Bonus if it’s delayed by exactly 2 seconds, so that it doesn’t spoil jokes, and I can quickly reference it if I missed something someone said (helping me avoid fixating on the captions.)

Because it’s the CC descriptions of music swells and things like “[laughs] and “[crying]”, etc that are distracting for me, and not needed.

What’s worse, sometimes they ruin comedic timing by putting the punchline on the screen before the setup has finished (or logical equivalent of a punchline… comedy is often found in timing) and the captions ruin the timing.

  mpv --sub-filter-sdh [--sub-filter-sdh-harder] --sub-delay=2

Agreed on timing issues. This also seems to vary by show/producer.

I think that'd ruin me more than not having subtitles at all, because I just get stuck at reading the subtitles all the time if they are on (which, I have on 99% of the time). I go so far to avoid content that doesn't have subtitles.

What I'd love to have, would be a "speed-reading" version of subtitles, that just show each word individually as it's spoken (or maybe two/three) instead of the full sentence. That way it can still be in sync, while not ruining punchlines. Would be a real hassle to actually write/make the subtitles though, but with all the AI/ML around today, there is probably a way to automate it.

I don't know if they've ever considered having that as a display option. They're just one of the only companies I can think of for whom it wouldn't involve a whole rethinking of how they create the captions.

As a non-native English speaker I’m used to watching most television and movies with subtitles. The extra sound descriptions don’t bother me too much actually. Sometimes it is kind of funny actually, it is a running joke in my home to count the times a show has [ominous music].

This drives me nuts too, especially when they're being subjective and I'm asking myself things like 'Was that music really "ominous"? Didn't seem that way...'

Another thing that bugs me is when captions reveal a character's name to indicate who is speaking when the name of that character hasn't actually been revealed in the story yet.

This is the exact reason why I vastly prefer playing media on my own media player. I have it set to always delay subtitles by exactly 2 seconds. I even have the font overridden to use a nice geometric sans (Josefin Sans, to be exact); subtitles with bitmap fonts (like they are on DVD and Blu-ray) are disabled outright.

Every time there's a new person watching something with me, they comment on the subtitle delay. It usually starts with a complaint that the subs are off-sync. Never had someone (yet) stick to that complaint though, after this explanation. But, nobody I've met has previously recognised a need for such a delay, either. Until they watch something with me, of course.

As you say, you don't have any evidence for this, so I'll just add that my subjective impression is the absolute opposite. I find it impossible to concentrate on what is happening visually on screen in a film when closed captions are on.

I associate CC with the one place I ever see them - at the laundromat, where they are always on because you can't hear the TV clearly above the background noise. Hard to think of a setting where "background entertainment" is a better descriptor.

I think practice helped, but so did reducing the size of the video frame. Turns out having the whole frame in my field of view was a big deal.

Goku: AHHHHHH!

Vegeta: ARGHHHH!

Goku: OOOMPH!!!

Vegta: HMMMMM!

The visuals were just as simple. For like most of the episode

But for any language that I understand well I only turn them on when the accent is so thick I can't get what the actors are saying.

Similarly I always turn on all subtitles in video games because it's easy to miss something if say ingame explosion or other sound effect covers the voice, or it is just too silent (say NPC talking that's a bit far)

But the article claim it helps multitasking seems weird - how having to look at screen would help when multitasking?

You have the audio on and are doing something else with your eyes. You don't quite hear something that's been said, glance at the screen, read the captions to fill in what was missed, return your eyes to your other task.

If it was audio only, you missed whatever it was, and have to live with it or replay a little bit of content. Going back a few seconds is often a UI challenge not worth the gained context, IMHO, but if it happens a lot, might as well not be watching anything.

never watched anything in a foreign language? It's just familiarity, after a while you get used to reading and watching at the same time.

My 26 year-old son watches everything with captions, so there’s always a battle because I switch them off and he switches them back on again.

This is a skill. I would have agreed with you 20 years ago but at some point I started putting them on because I could only afford a shitty audio setup and dramas got really mumbly. Took a while, but I learned to not be distracted by the subtitles.

I'm from Europe so used to subtitles from early age. My wife is Canadian, and first little while of our dating was bewildered with subtitles.

Now though, literally all my Canadian in-laws use subtitles, intergenerationalLy - they're used to them, and addicted to knowing what the heck is going on :)

[0] https://mediawiki.middlebury.edu/MIDDMedia/Hot_versus_cool_m...

I really like to think of media consumption in terms of attentional pressure. How long can you not pay attention without "missing something". For movies and TV shows it seems like 15 seconds, plus or minus depending on the content itself. Chatty podcasts give you 30 seconds or a minute.

I enjoy the fast video games I play (shoutout to Deep Rock Galactic, killer PVE FPS with a non-toxic player base!) because they modulate their attentional pressure and ratchet it up intensely at moments. It feels great to handle a situation where even a subsecond lapse in attention would result in failure.

From wikipedia: Cool media are those that require high participation from users, due to their low definition (the receiver/user must fill in missing information). Since many senses may be used, they foster involvement. Conversely, hot media are low in audience participation due to their high resolution or definition.

Seems like it's hard to place fast video games? You don't have to fill in much of anything (hot) but they require full participation (cool).

But I definitely agree that there is something to it, and video games occupy a different niche of entertainment than movies for me. Video games are a pastime and a hobby, movies and shows are not unlike books: I don't want to miss a single piece of the action.

When I have dinner I watch something off Youtube. Movie time is after dinner when I can give my full attention to it.

Ditto with excessive darkness.

You may notice that in movie theaters—the most focused and immersive watching experience there is—they don’t show captions except maybe when translating foreign language.

Or you may not, if you only watch movies at home on your TV.

If there is bullshit framing then it is the very notion of assumptions based on age, which is caked into the headline.

Movies originally had captions, because there was no dialogue track. As soon as they figured out synchronized sound, the captions went away. Even if people were paying very close attention.

Well, it just tells you come from the English speaking country. For the rest of us, subtitles in a movie theatre are among most normal things in the world.

Movie theaters have the same influence on a mind as any other experience of collective attention. It keeps your attention aligned with attention of a crowd. It may be a case of herd behavior, or it may be something special, I dont know, but it works.

I believe that this collective attention is the main reason why movie threaters are still profitable. But not just it: surroundings associated with attention on a screen and all these rituals, like eating pop corn, also do their part as stimuli leading to a learned response. You get highly focused attention without any conscious effort. You need conscious to fight it and to divert attention from a screen.

But it doesn't matter when you try to watch a movie or a lecture at home. Despite of all your experience of collective attention it would be much harder to keep your attention focused.

Even some DVDs did not have the option to turn off subtitles. I never had subtitles on for anything that gave me the option. (I even bought DVDs from overseas occasionally to not get subtitles)

But now every other show is frequently incomprehensible.

Either they've put lead in the drinking water, making us all not understand the spoken word, or they've made dialog audio shit.

If I'm actually fully immersed in the movie or whatever, and I can understand the dialogue, then I don't need the captions and I leave them off.

In the past, that line needed to come in loud and clear, or people would just miss it, probably forever. Now, we can rewind, or of course turn on subtitles, so there's not as much pressure on the audio finishing to be super clear.

I'm a background watcher for sure, and this trend with CC suggests to me that the whole "2nd screen" thing isn't playing with the younger generation.

Any insights as to why that may be?

To give more context, I was always a "background media" person. Even as a kid I'd draw while in front of the TV, I was never a focused participant.

By contrast I always pay attention when CC is off.

Given how much younger people use their my phone, I’m gonna say my hypothesis is plausible.

Older people are more likely to be alone and the TV helps to break the silence. TV is usually tv shows where people speak properly so that helps i guess

The alternative is that the new generation has no ability to focus on anything and needs the same information piped to their brain through both their eyes and ears. Up next: smellovision captions.