those of the past.

[i] Engelhart, Katie, ‘The importance of Braille literacy’, Free Speech Debate, 6 July 2012, http://freespeechdebate.com/en/case/the-importance-of-braille-literacy/

[ii] Britannica Editors, ‘Britannica’s Digital Milestones’, Encyclopaedia Britannica Blog, 13 March 2012, http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2012/03/britannica-digital-milestones/

[iii] Listening To Braille. Rachel Aviv. New York Times. 30 December 2009

The suggestion that seven million dollars is an excessive expenditure on a resource for 836,000 is extortionate is simply nonsense. That’s a little over eight dollars a head, hardly likely to break the bank. To say that a government is not discouraging the use of something by making it harder to access is simply untrue. Of course if a resource is harder or more expensive to access, people will be discouraged from using it.

To argue that this is a matter of the infringement of the right to free speech is not only wrong but offensive to those who have had that right genuinely curtailed. A stifling of free speech is about cutting off people’s access to ideas, denying them the right to take those ideas and present them to others. The slow, natural death of Braille does not do that. Fewer than one in ten blind children now learn Braille[i]. Those who wish to continue to use Braille can do so just as those who prefer to write a letter rather than send an email can do so. Both groups however, accept that it is likely to become more expensive and exclude them from the rest of society as others adapt and new technologies become the norm.

The information and ideas are there, they are available in a format that is available, even if it is not the format of absolute preference. The technology is available, many prefer it, those who don’t are free not to use it.

[i] “The Death of Braille” – Appropriate or Ominous? Neatorama.com. 26 February 2010.

This is a little reminiscent of Anatole France’s comment that “The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.”[i] Those who feel uncomfortable with a method of delivery are less likely to use it and are therefore excluded, in part at least, from information delivered in that format. To further exclude a group who are already denied some graphical representations of information another form of delivery does exclude them and limit their ability to speak freely as they are denied the information that is its root.

Additionally, oppositions argument only works were there is real action to take up new technologies rather than letting Braille die off without investing in replacement technologies, which has been seen in several jurisdictions including India[ii].

[i] McBride, Nicholas J., ‘The Importance of Law’, in Letters to a Law Student, 2010, http://wps.pearsoned.co.uk/ema_uk_he_mcbride_letters_2/142/36409/9320853.cw/content/index.html

[ii] Government turns blind eye to Braille Press. Rohit, P.S. The Times of India. 4 May 2012.

The current shift in publishing is unlike any other that has gone before, e-books are not like the TV, the Record player or the radio as all of these could only reproduce books in heavily edited form. The change is shown by ebook sales having outperformed printed book sales on amazon in the UK for the first time.[i] Against braille it is audio formats that are the biggest threat, the tape machine, the Walkman, the CD, Mp3, Mp4 and so on. All of these can reproduce books, unedited, in a format that allows the listener to proceed at their own pace, jump back and forwards and so on – just as a book does.

Earlier technologies had problems with quality, and each in turn was initially expensive. As they became more commonplace, quality improved and the price fell. Both of these have now coincided to create technologies that allow the listener the ultimate convenience.

Returning to the example given in the introduction, the CNIB library. Canada is a big country and Braille books are cumbersome. How much easier to email someone an MPEG, which they can have within seconds.

The digital age offers huge benefits to all but none more so than to those with sensory impairments. Its possibilities really are only bounded by our imagination.

[i] Malik, Shiv, ‘Kindle ebooksales have overtaken Amazon print sales, says book seller’, The Guardian, 6 August 2012, http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/aug/06/amazon-kindle-ebook-sales-overtake-print?newsfeed=true

All of that may well be true, however it does not make the two approaches mutually exclusive. Demonstrating that digital is good does not make analogue bad. Attacks on libraries have been driven more by austerity cuts, that are forcing 20% of the staff at Library and Archives Canada to go,[i] and the situation is similar in other countries such as the UK,[ii] than by the diminishing popularity of the book in particular or libraries in general. Indeed, the book has never been more popular as the ranks of those who like digital formats have been swelled by the digital natives of the Internet age.

[i] CBC News, ‘Federal libraries, archives shutting down’, CBC, 2 May 2012, http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/story/2012/05/02/ottawa-libraries-archives-closing-budget-cuts.html

[ii] Hall, James, ‘Scale of library cut-backs revealed’, The Telegraph, 16 March 2012, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9146818/Scale-of-library-cut-backs-revealed.html