Early this morning, pursuing a personal vice nurtured since childhood, I bounded along to the local branch of a well known national video game retailer, planning to grab myself a copy of a newly released and hotly anticipated game. On arrival, I was shocked to discover that the price tag on the game was a whopping £5 more than advertised on their own online store – a 14% mark-up. On principle, I left empty handed.

Luckily, I have the luxury of going home tonight and browsing for a better deal online. But what about those who can’t shop online? They would be stuck with paying the premium rate.

I got to work and didn’t think any more about it, until I read the excellent and profound article on the BBC Ouch blog – Martha Lane Fox talking about the case for getting more disabled people online.

“We know now that if you are online, even from a low income household, you save £200 a year, net, of the computer and internet connection.”

“Direct debits, switching energy deals, searching around for deals; you are massively disadvantaged economically now, if you are not online.”

Martha Lane Fox, UK digital champion

There are so many arguments for helping people to get online (many of which were explored at the recent GovCamp Scotland, which culminated in the signing of a digital participation charter for Scotland). Whilst many of the impacts can be hard to measure (though arguably far more profound), it’s good to see some cold hard figures that underline the economic imperative of helping people get online.

Couple that with the main story behind Martha Lane Fox’s article – that over 4.25 million disabled people in the UK are not online (worryingly, over half of the 8.43 million of all UK residents not online), and you can really start to perceive the impact of digital exclusion.

In the same article, Nigel Lewis from AbilityNet suggested why he thought so many disabled people remained disconnected:

“Often it’s because it is not accessible to them. Either they can’t engage with and use the standard computer out of the box, and so it needs adapting in some way, or the online services, the websites, are not accessible with their adaptive technology.”

Nigel Lewi, CEO of AbilityNet

One of the major messages in the aforementioned charter for Scotland was that we all have a part to play: friends and neighbours helping to support people to log on; tech companies helping to make the necessary devices readily available to those who need it; telecomms companies working with communities to improve connectivity; online providers making their products and services truly accessible; and local and central government pushing the digital agenda across all sectors.

I have no doubt that every reader of this post will fit into one or more of the above categories. I’d therefore urge everyone to take a moment to reinforce that message in their own minds – it won’t truly be the World Wide Web until everyone is online.

Motor impairments

The day had a motor impairment theme, which is typically a rather under-represented area of web accessibility. There was a bit of discussion around why this was, with the suggestion that it was due to a lack of pressure coming from those representing the needs of that audience. The excellent work of the likes of RNIB has led to a far greater understanding of the needs of visually impaired users, for example, and there is clearly a need for this to be replicated across the board.

Following a nice introduction to web accessibility from organisers Makayla Lewis (@maccymacx) and Graham Armfield (@coolfields), Makayla presented some of her findings from her research on how people with motor impairments (specifically those with Cerebral Palsy) use the web.

Perhaps the clearest message from Makayla’s presentation was how important the web, and social networking in particular, is to many users with CP – providing opportunities to interact with others far more easily. Such opportunities would have been strictly limited before the web, but accessibility issues continue to put up barriers. One telling example Makayla gives is of the user with severe impairments, who relies upon a carer to help them use FaceBook. The resulting lack of privacy is clearly far from ideal, and no doubt limits what they are comfortable doing online.

Makayla then establishes a live phone link with a person with Cerebral Palsy, who talks about the challenges she faces everyday. Problems like buttons being too small to easily click are common, and the user expressed frustration at the lack of help that websites offer. Another clear problem which many people may not think about was the issues generated when a website updates its design. The user stated that sites should really warn users before changing a site – explaining the how and why, and offering support. Finally, she suggested that the option to go back to the old version was always useful. Users with impairments will often adopt ‘coping strategies’ that will have to change when a site changes, so consideration of these users when launching a redesign is essential.

HTML5

I sacrificed a bite to eat to attend a lunchtime presentation by Martin Kliehm (@kliehm) on HTML5, which he called “Of Unicorns and Crocodiles”. It was an interesting showcase of both the problems and opportunities that will come with HTML5 – most notably, Martin suggested that accessibility was still very much a ‘bolt-on’ and that needed to change.

Crowd-sourcing web accessibility

The ‘unconference’ style of the day meant there were plenty of tough decisions about which sessions to attend, but I opted to go along to hear Dr Gail Bradbrook (@FixTheWebGail) talk about Fix The Web. The idea behind the site is to allow disabled users to easily report issues with websites. These are then picked up by a team of volunteers who will get in touch with the site owner, to report the issue and hopefully get it resolved.

I’ve signed up as a volunteer and will blog more about this exciting initiative soon.

Practical accessibility

Next, I went along to hear Karen Mardahl (@kmdk) give a few tips on practical accessibility, including captioning videos and creating accessible PDFs. I’ve written plenty on these subjects myself, and it was great to hear Karen talk about the quick-wins which are so easy to implement, yet which make such a huge difference to users.

Thanks to Makayla and all the others involved in organising the day – I hope it proved to be an inspiration to all those who attended or followed on Twitter, and I look forward to seeing the discussions continue online.

This is the day where all around the world, disabled and non-disabled people will blog about their experiences, observations and thoughts about disability discrimination. In this way, we hope to raise awareness of inequality, promote equality and celebrate the progress we’ve made.

Diary of a Goldfish

For this event last year I wrote a piece entitled Defining Disablism which proved popular and sparked some good discussions.

I’m still undecided on what I will cover this year, and indeed may wait until the day before finally committing. It will certainly have a web focus. Watch this space! (update – didn’t get a chance to do this on the day but pulling something together now and will post soon!)

Visit the Diary of a Goldfish site to see a list of other bloggers taking part in the day, as well as links to posts from previous years.

improve understanding of the different types of deafness by highlighting the many different methods of communication used by deaf, deafened, deafblind and hard of hearing people, such as sign language and lipreading.

Deaf Awareness Week website – www.look-at-me.org.uk

For a while now I’ve been working on a business case to pilot a project, offering key content from our website in the form of video of a British Sign Language interpreter. The following is an extract from that business case, explaining why such content could be valuable:

Scotland has an estimated 758,000 deaf or hard of hearing individuals (according to RNID stats). Of those, 57,000 are severely or profoundly deaf, and may use British Sign Language (BSL) as their first or preferred language (usually the case where the individual has been deaf since birth or early in life). A report by CLAN Edinburgh estimates the number of BSL first language users in Edinburgh to be 1,000 – 1,500 . This compares with 1,698 registered blind persons in Edinburgh in 2003 (by Scottish Government figures).

Individuals who have BSL as their first language may find it harder to read written English, as concepts unique to BSL can interfere with the learning process. Differences include word order, inflexion of verbs and lack of certain articles.

The Government officially recognised BSL on 18th March 2003.

Many organisations offer key online content in video format, with an interpreter delivering the content in BSL. An excellent example of this can be found on the British Deaf Association website. This is also increasingly being implemented by a number of local authorities.

Screenshot of a BSL video from the BDA website

A Scottish Government 2005 report on access to public services for BSL users suggested a serious lack of use of certain key areas, including social services, education and libraries. 54% of the people asked felt that they never accessed services from their Council.

Comments included:

• “We need more BSL information on the Internet like Deafstation.”
• “I think getting the information from the computer would build more confidence for Deaf people…”
• “Now we look for any web site that has BSL information, since Deaf people are interested in that website…It is more important to have BSL on the website.”
  

Offering certain key content in BSL Video format via the website represents one of a range of accessibility features which can enhance the inclusiveness of the website. It will help us engage with its deaf community, showing ourselves to be proactive in addressing their needs.

Audience

Target audience

The intended audience for the video content would be all individuals for whom benefit would be derived in accessing the information in this format, over and above the traditional online formats. Primarily this would be individuals who use BSL as their first language, but other groups who could benefit include:

• the blind and partially-sighted (assuming audio description is included)
  
• those with low literacy or other primary language
• those with a learning disability such as dyslexia

Secondary audience

It is also expected that the general public and professionals, both locally and nationally, will have some degree of interest in the videos.

Benefits

Encourages Inclusion for all

Such content would continue the efforts of the Council to be socially inclusive by improving the accessibility of one of its key channels of communication with its citizens. This could be measured by comparing usability results prior to and following implementation, as carried out with volunteers from the BSL community. It is expected that accessibility should be significantly improved for these individuals.

Provides a precedent

If successful the project would provide a compelling precedent for similar future developments. Video content can also be utilised for the benefit of citizens with other needs, as outlined above.

Exemplifies Best Practice efforts

The project would offer evidence of best practice in regards to accessibility and inclusion, and could be high-profile and prominent enough to encourage national interest and favourable coverage.

Risks

Cost of video production

Due to the high cost of producing video content, it would be difficult to amend or update, or to produce new content.

Increased demand for more BSL content

If the initial video content proves successful, this could generate requests for other information to be made available.

Increased demand for similar audio/video content

This approach could benefit citizens with other needs, such as individuals with dyslexia, low literacy or English as a second language.

No guarantee of service

Where a third party service (such as YouTube) is used to host the video content, no contract of service exists. Therefore, no guarantee can be secured regarding the permanence, availability or quality of service offered. No recourse is possible in the event of loss of such service, and a contingency plan is necessary in the event of such loss of service.

Project underway!

The project is now underway, and I’ve made contact with a local deaf literacies worker who will give us support in making the videos. We have a dedicated Audio/Visual unit who can produce high quality video, and have started work on identifying the sort of information we want to present in this format.

Once we’ve launched I’ll blog about here, of course. In the meantime, I’d be really interested to hear from other organisations who are looking at, or already doing, this on your website.

I thought I’d have a look at the term “disablism” – to get to grips with its meaning and work out how broadly it can be applied.

A dictionary definition?

Disablism is a relatively new word. The term has been popularised since 2004 by Scope (a UK disability organisation whose focus is people with cerebral palsy) as part of their Time to Get Equal campaign. However, it can be traced back to news articles from as early as 1995.

Scope rightly points out that we’ve had other big ‘isms’ (racism, sexism) for decades, and states that it’s time to add “disablism” to that list. On Scope’s website they even have an appeal to get the word added to dictionaries. They define disablism as:

discriminatory, oppressive or abusive behaviour arising from the belief that disabled people are inferior to others

Scope – Beating Disablism

On reading this it immediately struck me that this is a rather broad definition – and for good reason. Just as with other forms of discrimination, we’re not just talking about the obvious stuff – the abusive taunts, the bad jokes and the blatant social segregation. We’re also taking about the attitudes and policies which, although perhaps not intentionally discriminatory, are nevertheless so due to a lack of due consideration.

But the bit about “belief that disabled people are inferior to others”… how broadly can that be applied?

Society’s barriers

My father once said that it is society which puts up the barriers, through its attitudes and assumptions, which in turn disable the person (just as society can enable a person). Sometimes these barriers are the result of a blatant act (banning blind dogs from a taxi, for example) and are usually explicitly covered by the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) in the UK. But often the barriers occur due to not doing something – as the DDA would say, not taking reasonable measures.

Often, this will be a result of ignorance to people’s needs. This is not through ‘believing that disabled people are inferior’, but simply a product of not understanding their needs. I would therefore amend the definition:

discriminatory, oppressive or abusive behaviour arising from the belief that disabled people are inferior to others, or through not acknowledging that disabled people are equal and taking reasonable measures to protect their rights accordingly

This broadens the definition even further, covering those instances where, although no intentional bias exists, there is still discrimination through lack of action.

Ignorance is no excuse

Many will argue that if they do not know about the issues, they can’t be guilty of being ‘disablist’. But that misses the point of a truly inclusive society – one which not only breaks down barriers, but doesn’t even create them in the first place. A perfect scenario would be where it is harder to exclude than to include. Perhaps this is an unrealistic hope, but it is nevertheless a noble aim and should be the target of our efforts.

Accessibility on the web

As the drive towards an ‘inclusive web’ continues to gather pace, I struggle to think of a valid reason why a web professional should not know about, and practise, web accessibility. Of course, accessibility isn’t binary, and there are many grey areas. But the fact that we still see many of the “school-boy” errors (missing descriptions for images, text that won’t resize, etc) means that there is a long way still to go to get anywhere near an acceptable global standard.

And like it or not, every single person who makes the choice not to spend the 20 seconds giving that image a suitable description, or thinks that aesthetics beats usability, or who assumes blind people wouldn’t be interested in their site anyway – these people are the embodiment of disablism, because they have relegated the needs of those users (for whatever reason) and, by that action, cast them as inferior.

Addendum: I was proud for this post to be cited in Sarah Lewthwaite’s own BADD contribution – Web Development and Aversive Disablism.

This is the day where all around the world, disabled and non-disabled people will blog about their experiences, observations and thoughts about disability discrimination. In this way, we hope to raise awareness of inequality, promote equality and celebrate the progress we’ve made.

Diary of a Goldfish

Accordingly, I’m writing a blog post (EDIT – the post is now live) about what the term ‘disablism’ means to me, and looking at how broadly the term can be applied.

I’m also working on a post about my efforts to improve the accessibility of my organisation’s online content by providing video content in British Sign Language, with audio description and captioning (available soon).

Visit the Diary of a Goldfish site to see a list of other bloggers taking part in the day.