A consumer is supposed to be a business owner’s best friend. Somewhere between the lines, many consumers end up being the owner’s dog’s best friend. You know, the chew toy that gets used and abused until there is nothing left to do but to throw you away.
Not every business is set up with the ability to take all your money. There are many companies that have most of their products in an affordable price range. Sadly, they’re just there to collect what’s left from the big players: your greedy utilities company, landlord, plumber, son or daughter, or whoever it may be.
Redbox is one of those bottom-feeders. The idea isn’t to trash the company, but there is great reason to trash their service.
So, what exactly is Redbox doing that’s so wrong?
From a legal standpoint, Redbox is mainly guilty of false advertisement but they are guilty in a case with some very powerful circumstances. Why is that? Because they are falsely advertising their closed-captioning products!
Some companies are proud because they oversee the accuracy of their closed captioning products. Redbox doesn’t even make the effort to make sure that their products are what they claim them to be.
Instead, they collect the few dollars they want and they leave it at that. They believe that no one will take them over to court over a few dollars – and rightfully so, but they don’t realize that people are seeking legal action against them over their business practices, not the money lost.
Why Is Redbox Being Targeted in Court?
Okay, let’s clear this subject up a bit by putting out an accurate detailing on why Redbox is under so much scrutiny and why they are being taken to court.
If you are deaf, your options for entertainment are limited. Your sense of sight is heightened, so you usually rely on visual forms of entertainment. Movies are a great way to do this as there is a lot to enjoy in most movies even if you cannot hear the audio. However, this may not be the case if closed captioning was not an available feature.
Redbox provides their services to everyone, including deaf people. Their selection of media for deaf people is categorized within their closed captioning options. These are available at their kiosk machines and are included in certain DVD and Blu-Ray films. The problems come in when some of these films are labelled as being closed captioning even though they are not.
So the consumer orders their DVD, brings it home, and then realizes that there is no closed captioning even though they were under the impression of otherwise. A simple inconvenience sure, but getting a refund is not that easy. Then it happens once or twice more, so a deaf customer is lost here and there – imagine the volumes affected as the company grows bigger, which it has.
Of course, Redbox is being shamed for much more than a simple error as it has become very noticeable that the issue could have been prevented or easily resolved. They are being targeted in lawsuits, especially by deaf plaintiffs. These individuals, whom are entitled to a normal life while living with a disability find themselves restricted and deprived of their expected enjoyment even while attempting to live within their means.
These lawsuits will hopefully open some doors with classifying media content based on its’ inclusion of subtitles. It’s a very thin line, but a sensitive one to cross, and these legal cases will help move forward to a fairer market where deaf individuals can expect the same calibre of service as non-handicapped consumers.