The Blind Community’s Fight for a More Accessible Web
By Tim Sampson
July 17, 2013
Imagine being a small business owner who manages a company almost entirely
online. You communicate with clients, process payments, and organize
meetings
all through the Internet. Think about just how many steps would really be
involved.
There’d be countless login screens and dropdown menus to be navigated. And
searching for the right Web pages in the first place could even be a
challenge.
Now imagine doing all that while wearing a blindfold.
That’s the life led by millions of blind or visually impaired individuals
who
navigate the Web every day. The Internet is as critical to these individuals
as it is for anyone else—if not more so, since the Web is often used to
avoid
the challenges and transit that accompanies daily activities like shopping.
But gaining access can often be a costly, frustrating, and litigious matter.
Though using the Internet, a primarily visual medium, can be difficult for
those who lack the power of sight, its not altogether impossible. The
technology exists, mostly in the form of screen reader programs that do just
that: read out the contents of a Web page and convert them into an audio or
braille format. These programs are essential for people like T.J. Olsen, who
are visually impaired but depend on the Internet for their livelihood.
“My business is done almost entirely online,” said Olsen, 26, who works as a
self-employed music promoter and marketer in New York City.
Blind for as long as he can remember, Olsen has been able to trace the
progress of online accessibility since the Internet went mainstream in the
mid-90s. He received his first computer at the age of 8. Back then, the only
way for him to “surf the ‘net” was to copy and paste text into a speech
program.
The screen readers used today are much more advanced and automated than what
Olsen had to utilize back then. The programs automatically decipher pages,
including text, photos, and links. Some can even delineate between headers,
link menus, and body text to help better organize the information for
navigational purposes.
The tools, however, are only as good as the information they receive from
the
websites to which they connect. If a website is designed without
accessibility
in mind, or new features of the site have not be geared for screen reader
interface, it can be a major challenge.
“It’s constantly catching up. The technology that allows me to go online is
always one or two steps behind,” Olsen told the Daily Dot. “Adapting sites
for
people like me is an afterthought a lot of the times.”
The experience of any visually impaired person online will vary based on the
severity of their disability, type of program they use, and other technical
specifications. But most who talked with the Daily Dot say their experience
is
hit or miss. For instance, Olsen said the chances of landing on a site he
can
easily navigate are about “50/50.”
His anecdotal experience is backed up by a study from researchers at the
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. In their study of higher
education
and government Web pages from 181 different U.N. member states, the
researchers found that less than half the websites would receive a passable
grade for accessibility. And virtually all the websites had room for
improvement in some area.
In many ways, accessibility for websites is like accessibility for a
building:
It’s a few key changes that can make all the difference.
Since the early ‘90s, business have been required to meet access
requirements
laid out in the Americans with Disabilities Act.
For brick-and-mortar companies, that’s wheelchair ramps, automatic doors,
and
braille placards. Similarly, courts have found the ADA applies to the
virtual
realm in some instances as well. But instead of focusing on ramps and
automated doors, online accessibility is focused on coding descriptions and
page layout.
“There are lots of little things that can be annoying,” said Meredith
Ballard,
a senior at Appalachian State University in North Carolina.
Ballard was born with albinism and her vision has slowly deteriorated to the
point where she is now legally blind. She said there a lots of slight
glitches
that can prove to be stumbling blocks for the visually impaired online.
“The biggest difference is, we just can’t scan a page for the information we
want,” Ballard said. “If there are a dozen links on a page and we want the
one
at the bottom, it’s going to take listening to all the links be read in
order.”
Other major obstacles can include link and photo descriptions that are often
lacking in clarity. They are usually a byproduct of programmers not taking
the
time to consider how important such descriptions are to a small portion of
their visitors. CAPTCHA security verification can also be a burden if not
formated with a useful audio alternative, as the White House recently
learned
when it failed to provide a decipherable audio CAPTCHA option on its We the
People petition site.
Ballard said one of the biggest obstacles can be the cost involved in
getting
screen reader programs. The program and its updates can cost hundreds of
dollars depending on the brand. JAWS, the most commonly used program for
PCs,
retails at nearly $900 for a standard package and more than $1,000 for
professional-grade software.
Government assistance for this kind of software can be spotty. As a student,
Ballard has never had much trouble getting subsidies for screen-reader
technologies. Similarly, blind people who can demonstrate a need to used
computers for work can obtain assistance readily. However, that still leaves
many out in the cold.
“As a student, I’m lucky in that I’ve not had to worry about obtaining these
things,” Ballard said. “But if I’d lost my vision as an adult, that would
have
been a completely different story.”
Part of what makes the situation so frustrating is that Web accessibility is
often needed long before a person even lands a job that would require him or
her to use a computer.
Jonathan Lazar is a computer science professor specializing in Web
accessibility. In a recent study he conducted of 16 online job boards, he
found that job seekers who were visually impaired required assistance more
than two-thirds of the time.
“There is this belief out there that blind people aren’t online, and it’s
just
not true,” Lazar said. “If anything, Web access may be more important for
them
than it is for you and me.”
Lazar’s work began on the technical side of Web accessibility, working on
programs and hardware that allow disabled individuals to go online. But over
time, the Towson University professor and Harvard fellow has shifted his
focus
away from technological development to legal implementation.
“The technology is there,” he said. “The battle has been getting websites to
comply.”
The shift toward universal Web accessibility has occurred in spurts over the
past decade. International guidelines for Web accessibility date back to
1999.
Around that same time, courts ruled that the ADA extended to government
websites. Lazar said the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) was tasked with
enforcing these legal standards, but that enforcement dropped off around
2003.
Under the Obama administration, DOJ enforcement has picked up again. In the
meantime, though, disability advocates have focused their energies on the
private sector.
Last year, a Massachusetts Federal Court found that the ADA applied to
Netflix
as a “place of public accommodation.”
Likewise, the National Federation of the Blind and the National Association
of
the Deaf won a similar judgement against retail giant Target in 2006. Since
then, Target has worked with the NFB and NAD to move their website into
compliance.
“It was really this bizarre situation where you had a company fighting
people
who wanted to be their customers,” Lazar said.
Lazar said most companies that fail to provide accessible websites are
acting
from a place of ignorance. In his experience, he said many companies just
assume they don’t have blind or otherwise impaired customers using their
website. He said that’s a mistaken belief, since many blind people have used
websites to better plan trips to retail locations or avoid the hassle of
going
to stores altogether.
There is also a fear that acknowledging the problem will bring on a lawsuit.
But Lazar, who works with the NFB, said the organizations goal is
compliance,
not litigation.
“No company that is actively working toward compliance, working with the
National Federation for the Blind, is going to be sued,” he said. “It’s
always
the best option long-term to make your website compliant on it’s own. You
gain
customers and avoid legal trouble. It’s a win-win.”
The online accessibility landscape is slowly improving, Lazar said. The
lawsuits against Target, Netflix, and others have spurred even more
companies
into voluntary action.
“It’s something that’s not on people’s radars, and I don’t necessarily blame
them for that,” Ballard said. “But if you’re serious about your business,
you
should be working at this. It’s not an unsolvable problem.”
http://www.dailydot.com/lifestyle/blind-internet-users-screen-reader-captcha/
Get paid to drink coffee. Check it out at
www.sozolife.com/nancylynn
_______________________________________________
ATI (Adaptive Technology Inc.)
A special interest affiliate of the Missouri Council of the Blind
http://moblind.org/membership/affiliates/adaptive_technology
