Utah Deaf Technology
Compiled & Written By Jodi Becker Kinner
Edited by Valerie G. Kinney
Published in 2013
Updated in 2021
Edited by Valerie G. Kinney
Published in 2013
Updated in 2021
Over time, technological advancements have had an impact on the Utah Deaf community. To address their accessibility needs and overcome societal communication barriers, they use a variety of technologies. In addition, technological improvements make life easier for Deaf and hard of hearing people, and a variety of devices allow full participation in all aspects of life.
The Evolution of Hearing Aids
Hearing aids have gone a long way over the years. The first hearing aid was invented in the 17th century. From ear trumpets to today's hearing aids, hearing devices have evolved over time.
The Growth of Cochlear Implants
The first cochlear implant was initially invented in the 1950s. The Utah Association of the Deaf was naturally curious about the cochlear implants when they became popular in the 1960s.
Dr. David A. Dolowitz, an otologist at the University of Utah School of Medicine, spoke about the Deafness Research Foundation Temporal Bone Bank at the Utah Association of the Deaf Convention in 1963. UAD promoted the Temporal Bone Bank Program during its convention and stood ready to assist those who wanted to donate their temporal bones to help doctors with research that could help others hear (UAD Bulletin, Spring 1963).
The Los Angeles Foundation of Otology, with the support of a funding from Mr. and Mrs. George S. Eccles, began the cochlear implant experiment in the early 1960s. The First Security Bank of Utah was headed by Mr. Eccles. It was 1968 when the last implant was performed (UAD Bulletin, June 1974). Many others have gotten implants since then, but it's unclear why this was the last time.
Three profoundly Deaf patients were operated on at the time, with tiny electric wires implanted in their inner ears. These wires were attached to a device that turned sound into small complex electric currents through the skin behind the ear. The hearing nerve was directly activated by these electric currents, resulting in a sound sensation (UAD Bulletin, June 1974). Nothing had been done since then except to maintain close contact with the three individuals who had the implants. They were examined to see if the body had accepted the foreign material implanted in the inner ear, as well as to look for signs of rejection (UAD Bulletin, June 1974). It was discovered that no such signals of rejection had happened.
Dr. David A. Dolowitz, an otologist at the University of Utah School of Medicine, spoke about the Deafness Research Foundation Temporal Bone Bank at the Utah Association of the Deaf Convention in 1963. UAD promoted the Temporal Bone Bank Program during its convention and stood ready to assist those who wanted to donate their temporal bones to help doctors with research that could help others hear (UAD Bulletin, Spring 1963).
The Los Angeles Foundation of Otology, with the support of a funding from Mr. and Mrs. George S. Eccles, began the cochlear implant experiment in the early 1960s. The First Security Bank of Utah was headed by Mr. Eccles. It was 1968 when the last implant was performed (UAD Bulletin, June 1974). Many others have gotten implants since then, but it's unclear why this was the last time.
Three profoundly Deaf patients were operated on at the time, with tiny electric wires implanted in their inner ears. These wires were attached to a device that turned sound into small complex electric currents through the skin behind the ear. The hearing nerve was directly activated by these electric currents, resulting in a sound sensation (UAD Bulletin, June 1974). Nothing had been done since then except to maintain close contact with the three individuals who had the implants. They were examined to see if the body had accepted the foreign material implanted in the inner ear, as well as to look for signs of rejection (UAD Bulletin, June 1974). It was discovered that no such signals of rejection had happened.
The new cochlear implant UAD Bulletin, June 1974
Six years later, in 1974, a new effort to move the cochlear implant project forward was launched when biophysicist William H. Dobelle of the University of Utah Institute for Biomedical Engineering, in collaboration with Dr. Robert G. Sanderson, head of the Utah Services of the Deaf office, contacted Deaf people in the Utah community to volunteer to attend an electrocochleography meeting. Dr. Sanderson, Dave Mortensen, Joseph Burnett, and his wife, LaVerne, were four Deaf people who volunteered to be evaluated by Dr. Derald E. Brackmann to see if they were candidates for the implant. This was done by measuring the electrical output of inner ear cells and the hearing nerve. Only Joseph Burnett, a 1933 graduate of the Utah School for the Deaf and a 1937 graduate of Gallaudet College, was found to have functioning hearing nerves. He became a volunteer candidate for the cochlear implant (UAD Bulletin, June 1974).
The technology of cochlear implants has evolved over time. A needle was inserted by the doctor through the eardrum and into the inner ear bone during electrocochleography. Sound was then used to stimulate the inner ear, and the electrical output produced by the cells in the inner ear was measured using a computer. There was no trace of electrical output from the inner ear cells if they were dead. In that situation, the hearing nerve was directly stimulated. If sound was heard, it meant that the hearing nerve was working properly (UAD Bulletin, June 1974).
Eight Deaf people had received this type of implant. Five of these patients used their cochlear stimulator and found it to be very helpful. Two patients were still waiting for their post-surgery wounds to heal. As a result of producing electrical signals through his implanted device, one person had no sense of hearing (UAD Bulletin, June 1974).
All four Utah Deaf volunteers, along with their interpreter, Beth Ann Stewart Campbell, traveled to Los Angeles in 1975 to tour the Ear Research Institute, where Joseph Burnett, then 62 years old, received his new cochlear implant. He went home with wires implanted and began a series of tests with a "electronic ear" after a length of time. Dr. Dobelle's Institute for Biomedical Engineering and the Ear Research Institute conducted these experiments (UAD Bulletin, June 1975).
Joseph is believed to be the first Deaf person in Utah to receive a cochlear implant following a successful surgery. The cochlear implant program was launched through a collaboration between the University of Utah Biomedical Center and the House Hearing Institute of California (Nelson, The Salt Lake Tribune, April 27, 1975). Cochlear implants are being implanted in more Deaf children and adults nowadays.
The technology of cochlear implants has evolved over time. A needle was inserted by the doctor through the eardrum and into the inner ear bone during electrocochleography. Sound was then used to stimulate the inner ear, and the electrical output produced by the cells in the inner ear was measured using a computer. There was no trace of electrical output from the inner ear cells if they were dead. In that situation, the hearing nerve was directly stimulated. If sound was heard, it meant that the hearing nerve was working properly (UAD Bulletin, June 1974).
Eight Deaf people had received this type of implant. Five of these patients used their cochlear stimulator and found it to be very helpful. Two patients were still waiting for their post-surgery wounds to heal. As a result of producing electrical signals through his implanted device, one person had no sense of hearing (UAD Bulletin, June 1974).
All four Utah Deaf volunteers, along with their interpreter, Beth Ann Stewart Campbell, traveled to Los Angeles in 1975 to tour the Ear Research Institute, where Joseph Burnett, then 62 years old, received his new cochlear implant. He went home with wires implanted and began a series of tests with a "electronic ear" after a length of time. Dr. Dobelle's Institute for Biomedical Engineering and the Ear Research Institute conducted these experiments (UAD Bulletin, June 1975).
Joseph is believed to be the first Deaf person in Utah to receive a cochlear implant following a successful surgery. The cochlear implant program was launched through a collaboration between the University of Utah Biomedical Center and the House Hearing Institute of California (Nelson, The Salt Lake Tribune, April 27, 1975). Cochlear implants are being implanted in more Deaf children and adults nowadays.
Joseph B. Burnett. UAD Bulletin, June 1975
The Telecommunication System
Before the 1960s, Deaf individuals had to drive to a Deaf or hearing friend's house to meet them for business or pleasure, according to Rodney W. Walker, a 1933 alumnus of the Utah School for the Deaf. They also had to rely on neighbors to make phone calls for them. Those who had a telephone at home would ask their children to make calls for them, and these repeated requests could strain the parent-child relationship (Walker, 2006).
Rodney W. Walker. The UAD Bulletin, April 1955
Deaf people persevered despite the challenges and inconvenients they faced for many years until TTY was launched in 1964. Robert H. Weitbrecht, a Deaf physicist, and Dr. James C. Marsters, a Deaf orthodontist, discovered a way to transmit phone lines using teletype machines, which are comparable to those used to send telegrams. Teleprinter Phonetype Units, or TTY were used for telephone communication.
Dr. Robert H. Weitbrecht @ Ultratec, Inc.
The TTY was first demonstrated at the 1964 Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf Conference in Salt Lake City, Utah (Mortensen, UAD Bulletin, September 2012).
Following the convention, Mr. Weitbrecht and Dr. Marsters founded the first TTY company. The Deaf community benefited much from TTY. "TTY is catching on in many areas across the United States like wildfire," said Dennis R. Platt, president of the Utah Association for the Deaf (UAD) (Platt, UAD Bulletin, Fall 1969). Finally, having TTY spared Deaf individuals from having to rely on neighbors, friends, relatives, and their children, on the availability of a car to see other people, and on the frustration of not being able to find people at home.
Following the convention, Mr. Weitbrecht and Dr. Marsters founded the first TTY company. The Deaf community benefited much from TTY. "TTY is catching on in many areas across the United States like wildfire," said Dennis R. Platt, president of the Utah Association for the Deaf (UAD) (Platt, UAD Bulletin, Fall 1969). Finally, having TTY spared Deaf individuals from having to rely on neighbors, friends, relatives, and their children, on the availability of a car to see other people, and on the frustration of not being able to find people at home.
Mailbox TTYs, 1960s
In 1975, W. David Mortensen, often known as Dave, the president of the Utah Association for the Deaf, addressed his concerns regarding TTY issues. There was only one TTY for every 530 deaf people and one TTY for every hard of hearing person, according to national statistics.There were 78,626 people in Utah who had hearing loss, with 10,225 being deaf and 2,126 being prevocalic deaf. Despite this, there were 200 TTYs in Utah. According to the number of TTYs in use, only a small percentage of Deaf people own or utilize TTYs. As per President Mortensen, the inaccessibility of telecommunications posed a barrier for Deaf people. A person who is deaf or whose amplification equipment wasinefficient cannot make a purchase by calling a department store. Hearing people had access to all of the services that Deaf people did not. According to estimates, one out of every two people in the United States, had access to a telephone (Mortensen, UAD Bulletin, October 1975, p. 2).
W. David Mortensen, UAD Bulletin, June 1972
President Mortensen also expressed his displeasure with the cost of purchasing a TTY. Hearing individuals did not have to pay between $250 and $600 for a phone that suited their style or décor; instead, they only had to pay a little installation fee and a fair monthly rate. "Why should the Deaf be punished for trying to suit their fancy or décor rather than just communicating?" he queried. According to Mortensen (UAD Bulletin, October 1975, p. 2), AT&T and many of its operating businesses, including Mountain States Telephone, had an obligation to provide equipment to Deaf and other customers at a cost comparable to that of ordinary telephone equipment.
President Mortensen's frustration was echoed by F.A. Caligiuri, coordinator of Deaf Community Relations at California State University, Northridge. “To the Deaf person, the telephone is a constant reminder of his handicap and of his dependence upon others for its use," Caligiuri stated. "It also stands as an invisible barrier to his vocational advancement, for he has found from sad experience, that in employment he is considered for promotion only to positions which do not require the use of the telephone. It is a psychological barrier to the realization of his full potential. It is ironic that the telephone, which was invented by Alexander Graham Bell to aid his deaf wife is, by itself, entirely useless to the deaf” (Mortensen, UAD Bulletin, October 1975, p. 2).
The telephone company was required to comply with the Rehabilitation Act Amendment of 1974 and the Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1973. These acts, on the other hand, established requirements to ensure that people with disabilities have access to and use of public buildings built by or on behalf of the federal government. President Mortensen observed that telephones were an integral part of public buildings, yet that they were inaccessible to Deaf people (Mortensen, UAD Bulletin, October 1975, p. 2).
President Mortensen's frustration was echoed by F.A. Caligiuri, coordinator of Deaf Community Relations at California State University, Northridge. “To the Deaf person, the telephone is a constant reminder of his handicap and of his dependence upon others for its use," Caligiuri stated. "It also stands as an invisible barrier to his vocational advancement, for he has found from sad experience, that in employment he is considered for promotion only to positions which do not require the use of the telephone. It is a psychological barrier to the realization of his full potential. It is ironic that the telephone, which was invented by Alexander Graham Bell to aid his deaf wife is, by itself, entirely useless to the deaf” (Mortensen, UAD Bulletin, October 1975, p. 2).
The telephone company was required to comply with the Rehabilitation Act Amendment of 1974 and the Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1973. These acts, on the other hand, established requirements to ensure that people with disabilities have access to and use of public buildings built by or on behalf of the federal government. President Mortensen observed that telephones were an integral part of public buildings, yet that they were inaccessible to Deaf people (Mortensen, UAD Bulletin, October 1975, p. 2).
Kenneth L. Kinner is making a phone call, 1970s
Between the 19070s and the 1980s, the large mailbox TTY machines were eventually replaced by smaller portable typewriter-style machines that could be put on a desk or counter (Walker, 2006).
The cost of the phone bill was high at the time due to the time spent typing messages on the TTY. Depending on their ability level, some people typed slowly while others typed fast. Even the fastest typist, according to the survey, could not type as quickly as a person could speak on the phone (Walker, 2006).
The cost of the phone bill was high at the time due to the time spent typing messages on the TTY. Depending on their ability level, some people typed slowly while others typed fast. Even the fastest typist, according to the survey, could not type as quickly as a person could speak on the phone (Walker, 2006).
Portable TTY. UAD Bulletin, September 2012
The Enactment of Hearing Impaired
Telecommunication Access Act in Utah
Telecommunication Access Act in Utah
During the 1987 legislative session, the Utah Deaf Access Coalition, along with other organizations, worked hard to get Senate Bill 101 enacted (UAD Bulletin, January 1987). Senator Darrell Renstrom (D-Ogden) introduced Senate Bill (SB) 101, called the "Hearing Impaired Telecommunication Access Act." The Hearing Impaired Telecommunication Access Act was created to help Deaf people have better access to regular telephone services. The following were the key features of the bill:
A surcharge on every business and household phone line in the state would be used to fund the telephone access program. The funds raised would be used to purchase, maintain, and distribute TTYs, as well as provide training and administration (UAD Bulletin, February 1987).
- Provide TTYs to any Deaf person who qualifies,
- Set up a 24 hour central relay
system connecting Deaf TTY users with hearing persons, - Involve Deaf persons in setting up the program,
- Begin sometime in 1987 and grow to full service by 1989.
A surcharge on every business and household phone line in the state would be used to fund the telephone access program. The funds raised would be used to purchase, maintain, and distribute TTYs, as well as provide training and administration (UAD Bulletin, February 1987).
Deaf Supporters with Utah Governor Bangerter, 1987. It was the extended Utah Relay permit to continue in 1987 L-R: Gene Stewart, Peter Green, PSC chairman, representative from a blind organization, Lloyd Perkins, Rodney Walker, Tim Funk, Madelaine Perkins (Utah Relay director), Dave Mortensen, Jerry Westburg, Robert Bonnell and Governor Norman Bangeter sitting
The Establishment of Utah Relay Service
While the Utah Deaf Access Coalition campaigned to pass Senate Bill 101 in 1987, W. David Mortensen, president of the Utah Association for the Deaf, and his Board of Directors lobbied politicians, particularly Senator Paul Fordham, to help expand the Utah Relay Service.
The Utah State Legislature was presented with a proposal to charge each Utah citizen five cents on their phone bill to cover the expense of Deaf phone service. President Mortensen was concerned about the higher cost of using a phone for a Deaf person who uses a TTY. Rodney Walker, a Deaf advocate, was appointed to the committee working on this proposal. He was given the task of evaluating the speed with which different Deaf people used the TTY. Some people typed slowly, while others typed quickly, depending on their abilities. Mr. Walker concluded the survey and demonstrated that even the fastest typist could not type as quickly as a person could speak on the phone (Walker, 2006).
During a demonstration for legislators at the capitol, a proficient typewriter couldn't keep up with a person who read a quick note. After the person finished reading, the typist began to type. This demonstrated how much more expensive using a phone is for a Deaf person who uses a TTY. As a result of the demonstration, the Utah Legislature enacted the "Deaf tax," a three-cent-per-month surcharge on all homes and businesses telephone lines. To put it another way, each Utah resident would be taxed with a five-cent surcharge on their phone bill to cover the cost of the deaf phone service (UAD Bulletin, December 1988).
The Utah State Legislature was presented with a proposal to charge each Utah citizen five cents on their phone bill to cover the expense of Deaf phone service. President Mortensen was concerned about the higher cost of using a phone for a Deaf person who uses a TTY. Rodney Walker, a Deaf advocate, was appointed to the committee working on this proposal. He was given the task of evaluating the speed with which different Deaf people used the TTY. Some people typed slowly, while others typed quickly, depending on their abilities. Mr. Walker concluded the survey and demonstrated that even the fastest typist could not type as quickly as a person could speak on the phone (Walker, 2006).
During a demonstration for legislators at the capitol, a proficient typewriter couldn't keep up with a person who read a quick note. After the person finished reading, the typist began to type. This demonstrated how much more expensive using a phone is for a Deaf person who uses a TTY. As a result of the demonstration, the Utah Legislature enacted the "Deaf tax," a three-cent-per-month surcharge on all homes and businesses telephone lines. To put it another way, each Utah resident would be taxed with a five-cent surcharge on their phone bill to cover the cost of the deaf phone service (UAD Bulletin, December 1988).
Standard Examiner, February 26, 1987
This surcharge was used to fund a statewide telephone relay system that allowed Deaf, speech-impaired, and hard of hearing people to communicate with normal hearing and speaking people through the conventional phone system. The surcharge also helped to fund the provision of telecommunications devices to low-income people. The devices enabled Deaf and speech-impaired people with direct access to the telephone system (UAD Bulletin, December 1988).
During the legislative session, the Senate voted on SB 101 during its second reading, and on January 31, 1987, the bill faced a third reading. The Telephone Access Rally, which drew 200 Deaf people on January 30, was organized by UAD to push senators to pass the third reading. Governor Bangerter gave a short but moving speech to the audience. He had already signed a proclamation declaring January 30th as National Telephone Equal Access Day (UAD Bulletin, March 1987).
During the legislative session, the Senate voted on SB 101 during its second reading, and on January 31, 1987, the bill faced a third reading. The Telephone Access Rally, which drew 200 Deaf people on January 30, was organized by UAD to push senators to pass the third reading. Governor Bangerter gave a short but moving speech to the audience. He had already signed a proclamation declaring January 30th as National Telephone Equal Access Day (UAD Bulletin, March 1987).
Following the Senate's third reading, UAD continued to lobby for the bill to be passed through the House of Representatives and signed by Governor Bangerter. In March, the legislature enacted the Hearing Impaired Telecommunication Access Act just 20 minutes before it adjourned (UAD Bulletin, July 1987). UAD threw a party on May 13, 1987, to commemorate the occasion (UAD Bulletin, May 1987).
After countless meetings, negotiations, equipment reviews, and mounds of paperwork, a new era for Utah's Deaf and Hard of Hearing community began nine months after SB 101 was passed. On December 18, 1987, the Utah State Board of Education approved and signed a contract with Dr. Judy Ann Buffmire, Executive Director of Rehabilitation, and David Mortensen, President of the Utah Association for the Deaf to use a room in the Utah Community Center for the Deaf (Mortensen, UAD Bulletin, January 1988).
After countless meetings, negotiations, equipment reviews, and mounds of paperwork, a new era for Utah's Deaf and Hard of Hearing community began nine months after SB 101 was passed. On December 18, 1987, the Utah State Board of Education approved and signed a contract with Dr. Judy Ann Buffmire, Executive Director of Rehabilitation, and David Mortensen, President of the Utah Association for the Deaf to use a room in the Utah Community Center for the Deaf (Mortensen, UAD Bulletin, January 1988).
Deaf Supporters with Utah Governor Bangerter, 1988. Signing to permit purchase of TTYs for free distribution in 1988 Governor Norman Bangeter sitting. L-R: Lee Shepherd, Kristi Mortensen, Shanna Mortensen, Donna Lee Westberg, Tim Funk (assisted Dave Mortensen on the Hill), Ben Edwards, Craig Edwards, Roy Cochran, Senator Darrel Renstrom, D-Ogden (He helped passed the SB 101 bill), Dave Mortensen, Art Valdez and Mae Varley
President Mortensen signed a contract with the Public Service Commission on October 13, 1987, for the operation of the Utah Relay Service in Utah (Mortensen, UAD Bulletin, November 1987). The Utah Community Center for the Deaf had appointed Madelaine Perkins, a CODA and certified interpreter, to take over as the program director of the Utah Relay System, which was based at the Utah Community Center for the Deaf. The phone access relay system's official title was changed to Utah Relay Service (Mortensen, UAD Bulletin, November 1987).
The Utah Relay Service began operations on January 4, 1988, after a lengthy process of negotiation and setting up a statewide phone relay service (UAD Bulletin, January 1993). The Utah Relay Service was operated by the UAD for ten years under a contract with the Public Service Commission (Sanderson, UAD Bulletin, April 1999).
The Utah Relay Service began operations on January 4, 1988, after a lengthy process of negotiation and setting up a statewide phone relay service (UAD Bulletin, January 1993). The Utah Relay Service was operated by the UAD for ten years under a contract with the Public Service Commission (Sanderson, UAD Bulletin, April 1999).
Madelaine Burton Perkins
Did You Know?
In July 1982, a recent survey of TeleCaption decoder owners showed that 38% currently subscribe to cable services. A whopping 85% of viewers not now subscribing indicate that they would subscribe if closed-captioned programming were available. Captioning held two advantages for cable franchises: it’s community service and it builds the audience!
At that time, only ABC, NBC, and PBS provided closed captioning – and not very many primetime hours, either. UAD had come a long way since! (UAD Bulletin, July 2002).
At that time, only ABC, NBC, and PBS provided closed captioning – and not very many primetime hours, either. UAD had come a long way since! (UAD Bulletin, July 2002).
W. David Mortensen Receives Consumer Award
On January 19, 1990, the Utah State Committee of Consumer Services presented W. David Mortensen with a utility consumer achievement award at the State Capitol's Fifth Annual Utility Consumer Awards Celebration.
Mortensen was honored for his "commitment to strong consumer advocacy." In an article published by the Committee for Consumer Services, his efforts and contributions to securing equal access to phone services were emphasized. An excerpt from the article is as follows:
“Dave made sure the telephone is more accessible to the Deaf, the speech impaired and the hard of hearing. In 1986, Dave began organizing support for Legislation making the telephone system more accessible for the hearing and speech impaired.
With the help of Deaf and speech impaired consumers...Dave led the formation of a broad coalition of supporters. The coalition drafted legislation, found a sponsor and successfully lobbied for passage of a telecommunications access law. The law provides for establishment of a relay service and distribution of TTYs to low-income Deaf or speech impaired consumers.
...Dave’s leadership has made the telephone accessible to some 15,000 disabled Utah consumers. Thank you, Dave, for making it happen” (UAD Bulletin, February 1990, p. 4).
Mortensen was honored for his "commitment to strong consumer advocacy." In an article published by the Committee for Consumer Services, his efforts and contributions to securing equal access to phone services were emphasized. An excerpt from the article is as follows:
“Dave made sure the telephone is more accessible to the Deaf, the speech impaired and the hard of hearing. In 1986, Dave began organizing support for Legislation making the telephone system more accessible for the hearing and speech impaired.
With the help of Deaf and speech impaired consumers...Dave led the formation of a broad coalition of supporters. The coalition drafted legislation, found a sponsor and successfully lobbied for passage of a telecommunications access law. The law provides for establishment of a relay service and distribution of TTYs to low-income Deaf or speech impaired consumers.
...Dave’s leadership has made the telephone accessible to some 15,000 disabled Utah consumers. Thank you, Dave, for making it happen” (UAD Bulletin, February 1990, p. 4).
W. David Mortensen
It’s a Matter of Fairness
Since the establishment of the Utah Relay Service, Deaf relay users had to wait patiently until an operator was available to make the call, and they had been frustrated for not being able to get through because the lines were always busy. Dr. Robert G. Sanderson stated in 1991 that the relay system, which allowed Deaf and hearing individuals to converse by telephone/TTY, was designed to serve everyone equally. That means the casual caller as well as the business, a social chat as well as a life-threatening emergency, a local call as well as a long distance call.
It was brought to Dr. Sanderson's attention that some selfish relay users sought to monopolize restricted lines for their personal benefit, i.e., phone once, secure an operator, and demand that the operator make call after call, one after another, even if it took all day.
He requested that the Utah Relay System for the Deaf limit calls to "one at a time" - that is, finish one call and hang up before dialing again for the next. This would allow others to make their calls without having to wait interminably for an open line. With a limited number of telephone lines, it was easy for a salesman, a businessman, or several of them to totally clog the system, denying access to hundreds of people, much alone emergencies.
Dr. Sanderson said, “It boiled down to a matter of fairness to all” (Sanderson, UAD Bulletin, January 1991).
It was brought to Dr. Sanderson's attention that some selfish relay users sought to monopolize restricted lines for their personal benefit, i.e., phone once, secure an operator, and demand that the operator make call after call, one after another, even if it took all day.
He requested that the Utah Relay System for the Deaf limit calls to "one at a time" - that is, finish one call and hang up before dialing again for the next. This would allow others to make their calls without having to wait interminably for an open line. With a limited number of telephone lines, it was easy for a salesman, a businessman, or several of them to totally clog the system, denying access to hundreds of people, much alone emergencies.
Dr. Sanderson said, “It boiled down to a matter of fairness to all” (Sanderson, UAD Bulletin, January 1991).
Dr. Robert G. Sanderson @ Gallaudet University Archives
The Utah Relay Service Celebrates Five-Year Anniversary
Although there was no fanfare, hoopla, or ribbon cutting, the Utah Relay Service (URS) formally began operations on January 4, 1988. When the Utah Association for the Deaf looked back in January 1993, they noted that Utah was a true pioneer, being the sixth state to provide Deaf callers with relay services 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
As taken from the January 1993 issue of the UAD Bulletin, the following information was obtained from previous issues of the UAD Bulletin:
“On December 1987, Dr. Judy Ann Buffmire, Executive Director of the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, and Dave Mortensen, UAD President, started working on the relay room in the
former UCCD [Utah Community Center for the Deaf] in Bountiful and installed equipment.
In January [1988] there were 3,404 calls; 5,269 in February. The URS was handling about 175 calls every day. The Utahns were fast learning telephone etiquette.
By April, there were problems with equipment intercepting TTY calls. Numbers became letters on the URS computers.
People complained about not getting through as the lines were always busy.
The Deaf callers were educated on using credit cards so they could make long distance calls.
As taken from the January 1993 issue of the UAD Bulletin, the following information was obtained from previous issues of the UAD Bulletin:
“On December 1987, Dr. Judy Ann Buffmire, Executive Director of the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, and Dave Mortensen, UAD President, started working on the relay room in the
former UCCD [Utah Community Center for the Deaf] in Bountiful and installed equipment.
In January [1988] there were 3,404 calls; 5,269 in February. The URS was handling about 175 calls every day. The Utahns were fast learning telephone etiquette.
By April, there were problems with equipment intercepting TTY calls. Numbers became letters on the URS computers.
People complained about not getting through as the lines were always busy.
The Deaf callers were educated on using credit cards so they could make long distance calls.
Dr. Judy Ann Buffmire. The Salt Lake Tribune, August 22, 2011
After May 13, the URS would take only one call per person so the URS could serve more callers. Also, the URS limited the calls to only fifteen minutes.
The UAD found that it did not get enough money from the $.03 charge on all telephone lines to hire more operators. By July, the UAD decided to go back to the legislature and ask for a 10-cent cap on the Deaf tax on phone lines. The URS had to keep up with the fast growing use of the relay services and to cut down on the “all lines are busy – please hold” answer.
After six months, the URS had handled 6800 calls. In ten months’ operation, the relay grew to 8,000 calls a month.
By March 1989, the increase by funding from three cents to a ten-cent cap was approved by the Utah Legislature.
The widely disliked message “Utah Relay. All lines are busy, please hold” became a thing of the past.
After five years, URS had come a long way" (UAD Bulletin, January 1993).
By 1993, the URS was funded by a 7-cent surcharge on all telephone bills in Utah. The URS had eleven lines in the first quarter of 1992 and received 20,000 more calls than in 1991.
The URS was possibly the only agency run by a Deaf group. Private telephone companies ran the majority of the other state relays (UAD Bulletin, January 1993). The URS was in operation from 1987 to 1999.
The UAD found that it did not get enough money from the $.03 charge on all telephone lines to hire more operators. By July, the UAD decided to go back to the legislature and ask for a 10-cent cap on the Deaf tax on phone lines. The URS had to keep up with the fast growing use of the relay services and to cut down on the “all lines are busy – please hold” answer.
After six months, the URS had handled 6800 calls. In ten months’ operation, the relay grew to 8,000 calls a month.
By March 1989, the increase by funding from three cents to a ten-cent cap was approved by the Utah Legislature.
The widely disliked message “Utah Relay. All lines are busy, please hold” became a thing of the past.
After five years, URS had come a long way" (UAD Bulletin, January 1993).
By 1993, the URS was funded by a 7-cent surcharge on all telephone bills in Utah. The URS had eleven lines in the first quarter of 1992 and received 20,000 more calls than in 1991.
The URS was possibly the only agency run by a Deaf group. Private telephone companies ran the majority of the other state relays (UAD Bulletin, January 1993). The URS was in operation from 1987 to 1999.
In 1971. W. David Mortensen (Dave) was talking to Utah Governor Scott M. Matheson about the TTYs. Lucy Greenwood was the interpreter. Dave wanted Governor Matheson to help purchase the TTYs for the Utah Deaf community to use
TTYs Springing Up Here and There in Utah
According to the Utah Association for the Deaf's Bulletin from 1992, TTYs were selling like hot pancakes in Utah. Following the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act in 1990, many public locations attempted to provide a variety of communication aids for people with hearing or speech impairments.
The TTY pay phone at Murray's Fashion Place Mall was most likely the first known business TTY in Utah. It was discovered by Dave Mortensen at that mall, and he found it to be simple to operate. A quarter is inserted into a regular pay phone, and a TTY number is dialed. With the TTY, a drawer will slide out. The caller simply connects the hook phone receiver to the TTY device and begins talking (UAD Bulletin, April 1992).
The TTY pay phone at Murray's Fashion Place Mall was most likely the first known business TTY in Utah. It was discovered by Dave Mortensen at that mall, and he found it to be simple to operate. A quarter is inserted into a regular pay phone, and a TTY number is dialed. With the TTY, a drawer will slide out. The caller simply connects the hook phone receiver to the TTY device and begins talking (UAD Bulletin, April 1992).
Ajax Presses is the latest employer to obtain a TTY for its large number of Deaf employees. Looking at the set-up is Steven Christensen, Paul Gines, and George Gavros. Jerry Westburg is at the keyboard of the model 15"mailbox' TTY. UAD Bulletin, April 1974
The Enactment of the House Bill 217
House Bill 217, approved during the 1994 legislative session, raised the phone premium threshold to 25 cents in order to fund and improve the Utah Relay System (Mortensen- Nelson, UAD Bulletin, March 1994, p. 2; UAD Bulletin, March 1994, p. 2-3).
Dave Mortensen at his mailbox TTY UAD Bulletin, September 2012
Deaf Citizen’s Day a Big Success
The "Deaf Citizens' Day on the Hill" in February 1994 was a huge success because the State Office building auditorium was packed with around 200 people, including students from American Sign Language and Interpreters in Training classes, as well as students and teachers from the Utah School for the Deaf and many others from the Deaf community. W. David Mortensen, president of the Utah Association for the Deaf, stated that Governor Mike Leavitt walked in waving his hand and shaking hands with as many people as he could. Then he addressed the Utah Deaf community.
Governor Leavitt signed the proclamation regarding Utah Relay Services after reading it. He waved and smiled as he walked away, and the audience applauded by waving their hands. Dave Mortensen, UAD president, was moved by the Deaf community's spirit (Mortensen, UAD Bulletin, February 1994).
Governor Leavitt signed the proclamation regarding Utah Relay Services after reading it. He waved and smiled as he walked away, and the audience applauded by waving their hands. Dave Mortensen, UAD president, was moved by the Deaf community's spirit (Mortensen, UAD Bulletin, February 1994).
Watching Albert Sconiers make a call over the recently installed Phenotype unit and Model 2-B teletype machine are: Fay Young, Ralph Sylvester, foreman, Lawrence Anderson, Lawrence Payne, Dave Mortensen, and Everrett Gustin, kneeling. UAD Bulletin, December 1973
The Growth of Utah Relay Service
In 1996, the Utah Association for the Deaf was one of only two state associations for the Deaf running relay system, and they were delighted to report that, since 1998, they had seen incredible growth with remarkably few glitches. In 1988, for example, there were 89,626 calls; since then, there have been about 2,118,155 calls! Given the volume, there had been surprisingly few complaints. UAD's program director, Madelaine Perkins, owed a significant portion of this to her abilities and dedication (Sanderson, UAD Bulletin, January 1996).
A new TTY service has been initiated by the Salt Lake City Police Department. Deaf persons can call the department when they need help. In the picture above are left to right: Deaf advocate, Lloyd H. Perkins, Salt Lake City Commissioner, Glen N. Greener, and Chief of Police Dewey J. Fillis. Perkins donated the teletype unit and the city bought the converter. Chief Fillies said the price have been train to operate the system. Calls have nee relayed, when necessary, to doctors, paramedics, and other persons whom Deaf families needed in a hurry. UAD Bulletin, April 1975
Utah Relay Service Executive Director Retires
Madelaine Perkins, the Executive Director of the Utah Relay Service for the Deaf, retired on September 30, 1996 (UAD Bulletin, September 1996).
In 1988, Madelaine was hired by the Utah Association for the Deaf to set up a relay system (UAD Bulletin, September 1996). She had diligently overseen the URS activities for the UAD for the past eight years (Mortensen, UAD Bulletin, October 1996). She brought a long-term awareness of deafness and Deaf people to the role as a result of her interpreting experience, marriage to a Deaf person, and business experience as an executive secretary for a businesswoman (UAD Bulletin, September 1996).
Madelaine had done an exceptional job, given the difficulties she had faced, and the Deaf people of Utah had benefited. As a result of her efforts, Utah became one of only one or two independent relay systems. The Big Boys, AT&T, MCI, and Sprint, had long coveted Utah's system, but Deaf people had prove that they were capable of running it with modest improvement and great sensitive assistance from the Utah Public Service Commission (UAD Bulletin, September 1996).
In 1988, Madelaine was hired by the Utah Association for the Deaf to set up a relay system (UAD Bulletin, September 1996). She had diligently overseen the URS activities for the UAD for the past eight years (Mortensen, UAD Bulletin, October 1996). She brought a long-term awareness of deafness and Deaf people to the role as a result of her interpreting experience, marriage to a Deaf person, and business experience as an executive secretary for a businesswoman (UAD Bulletin, September 1996).
Madelaine had done an exceptional job, given the difficulties she had faced, and the Deaf people of Utah had benefited. As a result of her efforts, Utah became one of only one or two independent relay systems. The Big Boys, AT&T, MCI, and Sprint, had long coveted Utah's system, but Deaf people had prove that they were capable of running it with modest improvement and great sensitive assistance from the Utah Public Service Commission (UAD Bulletin, September 1996).
Madelaine Perkins,
The Deaf Mortensen Family Meets
Utah Governor Michael Okerlund Leavitt
Utah Governor Michael Okerlund Leavitt
On behalf of the Utah Deaf Community, the Deaf Mortensen family of W. David, Shanna, and their daughter Kristi went to visit Michael Okerlund Leavitt, the Utah Governor, in 1996, and requested that he support the Utah Relay Service.
L-R: Stephen 'Zak' Zakharias, interpreter, Kristi, Utah Governor Mike Leavitt, Dave Mortensen, Shanna Mortensen, Kristi Mortensen and Jean Jewkes, interpreter
Sprint Takes Over the Utah Relay Service
Since 1988, the Utah Public Service Commission (PSC) has supplied the Utah Relay Service under a contract with the Utah Association for the Deaf and as authorized by the State of Utah. The deal with UAD was set to end in 1999. Sprint was chosen and given the contract by the PSC after a competitive bidding process that was approved by the State of Utah (UAD Bulletin, February 2000).
After Sprint took over the Utah Relay, it was voted to use
the money to establish an interpreter training program at Salt Lake Community College. L-R: Robert Sanderson, Jeff Pollock, Dave Mortensen, Shanna Mortensen, Craig Radford, Robert Kerr, JR Goff, Rep. Spendlove of the Utah House of Representative, who gets it passed with Gov. Jonathan Huntsman’s, Jr. sitting
In a bid with the Public Service Commission for the year 2000, Sprint won the Utah Relay Service. The Deaf community was outraged by Sprint's decision to win Utah Relay Service. Dr. Robert G. Sanderson stated that the UAD management team had studied the situation for more than two years and concluded that Hamilton, which employed Utah workers, would provide the best service to Utah Deaf and Hard of Hearing, as well as speech impaired people, rather than Sprint, which placed all calls in one of its out-of-state, difficult-to-reach call centers (Sanderson, UAD Bulletin, April 1999). Despite having no say in the Utah Public Service Commission's bidding decision, Dr. Sanderson is said to prefer Hamilton to Sprint. The Utah Relay Service of Utah was closed in 2000. The TTY eventually became obsolete when Sorenson Communication, Inc. entered the picture in 2003.
Protest to save the Utah Relay Service
Protest to save the Utah Relay Service
Protest to save the Utah Relay Service
The Birth of Video Relay Service Industry
While studying at Los Angeles Pierce College in 1981, Jonathan Hodson, a Utah native and former Director of Business Development at Sorenson Communication, Inc., was looking into the possibility of video data being transmitted over an analog line (plain old telephone system, or POTS) using a 28.8 kilobit modem. To find out if video data could be carried using POTS and modems, Jonathan and a classmate went to see a computer professor. The professor took a deep breath and thought about it. Then, he grabbed the marker and began drawing frequency diagrams on the whiteboard. He reasoned and then decided on a course of action. He stated that video data transmission using that technology is impossible under any circumstances.
The idea occurred to Jonathan that there had to be a method to implement this concept, so he reached out to a friend who worked as an electronic engineer for IBM in San Jose, California. Jonathon went over the details of his concept with him. His friend stated that he will respond as soon as possible with an answer. After several days, he was unable to come up with a way.
The idea occurred to Jonathan that there had to be a method to implement this concept, so he reached out to a friend who worked as an electronic engineer for IBM in San Jose, California. Jonathon went over the details of his concept with him. His friend stated that he will respond as soon as possible with an answer. After several days, he was unable to come up with a way.
Jonathon Hudson
During a Thanksgiving dinner in 1994 at the house of Jonathan's sister Elizabeth and her husband, James Lee Sorenson, James mentioned that his company was collaborating with Utah State University on a video compression technology, and that he intended to buy the technology for his company. Jonathan had no idea what compression was at the time.
In the summer of 1996, Jonathan received a call from Sorenson Vision, Inc. notifying him that James Sorenson, his father, Utah billionaire James LeVoy Sorenson, and his executives wanted to show him the video-conferencing software they had developed for their company. Jonathan's initial thoughts were that it was video-conferencing equipment and that it would most likely display a choppy picture with missing frames, but that he would at the very least give it a chance to see their latest technology. Jonathan and his interpreter traveled to California to meet with them and view their video software. Their ability to project complex and smooth movements of a Deaf person utilizing American Sign Language proved to be rather impressive. Jonathan and his interpreter were completely taken aback!
In the summer of 1996, Jonathan received a call from Sorenson Vision, Inc. notifying him that James Sorenson, his father, Utah billionaire James LeVoy Sorenson, and his executives wanted to show him the video-conferencing software they had developed for their company. Jonathan's initial thoughts were that it was video-conferencing equipment and that it would most likely display a choppy picture with missing frames, but that he would at the very least give it a chance to see their latest technology. Jonathan and his interpreter traveled to California to meet with them and view their video software. Their ability to project complex and smooth movements of a Deaf person utilizing American Sign Language proved to be rather impressive. Jonathan and his interpreter were completely taken aback!
James LeVoy Sorenson. The Salt Lake Tribune, November 5, 2012
As a result, Jonathan was hired by Sorenson Vision in the fall of 1996 as director of business development, with the responsibility of marketing the company's video software to the Deaf community. VisionLink was the first product developed by Sorenson Vision, and it was created with the Deaf community in mind. Jonathon thought marketing this fantastic product would be simple, but he was surprised to discover that the Deaf community was not prepared to embrace this significant shift in their mode of communication. Because they had grown accustomed to using a TTY for communication, they were concerned about losing their ability to write well in English. Another "horror," which was particularly prevalent among women, was the possibility of being captured on video with their hair undone or in other unflattering settings.
Despite the set back , it did not deter Jonathan from continuing to advertise the video software. He introduced the technology to a number of deaf organizations, universities with deaf programs, and high-profile individuals. It was gradually becoming recognized that this was the wave of the future; yet, he insisted on reminding them that this future was available right now, not in the distant future.
Several times in 1998, Jonathan brought up the notion of using video relay interpreting technology to provide video relay interpreting to Sorenson Vision, but they disregarded his idea. Communication Services for the Deaf (CSD) was introduced to this product and the concept of video relay interpreting. They exhibited strong interest in the video relay concept and began to pursue it, eventually accepting it as a component of the telecommunication relay service (TRS), which is financed by the Federal Communications Commission.
Sorenson EnVision, the second-generation video conferencing system after VisionLink, was developed in 1999 and immediately became the second-generation video conferencing system, serving both the Deaf and hearing sectors. Around the same time, the FCC approved video relay interpreting as a component of TRS, which later became video relay service, or VRS. To provide VRS, CSD and Sprint created a partnership. They elected to use the free Microsoft Netmeeting software instead of Sorenson VisionLink.
Ed Bosson, a Texas Relay administrator, had been attempting to provide low-cost VRS to Deaf individuals in his state. Ed, who was widely considered as the father of video relay, had experimented with expensive video equipment that forced Deaf callers to travel to faraway areas in order to use the service. After months of collaboration with him, they launched the first home-based video conferencing system in September 2000. EnVision was chosen for inclusion on the state voucher list to provide services to Texas Deaf people, becoming Texas the first state in the United States to do so.
Despite the set back , it did not deter Jonathan from continuing to advertise the video software. He introduced the technology to a number of deaf organizations, universities with deaf programs, and high-profile individuals. It was gradually becoming recognized that this was the wave of the future; yet, he insisted on reminding them that this future was available right now, not in the distant future.
Several times in 1998, Jonathan brought up the notion of using video relay interpreting technology to provide video relay interpreting to Sorenson Vision, but they disregarded his idea. Communication Services for the Deaf (CSD) was introduced to this product and the concept of video relay interpreting. They exhibited strong interest in the video relay concept and began to pursue it, eventually accepting it as a component of the telecommunication relay service (TRS), which is financed by the Federal Communications Commission.
Sorenson EnVision, the second-generation video conferencing system after VisionLink, was developed in 1999 and immediately became the second-generation video conferencing system, serving both the Deaf and hearing sectors. Around the same time, the FCC approved video relay interpreting as a component of TRS, which later became video relay service, or VRS. To provide VRS, CSD and Sprint created a partnership. They elected to use the free Microsoft Netmeeting software instead of Sorenson VisionLink.
Ed Bosson, a Texas Relay administrator, had been attempting to provide low-cost VRS to Deaf individuals in his state. Ed, who was widely considered as the father of video relay, had experimented with expensive video equipment that forced Deaf callers to travel to faraway areas in order to use the service. After months of collaboration with him, they launched the first home-based video conferencing system in September 2000. EnVision was chosen for inclusion on the state voucher list to provide services to Texas Deaf people, becoming Texas the first state in the United States to do so.
Jonathan Hodson has helped Sorenson Media become the No. 1 supplier of video-relay call services to the Deaf as the company's national Video Relay Service outreach director. He is pictured making a phone call to a hearing consumer using VRS (The Salt Lake Tribune, July 14, 2004)
The Establishment of the Sorenson Communications, Inc.
Several telephone companies that were FCC-certified for TRS, such as MCI, AT&T, Hamilton, CAC, and others, began contracting with interpreting partners to follow the VRS trend. Jonathan gave presentations to Sprint, AT&T, MCI, and other phone carriers on the EnVision product. They were uninterested in it and instead wanted to use Microsoft Netmeeting, which was available for free.
In 2001 and 2002, Jonathan pitched the video relay concept to Sorenson Vision (later Sorenson Technology, which merged with Sorenson Media). Even with the possibility for $9 per minute earnings, they were cautious to adopt the notion.
Jonathan and his associates set up their basic 10x10 booth to demonstrate the EnVision product at Gallaudet University for the Deaf Way II event in July 2002. Communication Services for the Deaf reached him and asked if EnVision might be used in their large floor exhibit with 14 VRS stations and a large screen exhibiting the video conferencing link. He inquired as to what the problem with Microsoft Netmeeting was. Due to bandwidth limitations, they said it couldn't give clear motion. EnVision was able to complete the task successfully because to its video compressing technology. Thousands of Deaf attendees watched the communication on the giant screen and asked where they could see the actual thing. Many people flocked to Jonathan's little stand to buy EnVision.
Following the event, Jonathan informed Sorenson executives of the enormous VRS revenue generated by CSD throughout the seven-day period, especially because the FCC had recently increased the reimbursement rate to $14 per minute. Per-minute pay, he noted, had opened their eyes.
In 2001 and 2002, Jonathan pitched the video relay concept to Sorenson Vision (later Sorenson Technology, which merged with Sorenson Media). Even with the possibility for $9 per minute earnings, they were cautious to adopt the notion.
Jonathan and his associates set up their basic 10x10 booth to demonstrate the EnVision product at Gallaudet University for the Deaf Way II event in July 2002. Communication Services for the Deaf reached him and asked if EnVision might be used in their large floor exhibit with 14 VRS stations and a large screen exhibiting the video conferencing link. He inquired as to what the problem with Microsoft Netmeeting was. Due to bandwidth limitations, they said it couldn't give clear motion. EnVision was able to complete the task successfully because to its video compressing technology. Thousands of Deaf attendees watched the communication on the giant screen and asked where they could see the actual thing. Many people flocked to Jonathan's little stand to buy EnVision.
Following the event, Jonathan informed Sorenson executives of the enormous VRS revenue generated by CSD throughout the seven-day period, especially because the FCC had recently increased the reimbursement rate to $14 per minute. Per-minute pay, he noted, had opened their eyes.
Jonathan proposed a joint EnVision and VRS operation, as well as a partnership with a telephone company. The plan piqued James Lee Sorenson's interest. "Prove me wrong, go find a telephone company," James finally said to Jonathan. He sent his executives to investigate VRS in order to see if it could be turned into a profitable venture. Jonathan was assigned the task of gathering and synthesizing information. They informed James that this was the real deal after about two weeks. Later, James sent Jonathan an email wishing Sorenson had started VRS years ago!
Jonathan met with Sprint, MCI, AT&T, Hamilton, CAC, and other companies during the development of the standalone Sorenson VP-100 videophone. They were, however, uninterested in the new technology. Their meetings were to be held via Microsoft Netmeeting. Following that, ATT launched a Request Form Program to obtain bids from VRS vendors. Sorenson Media decided to submit a proposal. In 2002, instead of Sorenson Media, an interpreting agency was chosen to be AT&T's partner because Sorenson Media lacked interpreting experience.
Sorenson Media applied for a VRS certificate with the FCC on their own. After repeated attempts and negotiations with the FCC, Sorenson Media was issued a certificate as the first small, non-telephone VRS provider. Several phone companies objected to Sorenson Media since it was primarily a technology company.
Regardless of the situation, Sorenson Media embraced VRS in April 2003. After splitting its operations, Sorenson Communications, Inc. (SCI) was founded to focus only on VRS. As a result, SCI became the nation's largest and fastest-growing video relay service provider, with over 70,000 Deaf users (Jonathan Hodson, personal communication, November 7, 2009). In addition, this company was the first VRS supplier to develop a videophone for the Deaf community (The Endeavor, Winter 2017).
Jonathan met with Sprint, MCI, AT&T, Hamilton, CAC, and other companies during the development of the standalone Sorenson VP-100 videophone. They were, however, uninterested in the new technology. Their meetings were to be held via Microsoft Netmeeting. Following that, ATT launched a Request Form Program to obtain bids from VRS vendors. Sorenson Media decided to submit a proposal. In 2002, instead of Sorenson Media, an interpreting agency was chosen to be AT&T's partner because Sorenson Media lacked interpreting experience.
Sorenson Media applied for a VRS certificate with the FCC on their own. After repeated attempts and negotiations with the FCC, Sorenson Media was issued a certificate as the first small, non-telephone VRS provider. Several phone companies objected to Sorenson Media since it was primarily a technology company.
Regardless of the situation, Sorenson Media embraced VRS in April 2003. After splitting its operations, Sorenson Communications, Inc. (SCI) was founded to focus only on VRS. As a result, SCI became the nation's largest and fastest-growing video relay service provider, with over 70,000 Deaf users (Jonathan Hodson, personal communication, November 7, 2009). In addition, this company was the first VRS supplier to develop a videophone for the Deaf community (The Endeavor, Winter 2017).
Sorenson Launches Video Relay Service
Over the years, Jonathan has played a key role in spreading awareness of low-cost video compression technology available to the Deaf community among Deaf organizations and state relay administrators. As a result, Deaf organizations and state relay administrators petitioned the FCC to incorporate video relay service in the telecommunications relay service infrastructure (Jonathan Hodson, personal communication, October 27, 2013). When Sorenson Communication, Inc. launched a free video relay service (VRS) for the 28 million Deaf and hard of hearing people in the United States in 2003, his perseverance paid off. Deaf and hard of hearing people can make video relay calls to family, friends, and business associates using a trained American Sign Language (ASL) interpreter and a broadband Internet connection (UAD Bulletin, May 2003). The users now have access to a "functionally equivalent" video relay system.
The "functionally equivalent" access to the video relay system now benefits Deaf and hard of hearing users more than any other form of relay service. Ronald C. Burdett, a Utah Deaf native, joined Sorenson Communication, Inc. as vice president of community relations.
Ronald C. Burdett. Photo courtesy of the Sorenson Communications, Inc.
Just months before the 2007 Winter Dealympics in Utah, the Salt Lake City International Airport became the first airport in the United States to offer Sorenson Communications' free videophone booths for Deaf and hard of hearing travelers. "This will be seen by a lot of Deaf from all around the world, and they'll be thrilled," said Ronald Burdett, Deaf and vice president of community relations for Sorenson Communication, Inc. Patrick Nola, president and CEO of Sorensen Communications, said, "This is a historic first for the country." This, we hope, will serve as a model for other airports across the country" (Welling, The Deseret News, November 4, 2006).
In 1989. L-R: Him Hilber, Diane Williams, Lloyd Perkins, Shirley Snow, Ron Nelson, Kristi Mortensen, Jerry Westberg, Dennis Platt, Roy Cochran, Dave, Mae Varley, Robert Sanderson and Governor Norman Bangerter
The Development of Closed Captions
Prior to 1930, the Deaf community was able to enjoy silent films as well as certain films with subtitles. Deaf people have been at a distinct disadvantage since the 1930s when non-talking movies were replaced by talking films (Walker, 2006).
For more than 30 years, there were no captions added to films. Deaf people were left out in the cold (Sanderson, 2004). Despite the efforts of Dr. Malcolm J. Norwood, who was himself deaf and is widely considered the "Father of Closed Captioning," it wasn't until June 30, 1960, that Captioned Films for the Deaf became available. As a director for the United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Dr. Norwood, also known as "Mac," persuaded top-level administrators of the necessity of Deaf individuals having an education through the use of captioned films (Sanderson, 2004).
After receiving approval, Mac began developing a nationwide program of captioned films for Deaf and hard of hearing people. It sparked a great deal of interest in the Deaf community. As a result, thousands of Deaf individuals rented or purchased 16 mm projectors to use with the films from the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare's film library in Washington, D.C., which were made available to them by the department (Sanderson, 2004).
For more than 30 years, there were no captions added to films. Deaf people were left out in the cold (Sanderson, 2004). Despite the efforts of Dr. Malcolm J. Norwood, who was himself deaf and is widely considered the "Father of Closed Captioning," it wasn't until June 30, 1960, that Captioned Films for the Deaf became available. As a director for the United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Dr. Norwood, also known as "Mac," persuaded top-level administrators of the necessity of Deaf individuals having an education through the use of captioned films (Sanderson, 2004).
After receiving approval, Mac began developing a nationwide program of captioned films for Deaf and hard of hearing people. It sparked a great deal of interest in the Deaf community. As a result, thousands of Deaf individuals rented or purchased 16 mm projectors to use with the films from the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare's film library in Washington, D.C., which were made available to them by the department (Sanderson, 2004).
Dr. Malcolm J. Norwood @ Described & Captioned Medial Program
United Utah Organizations of the Deaf was founded in July 1960 to collaborate with local organizations such as the Utah Association of the Deaf, the Utah Athletic Club of the Deaf, the Salt Lake Frats, the Ogden Frats, the Salt Lake Valley Branch for the Deaf, the Ogden Branch for the Deaf, and other organizations among the Deaf in Utah to primarily coordinate dates for each group's activities in order to avoid any overlapping of meetings and events so that everyone could (Walker, 2006). During a meeting on May 1, 2004, representatives from various organizations voted to dissolve the United Organizations for the Deaf (UAD Bulletin, June 2004).
Dr. Norwood's perseverance paid off in the 1970s and 1980s, when the captioning industry as we know it was born (Feldman, 2008). Closed captioned TV series were popular at the time, and "this attracted Deaf people away from captioned film showings at Frat meetings" (Walker, 2006). The Frat continued to meet, although subtitled film screenings were progressively phased out.
On October 16, 1990, President George H.W. Bush signed the "Television Decoder Circuitry Act" into law. All television sets with a display of 13 inches or more were required to have built-in closed captions by July 1, 1993. (UAD Bulletin, December 1990). Zenith was the first company to offer closed captioning in late 1991, just in time for the holidays. The range included portable and console models. The new Zeniths' closed captions were huge - you could read the lines from across the room (Kinney, UAD Bulletin, April 1992). By 1993, two television manufacturers had released models with closed caption decoders built in. The companies in question were JVC and Toshiba (UAD Bulletin, July 1993). It was a dream come true for the Deaf and hard of hearing people. They didn't have to buy a captioning decoder anymore. They were finally able to watch TV with closed captions in a hotel room and at the homes of friends and family members.
Dr. Norwood's perseverance paid off in the 1970s and 1980s, when the captioning industry as we know it was born (Feldman, 2008). Closed captioned TV series were popular at the time, and "this attracted Deaf people away from captioned film showings at Frat meetings" (Walker, 2006). The Frat continued to meet, although subtitled film screenings were progressively phased out.
On October 16, 1990, President George H.W. Bush signed the "Television Decoder Circuitry Act" into law. All television sets with a display of 13 inches or more were required to have built-in closed captions by July 1, 1993. (UAD Bulletin, December 1990). Zenith was the first company to offer closed captioning in late 1991, just in time for the holidays. The range included portable and console models. The new Zeniths' closed captions were huge - you could read the lines from across the room (Kinney, UAD Bulletin, April 1992). By 1993, two television manufacturers had released models with closed caption decoders built in. The companies in question were JVC and Toshiba (UAD Bulletin, July 1993). It was a dream come true for the Deaf and hard of hearing people. They didn't have to buy a captioning decoder anymore. They were finally able to watch TV with closed captions in a hotel room and at the homes of friends and family members.
Actual broadcast of NBC’s “Watch Your Child/The Me Too Show.” Interpreter Maureen Collins appears in the right-hand corner of the TV screen throughout the program. Captions are broadcast at the beginning of each new activity. UAD Bulletin, June 1972
Captions are required by federal law to be presented on television programmes and wide-release films. Deaf people now have the option of watching captioned television shows and movies. More captioned movies have been added to Utah theaters as a result of the Popcorn Coalition and Utah-CAN's efforts. With the advancement of technology, Deaf directors/producers are producing and directing an increasing number of ASL films. Our local Utah film producers are Lance Pickett of R.E.M. Films and Julio Diaz, Bobby Giles, and Jim Harper of Eye-Sign Media.
TV Stations
In 1993, UAD was able to convince two more local television stations to caption their local news broadcasts. UAD had further work to do to get those TV stations to caption their news in "real-time" captioning mode, allowing them to enjoy all remarks written on the shows while also getting them closer to equal access, as hearing viewers do (Mortensen, UAD Bulletin, June 1995).
By 1997, all three TV stations with "Real-Time" captioning of the nightly news were Channel 13 Fox, Channel 2 KUTV, and Channel 4 KTVX. With the introduction of real-time captioning, UAD congratulated those TV stations for being considerate to their Deaf viewers (UAD Bulletin, July 1997, p. 4).
By 1997, all three TV stations with "Real-Time" captioning of the nightly news were Channel 13 Fox, Channel 2 KUTV, and Channel 4 KTVX. With the introduction of real-time captioning, UAD congratulated those TV stations for being considerate to their Deaf viewers (UAD Bulletin, July 1997, p. 4).
Finally, in the preceding 100 years, technology has evolved significantly. Deaf and hard of hearing people now have access to the information society that hearing people take for granted, thanks to technological advancements. Furthermore, the Utah Deaf community values technology because it allows them to communicate more effectively with both the Deaf and hearing worlds.
Personal Communication
Jonathan Hodson, personal communication, November 7, 2009.
Jonathan Hodson, personal communication, October 27, 2013.
References
“20 Years Ago...” UAD Bulletin, vol. 26.2 (July 2002): 5.
“Hooray for SB42.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 17, no. 10 (March 1994): 2-3.
“Lobby Your Legislators!” UAD Bulletin, vol. 10, no. 9 (February 1987): 3.
“‘Joe,’ 62, hears his first sound by ‘plugging’ into a U. computer.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 10, no. 2 (June 1975): 4.
“Happy 5th Birthday, Utah Relay Service!!” UAD Bulletin, vol. 17, no. 8 (January 1993): 1.
Kinney, Valerie. “New Zenith Owners Experience Problems.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 15, no. 11 (April 1992): 3-4.
“More Built-in Televisions in Stores.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 18, no. 2 (July 1993): 11.
“Mortensen Receives Consumer Award.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 12, No. 22 (February 1990): 4.
Mortensen, David. “Deaf Citizen’s Day a Big Success.” UAD Bulletin, v. 17, no. 9 (February 1994): 1.
Mortensen, David. “UAD President’s Message.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 19.1 (June 1995): 4.
Mortensen, David. “UAD President’s Message.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 20.5 (October 1996): 4.
Nelson-Mortensen, Kristi. “Progress on Capitol Hill.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 17, no. 10 (March 1994): 2.
Platt, Dennis. “President’s Corner.” The UAD Bulletin, vol. 6, no. 1 (Fall 1969): 2.
Mortensen, W. David. “President’s Message.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 10, no. 3 (October 1975): 2.
Mortensen, W. David. “President’s Message.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 11, no. 6 (November 1987): 2.
Mortensen, W. David. “President’s Message.” The UAD Bulletin, vol. 11, no. 8 (January 1988): 2.
Sanderson, Robert G. “It’s a Matter of Fairness.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 14, no. 8 (January 1991): 4.
Sanderson, Robert G. “URS Needs Communication Assistants.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 19.8 (January 1996): 3.
“Speech and Hearing Impaired Telephone Surcharge.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 12, no. 8 (December 1988): 4.
“Summary of Board Minutes.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 10, no. 12 (May 1987): 2.
“Technology Has Changed Deaf Life: Is Your Child Benefitting?” The Endeavor (Winter 2017): 41.
“Telephone Access Bill Moves in Legislature.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 10, no. 10 (March 1987): 2.
“Telephone Access and Relay Service Bill.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 10, no. 8 (January 1987): 3.
“TDDs Springing Up Here and There in Utah.” UAD Bulletin, v. 15, no. 11 (April 1992): 2.
“UAD Convention Business Meeting June 13-14, 1997.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 21.2 (July 1997): 4.
“UAD Convention in Provo a First.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 11. No. 1 (July 1987): 2.
“URS Executive Director to Retire.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 20.4 (September 1996): 6.
“Utah Deaf Lead Nation in Ear Research.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 9, no. 3 (June 1974): 2.
Walker, Rodney, W. My Life Story, 2006.
Welling, Angie. “Airport Videophones a First in U.S.” The Deseret News, November 4, 2006.
Jonathan Hodson, personal communication, November 7, 2009.
Jonathan Hodson, personal communication, October 27, 2013.
References
“20 Years Ago...” UAD Bulletin, vol. 26.2 (July 2002): 5.
“Hooray for SB42.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 17, no. 10 (March 1994): 2-3.
“Lobby Your Legislators!” UAD Bulletin, vol. 10, no. 9 (February 1987): 3.
“‘Joe,’ 62, hears his first sound by ‘plugging’ into a U. computer.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 10, no. 2 (June 1975): 4.
“Happy 5th Birthday, Utah Relay Service!!” UAD Bulletin, vol. 17, no. 8 (January 1993): 1.
Kinney, Valerie. “New Zenith Owners Experience Problems.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 15, no. 11 (April 1992): 3-4.
“More Built-in Televisions in Stores.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 18, no. 2 (July 1993): 11.
“Mortensen Receives Consumer Award.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 12, No. 22 (February 1990): 4.
Mortensen, David. “Deaf Citizen’s Day a Big Success.” UAD Bulletin, v. 17, no. 9 (February 1994): 1.
Mortensen, David. “UAD President’s Message.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 19.1 (June 1995): 4.
Mortensen, David. “UAD President’s Message.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 20.5 (October 1996): 4.
Nelson-Mortensen, Kristi. “Progress on Capitol Hill.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 17, no. 10 (March 1994): 2.
Platt, Dennis. “President’s Corner.” The UAD Bulletin, vol. 6, no. 1 (Fall 1969): 2.
Mortensen, W. David. “President’s Message.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 10, no. 3 (October 1975): 2.
Mortensen, W. David. “President’s Message.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 11, no. 6 (November 1987): 2.
Mortensen, W. David. “President’s Message.” The UAD Bulletin, vol. 11, no. 8 (January 1988): 2.
Sanderson, Robert G. “It’s a Matter of Fairness.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 14, no. 8 (January 1991): 4.
Sanderson, Robert G. “URS Needs Communication Assistants.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 19.8 (January 1996): 3.
“Speech and Hearing Impaired Telephone Surcharge.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 12, no. 8 (December 1988): 4.
“Summary of Board Minutes.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 10, no. 12 (May 1987): 2.
“Technology Has Changed Deaf Life: Is Your Child Benefitting?” The Endeavor (Winter 2017): 41.
“Telephone Access Bill Moves in Legislature.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 10, no. 10 (March 1987): 2.
“Telephone Access and Relay Service Bill.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 10, no. 8 (January 1987): 3.
“TDDs Springing Up Here and There in Utah.” UAD Bulletin, v. 15, no. 11 (April 1992): 2.
“UAD Convention Business Meeting June 13-14, 1997.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 21.2 (July 1997): 4.
“UAD Convention in Provo a First.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 11. No. 1 (July 1987): 2.
“URS Executive Director to Retire.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 20.4 (September 1996): 6.
“Utah Deaf Lead Nation in Ear Research.” UAD Bulletin, vol. 9, no. 3 (June 1974): 2.
Walker, Rodney, W. My Life Story, 2006.
Welling, Angie. “Airport Videophones a First in U.S.” The Deseret News, November 4, 2006.