Home > Features > Charlie's Subtitle Diary
Charlie's Subtitle Diary
16th November 2008
Television subtitles are great, particularly for deaf and hard of hearing viewers. But when subtitling is produced for live programmes, some oddities can creep in to what appears on screen. Charlie Swinbourne spends a week on the sofa with the remote control to try and spot a few of the more amusing and bizarre examples - some of which you can see for yourself in his accompanying video.
There are a few things in life that I couldn't live without. My fiancée, for a start. My family and friends, hearing aids ... and subtitles. Did you catch that? Yep, subtitles.
For the uninitiated, subtitles are black lines filled with coloured text that magically appear on my TV screen, allowing me to read everything I don't hear; in other parts of the world they call it 'closed captioning'. Thanks to , there are now more subtitles on TV than ever before.
There are two types of subtitles: pre-recorded and live. It's here I must confess that my adulation is reserved for only one of them: the pre-recorded variety.
As the name suggests, pre-recorded subtitles are carefully compiled before a programme is shown, and later appear with perfect timing, 'in sync' with the words spoken on screen. You see these on TV dramas, comedies and films.
However, I have mixed feelings about live subtitles, which are created on the fly, as a live programme airs, with no rehearsals. You would see this on live TV shows such as news, sport and event television like Strictly Come Dancing.
There are two types of subtitles: pre-recorded and live. It's here I must confess that my adulation is reserved for only one of them: the pre-recorded variety.
As the name suggests, pre-recorded subtitles are carefully compiled before a programme is shown, and later appear with perfect timing, 'in sync' with the words spoken on screen. You see these on TV dramas, comedies and films.
However, I have mixed feelings about live subtitles, which are created on the fly, as a live programme airs, with no rehearsals. You would see this on live TV shows such as news, sport and event television like Strictly Come Dancing.
The two most common methods for creating live subtitles include speech recognition - where a person speaks clearly into a microphone while listening to the broadcast, with a computer recognising their words - and stenography - where a typist inputs words phonetically onto a keyboard.
I wouldn't want live subtitles to disappear, since they make important shows accessible. But to explain my difficulties further, they appear in a very different way to the pre-recorded variety. Sentences scroll, or crawl, onto the screen word by word, often with a frustrating delay of a few seconds after being spoken. Pre-recorded subtitles just get flashed up.
But here's the crux, and the point of this article. As they're created at speed, mistakes regularly creep in to the text that appears on TV. At times this is annoying - when you miss the meaning of a sentence. On the other hand, there's the phenomenon of mistakes being unwittingly hilarious, changing the meaning of what's being said for comedic effect.
To highlight this, I spent a week on the sofa (oh, the hardship) noting the errors I saw. What follows is a diary of my week in front of the box. First, though, here's a video of some of my 'favourite mistakes':
I wouldn't want live subtitles to disappear, since they make important shows accessible. But to explain my difficulties further, they appear in a very different way to the pre-recorded variety. Sentences scroll, or crawl, onto the screen word by word, often with a frustrating delay of a few seconds after being spoken. Pre-recorded subtitles just get flashed up.
But here's the crux, and the point of this article. As they're created at speed, mistakes regularly creep in to the text that appears on TV. At times this is annoying - when you miss the meaning of a sentence. On the other hand, there's the phenomenon of mistakes being unwittingly hilarious, changing the meaning of what's being said for comedic effect.
To highlight this, I spent a week on the sofa (oh, the hardship) noting the errors I saw. What follows is a diary of my week in front of the box. First, though, here's a video of some of my 'favourite mistakes':
In order to see this content you need to have both enabled and installed. Visit for full instructions
Wednesday 5th November
Today, television news programmes - and the world - wake up to the historic US Presidential election result. The subtitles on the ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ News at One (³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ One) tell me that John McCain is "672 years old". He looks young for his age.
The subtitles go awry for ten minutes on Sky News' Live at Five. First, Barack Obama is called "a President ball", which should have read "a President for all". Then he's shown telling America that tonight is "Iran said", rather than "your answer". Finally, Sarah Palin wishes Obama "well", which comes up as "wealth".
Breaking from the news, I turn to Blue Peter (³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ One) where presenter Andy Akinwolere says "That's a good one". The subtitle comes up with "Gnat's a good one" instead.
At 7.00pm, I am impressed by the subtitles on Channel 4 News, until I see "Atlanta" transformed into "alapbt ya".
The subtitles go awry for ten minutes on Sky News' Live at Five. First, Barack Obama is called "a President ball", which should have read "a President for all". Then he's shown telling America that tonight is "Iran said", rather than "your answer". Finally, Sarah Palin wishes Obama "well", which comes up as "wealth".
Breaking from the news, I turn to Blue Peter (³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ One) where presenter Andy Akinwolere says "That's a good one". The subtitle comes up with "Gnat's a good one" instead.
At 7.00pm, I am impressed by the subtitles on Channel 4 News, until I see "Atlanta" transformed into "alapbt ya".
Thursday 6th November
Loose Women (ITV1) is subtitled perfectly until a name comes up which must be a subtitler's worst nightmare. "Engelbert Humperdinck" duly appears on screen as "engle Bert humper distinct" (see image above).
At 11.00pm, Sky News Tonight tells me that "Six tax payers are bailing out the banks", which I think is very generous indeed.
At 11.00pm, Sky News Tonight tells me that "Six tax payers are bailing out the banks", which I think is very generous indeed.
Friday 7th November
Daily Politics (³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ Two) tells me about "a sharply focused localical pain", which doesn't sound pleasant. It should read "a sharply focused local campaign". Later, I find nothing wrong with The Paul O'Grady Show on Channel 4.
In the evening, I struggle to enjoy Have I Got News For You (³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ One), thanks to subtitled jokes that arrive with a two second delay. This is compounded when the Democrats become "the Daily Mailcrats", while Paul Merton's "rings of Saturn" become "rings of satin". In contrast, Newsnight Review (³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ Two) gets a five-star rating from me.
In the evening, I struggle to enjoy Have I Got News For You (³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ One), thanks to subtitled jokes that arrive with a two second delay. This is compounded when the Democrats become "the Daily Mailcrats", while Paul Merton's "rings of Saturn" become "rings of satin". In contrast, Newsnight Review (³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ Two) gets a five-star rating from me.
Saturday 8th November
I'm not a racing enthusiast, but I wake up to The Morning Line (Channel 4), where "gloom and doom" becomes a brand new fashion trend - "glam and doom".
At 1.30pm I tune in to the half-time analysis on Live Ford Football Special (Sky Sports 1). I'm just in time to see Graeme Souness remarking on the rainy weather that "as a player, these are the conditions you want a plane". A water plane, perhaps.
The X Factor - The Result (ITV1) is very well subtitled for a music show, but blots its copy book when "still reeling" becomes "steel reeling".
I return to football on Match of the Day (³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ One) in time to see the players "mock the fact that tomorrow is Remembrance Sunday". Then Arsenal defender Bacary Sagna is fouled "by a zebra", rather than by Manchester United's Patrice Evra. Fortunately the zebra escapes a yellow card.
At 1.30pm I tune in to the half-time analysis on Live Ford Football Special (Sky Sports 1). I'm just in time to see Graeme Souness remarking on the rainy weather that "as a player, these are the conditions you want a plane". A water plane, perhaps.
The X Factor - The Result (ITV1) is very well subtitled for a music show, but blots its copy book when "still reeling" becomes "steel reeling".
I return to football on Match of the Day (³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ One) in time to see the players "mock the fact that tomorrow is Remembrance Sunday". Then Arsenal defender Bacary Sagna is fouled "by a zebra", rather than by Manchester United's Patrice Evra. Fortunately the zebra escapes a yellow card.
Sunday 9th November
The subtitler barely puts a foot wrong in The Andrew Marr Show (³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ One) - the job presumably made easier by the show's leisurely Sunday morning pace. Later in the day, ITV1's FA Cup Special shows no sign of subtitling errors. Or zebras.
Monday 10th November
The ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ News at Ten (³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ One) turns "vehicle excise" into "vehicle skies", which might concern the aviation industry. Then "economic growth" becomes "Ek o amic growth", which appears like visual onomatopoeia, fittingly reflecting the current breakdown in the financial system.
Inside Sport (³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ One) features an interview with footballer Michael Essien where he describes his mother as a "pill yar behind me" (the correct word was "pillar"), before declaring how he loves to play for "begana" (which should read "Ghana"). Meanwhile, on Sky News Tonight, "gesture" becomes "Jets je".
Inside Sport (³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ One) features an interview with footballer Michael Essien where he describes his mother as a "pill yar behind me" (the correct word was "pillar"), before declaring how he loves to play for "begana" (which should read "Ghana"). Meanwhile, on Sky News Tonight, "gesture" becomes "Jets je".
Tuesday 11th November
I wake up bleary eyed at 6.00am for GMTV Newshour (ITV1), just in time to see Penny Smith ask a school headteacher whether "500 executions" means her school is out of control (see image above). I nearly choke on my cornflakes, only to rewind and find that the school does not have a capital punishment policy - "executions" should have read "exclusions". I end my week happily finding little to fault in Five's live phone-in show The Wright Stuff.
With very square eyes after my week in front of the box, I was keen to find out more about why these mistakes happen on air, so I spoke to James Gardner from IMS Media, who provide live subtitling for Sky and Five using a speech recognition method, and Cherry Cole from ITFC, who provide live subtitles for ITV and GMTV's national broadcasts using stenography.
Both James and Cherry were keen to emphasise the skill of the subtitlers they work with, while admitting that mistakes are impossible to eradicate because of the challenges of live broadcast. James told me: "Live subtitling always has errors - it is impossible to get 100% accuracy over any length of time". Meanwhile, Cherry admitted that stenography is "98-99% accurate", which means that 1-2% of screen time features mistakes.
There was a bright side: Cherry explained that technology may in future "be able to recognise the speech within a broadcast, making subtitling automatic", but that these advances are a few years away.
It seems that the hilarious mistakes in live subtitling will be around for some time yet, leaving the deaf audience with a choice. We can either get frustrated when they appear, or accept them as part of an imperfect form, having a good laugh the next time a "zebra" tackles a footballer ...
Both James and Cherry were keen to emphasise the skill of the subtitlers they work with, while admitting that mistakes are impossible to eradicate because of the challenges of live broadcast. James told me: "Live subtitling always has errors - it is impossible to get 100% accuracy over any length of time". Meanwhile, Cherry admitted that stenography is "98-99% accurate", which means that 1-2% of screen time features mistakes.
There was a bright side: Cherry explained that technology may in future "be able to recognise the speech within a broadcast, making subtitling automatic", but that these advances are a few years away.
It seems that the hilarious mistakes in live subtitling will be around for some time yet, leaving the deaf audience with a choice. We can either get frustrated when they appear, or accept them as part of an imperfect form, having a good laugh the next time a "zebra" tackles a footballer ...
More articles about
Bookmark with...
Live community panel
Our blog is the main place to go for all things Ouch! Find info, comment, articles and great disability content on the web via us.
Listen to our regular razor sharp talk show online, or subscribe to it as a podcast. Spread the word: it's where disability and reality almost collide.
More from the ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳
All the latest news from the paralympics.
News and views for people who are blind or partially sighted.
Weekdays 12.40pm. Radio 4's consumer affairs programme.
~RS~q~RS~_bbc_=0&__ip__=54.77.26.26&dnainitialtitle=Charlie%27s%20Subtitle%20Diary&dnahostpageurl=http://www.bbc.co.uk/ouch/features/charlies-subtitle-diary.shtml&dnauid=ouch:article:1831&s_baseHeadingLevel=1&dnashow=10&dnafrom=0&dnato=9&dna_encoding=utf-8&s_sssicomponent=1&s_sssiCommentCount=&dnacommentforumlistprefix=%5B_%5D&dnarecentcommentsprefix=%5B_%5D&s_commentprofileurl=/dna/mbouch/CommentProfile?&s_contact=0~RS~z~RS~06~RS~){kind=small}
Comments
Charlie
This is absolutely brilliant. We do not have a study on the quality of subtitling particularly with live subtitling. So what we have is a personal study of live subtitling. This would be good for both DBC and TAG to be aware of so that they can put pressure on OFCOM that not only we need quantity of subtitles but also accompanying with quality which is so lacking at this moment.
Thank you for your time and patience is doing this.
Regards
Christopher
Complain about this comment
There is no doubt that live captioning has its problems, but, at the same time, and as you say, far better than nothing at all. It would be nice for there to be greater accuracy, but I would rather have what we are presented with than nothing at all.
However, and remarkably, is the frequency of captioning errors with pre-recorded material, for which there is no excuse. By way of an example, I was watching the "Barristers" programme on Friday. Numerous errors. I am sure that the new barristers will be interested to know that, amongst other things, they attended a "Core" and not a "Call." (Same error, twice in this recorded programme.)
Perfection is too much to ask for (and I am not being cynical), but errors in pre-recorded programmes should be close to perfect as there is no excuse for them to be otherwise.
Terry P
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the .
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the .
I will never be able to watch football on TV again without thinking of zebras on the field...
Agree that live subtitling will never be perfect - but more should be done to remove errors in pre-recorded programmes. I also think more should be done to think about placement of subtitles. A personal gripe of mine is when you see subtitles on top of any other written information on the screen (like a quote or a translation).
It's unclear to me what monitoring there is of the quality of subtitles - I heard that Ofcom won't do this because it is too expensive...
Regards,
Ian
Complain about this comment
I will never be able to watch football on TV again without thinking of zebras on the field...
Agree that live subtitling will never be perfect - but more should be done to remove errors in pre-recorded programmes. I also think more should be done to think about placement of subtitles. A personal gripe of mine is when you see subtitles on top of any other written information on the screen (like a quote or a translation).
It's unclear to me what monitoring there is of the quality of subtitles - I heard that Ofcom won't do this because it is too expensive...
Regards,
Ian
Complain about this comment
I actually type up subtitles (on pre-recorded programmes) for some ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ programmes as a freelancer at home, and take a pride in trying to get it right, often watching the programmes again to see what mistakes I've made, and they are corrected, fortunately not too many! I am very sympathetic to the people who work on the live broadcasts as, for example, to transcribe 15 mins of audio takes on average an hour so it must be extremely demanding to keep up with the pace of a live broadcast. I'm hoping that no speech recognition programme will ever beat the quality of transcript that a person can achieve, as there are subtle nuances that can be picked up and also the context of the conversation can play a part - and I'd be out of a job! So really, it's easy to complain but there is some skill involved on the part of the transcriber.
Complain about this comment
This comment will probably be removed, but my favourite live subtitling error of all time is "Arch bitch of Canterbury' on the local news...
Complain about this comment
Ever noticed that sometimes the subtitles don't disappear at the end of a show when they're supposed to? Sometimes they just linger on the screen. (I read somewhere about why this happens: apparently the way subtitles usually work is that there is one signal to toggle them on and then there's supposed to be another signal to toggle them off. But if that signal isn't sent out properly, then the captions just stay up there. It's kind of as if you set your word processing to "italics" font and then forgot to set it back to regular text again at the proper point.)
One time, this led to a bizzarre scene in which the subtitles on my TV said "Have a nice day" (I think this must have come from the end of a news broadcast or something) ... but the scene being depicted were bloody scenes of war. Not exactly a set of images you associate with the sentiments implicit in "Have a nice day."
Complain about this comment
I saw a howler in a recent pre-recorded show. The dancers on the screen were singing "The Continental". The real words are: "Beautiful music, dangerous rhythm ". The subtitles read: "...dangerous river"!
According to the song, dancing "The Continental" is meant to put you at risk of falling in love, not falling into deep water.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS