Discover more from The Accessibility Apprentice
Eat, sleep, love, access
How technology makes our everyday experiences more convenient and less inclusive: 3 case studies
This newsletter remains free thanks to the power of will and passion for accessibility. You can support the author by buying him a cup of coffee.
“Nosedive”, the 2016 “Black Mirror” episode, was written as a critique of the contemporary social media, assigning tangible values to virtual concepts. Digital popularity spills over into the real world, becomes palpable, and defines one’s place in the society: an obviously exaggerated threat that has arguably grown even more relevant and threatening since the episode’s release.
The protagonist of “Nosedive” struggles to raise her rating on the ubiquitous social app: hitting a 4.5 mark would elevate her into the higher echelons of society, turning unattainable dreams into opportunities up for grabs. The story, however, follows her as she slowly looses her position, together with its privileges and expectations, liberating her from possessions, responsibilities, and, lastly, the intrinsic need to conform. She embraces being the pariah, excluded from the society for not obeying the rules of engagement.
The somewhat on-the-nose commentary of the episode, however, lies merely on the surface. Sure, social media’s ability to turn virtual popularity into real-world benefits is scary, but its power to exclude individuals for now adhering to its unrealistic standards is arguably even more terrifying. By making things more accessible to those who respect the made-up concepts, it refuses entry to those who do not participate, willingly or otherwise.
In this issue of “The Accessibility Apprentice”, we are going to review four cases where technology, having made certain aspects of our lives infinitely more convenient, ended up excluding entire groups of people from enjoying them.
Dining in as an exercise in exclusion
Last year, an Australian fast-food chain, Guzman Y Gomez, opened several restaurants in Singapore and rolled out a new app for the dine-in customers. Beside being extremely affordable (and occasionally, quite delicious), GYG stood out as a perfect combination of speed and quality, so it was only natural that the chain would do anything to optimise its performance. For instance, each table at their restaurants came equipped with a QR code, so the food would get delivered straight to the customer, bypassing the check-out lines. It’s fast, relatively cheap (for the chain), and extremely convenient on paper.
The harsh reality, however, was less than perfect. In the newly renovated restaurants, GYG opted to print their QR codes on transparent glass, which, despite them looking undoubtedly cool, made scanning the codes insanely hard. Cameras would simply refuse to recognise them, especially in bright daylight and on colourful surfaces.
GYG promptly rolled out new QR codes, printed on matte black glass, so I could enjoy my $9.9 mini-burrito meal without queuing up at the counter.
QR codes replacing menus and waiters are not a novelty: the pandemic pushed the restaurants to adopt the digital checkout systems, and many chose to stick with it when the world returned to normal. On the one hand, placing an order and paying the bill on the phone is a smooth transactional experience: everyone can take their time to study the menu, customise their orders, and at times, even split the bill.
On the other hand, digital menus and checkout systems should meet the same standards as any other mobile experience, including being accessible and inclusive.
In his review of the dining experience as a blind person, Michael Taylor from Usablenet highlights several issues: from not being able to open the restaurant’s menu page using a screen reader to item prices not being read out correctly. This ultimately turns dining in into an exercise of patience, forcing the screen reader user to turn to someone else for help and undoubtedly ruining an otherwise pleasant evening.
What can we do to fix it
Digital menus are not going anywhere, and creating accessible and enjoyable experiences is vital for the restaurants, if they wish to retain their customers.
Make sure the restaurant has a stable Internet connection. There is nothing more frustrating than not being able to load a menu page while sitting in the booth on the ground floor of some shopping mall.
Ensure that the QR codes are easy to scan. Use old and low-end devices to test them.
Provide alternatives. Have a paper menu ready, for instance.
Optimise your menus. QR codes leading to heavy PDF files that take forever to load and require an infinite amount of panning in and out is just as frustrating as not being able to view the menu at all.
Build accessible pages. Screen-readers, alt text, colour contrast: the same standards apply here as anywhere else.
Test with users with disabilities.
Travel through hell and back
Several months ago, I wrote about how lack of accessibility considerations can ruin a pleasant holiday planning experience. Visa applications, travel permits, tickets booking: I would bump into issues at every step of the way, but luckily, wouldn’t experience anything but a mild frustration. My disability didn’t exclude me from visiting the websites, completing the forms, and proceeding with my travel plans, but not everyone is as privileged as I am.
Patrick Sturdivant, a blind software engineer consultant at Deque Systems, wrote a long post, sharing his experience travelling internationally as a blind person. As any other independent adult, Patrick enjoys travelling, and wants to do so at his convenience, not having to rely on anyone’s assistance or adjust his plans due to the system’s lack of consideration for travellers like himself.
In his post, Patrick recalls a rather pleasant experience booking his flight and submitting additional requests, and goes on to highlight how one of the most challenging aspects of travelling as a blind person is connecting with other people to pass through the touchpoints. From booking an Uber to boarding the plane: he cannot rely on technology alone to guide him through the crowds, so having a human to assist him is vital:
once I can make a human connection, I can communicate my needs and get the ball rolling for the accommodations I need
A rather fascinating testament to that is the way Patrick goes about finding the check in counter: by either waiting for the airport staff to accompany him, calling them to walk him to the counter virtually, or asking other travellers for help.
I’ll have a virtual assistant and an in-person version, both wanting to take me in different directions!
One might think, an indoors navigation app, an augmented reality experience, could be the perfect solution for Patrick’s problem, but this attempt at slapping the band-aid over a problem may not be the way to go.
In his article, Patrick writes about rarely using kiosks: a piece of technology, designed and built seemingly to make the experience of checking in faster, simpler, and more accessible. However, he writes,
I completely agree that kiosks should be made accessible for those who have other disabilities than mine, but until they can fix the problem of a totally blind person easily finding the unit (usually located out in the middle of a very large room with lots of moving objects), I am probably not going to use it.
Similarly, finding the way to the cereal shelf in an empty grocery store is somewhat different from looking for the airport counter, carrying a heavy luggage and avoiding bumping into other humans. While some experiences are destined to be digitised to become accessible, others cannot replace the human connection without a fundamental overhaul. Unless we wish to drastically change the way airports work, making travelling more accessible will not comprise building accessible digital touchpoints only.
What can we do
Ensure that the digital experiences (tickets, visas, arrival cards) are accessible to everyone;
Identify the key touchpoints (home, curbside pick up, airport entrance, check in counter, etc.) and ensure a smooth transition between them, augmenting it with the digital experience where possible;
Use technology to effectively connect the traveller with other humans: taxi drivers, airport staff, flight attendants.
Shop (no) more
A few months ago, a Reddit user started a thread, sharing how their small business was being sued for accessibility violations on their website. The problem was, the user did not build the website themselves: they used an official Shopify theme, tagged as accessible. The heartbroken user tried seeking help from Shopify (to no avail) and consulted the lawyer who
says our only options are to pay or fight, both very expensive
Nic Chan, a web developer and an accessibility expert, writes that although it is hard to deny the Reddit user sympathy (their situation is indeed dire), the industry has become somewhat accustomed to
the desire to never think about accessibility personally, to dump that responsibility onto someone else.
This desire, in turn, “has negative impacts on the accessibility of the internet as a whole”. The merchant’s lack of attention to accessibility leads to them getting sued by a company that goes after small businesses for accessibility violations. The corporation behind the original theme suggests using an accessibility overlay, giving the worst possible recommendation. In the meantime, people with disabilities continue being neglected: as Nic Chan writes,
disabled people shouldn’t have to beg for accessibility, but the current state of accessibility legislation means that disabled people are often forced to rely on complaints and lawsuits
Online shopping is not likely to disappear: its promise of convenience and affordability is way too enticing to forfeit, despite endless controversies and concerns regarding workers’ safety, rights violations, and other less than ethical practices.
However, studies after studies demonstrate a profound lack of consideration for the accessibility standards across major ecommerce platforms and small online shops alike. Screen reader users not being able to access basic functions, apps failing to respect system font setting, low colour contrast, bright and irritating visuals: the laundry list of concerns is as long as the WCAG guidelines.
The businesses refuse to understand that people with disabilities are their active or potential consumers, and losing them means losing precious revenue and loyal customers. Can we really change the status quo with lawsuits and heavy fines? One might argue, it may not be as simple as hurting someone’s wallet to make them think.
What can we do
If you are a business owner, review your website (app). Do not treat this as a checklist: understand what accessibility is, why you need to care, and what needs to be done. Hire a professional to review your product, suggest the course of action, and educate you and your team;
Do not install accessibility overlays. They are not going to make your product accessible and will not shield you from a possible lawsuit;
Recruit people with disabilities to test your product, interview them to better understand their needs, pains, concerns, and expectations.
I am full of hope
It’s easy to dismiss this (and any other accessibility-centred) article as overly critical of technology in general, but the truth is, I believe technology does make our world better. It creates opportunities by removing barriers and making products and services available and affordable. I am thrilled to watch technology democratise once heavily shielded areas, such as education, and create convenient and safe experiences for the real world.
At the same time, I believe it is critical to acknowledge the shortcomings and failures of our technological achievements, bring people’s attention to the ways technology contributes to increasing inequality, and eliminate the barriers it establishes.
Adopting new ways of ordering food or buying groceries is a step towards a prosperous future. We just need to make sure that we don’t leave anyone behind as we march towards it.