from Mosnews.com, reported last Friday:
“Natalia Dmitruk, a sign language presenter with the Ukrainian TV channel UT-1 has ignored the text read by the news presenter and instead transmitted the message that the results of the elections were rigged, Russia’s NTV television reports.”
She’s concerned that the station might drop sign language interpreting altogether, but explained (in Ukrainian Sign Language as part of her protest): ” I am very disappointed by the fact that I had to interpret lies.” She then joined a strike called by journalists of the TV station.
A Nov 26, 2004 story by the BBC on the Ukraine’s television media against censorship includes this bit: “the sign-language presenter said that in an earlier bulletin, she had rejected the pro-government script and informed her viewers instead of the allegations of vote-rigging.”
~ thanks, Cole, for sending on this news! so many questions it raises – which ethic is “higher” – interpreter’s impartiality and “faithfulness to the message” or freedom of political expression? It’s unclear from the reporting whether anyone “caught” what the interpreter did, or if she revealed it herself – which is also interesting. An open admission of “breaking role”!