Web designers now have some new important elements to consider as they create their sites: elements that make sites accessible to the visually impaired.
According to MediaPost’s Online Media Daily of Sept 2, 2008, in Target Settles Suit with Blind Over Web Site (by Wendy Davis) the National Federation of the Blind is serious about making sure websites are in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
According to the National Federation of the Blind, guidelines that help make Web sites accessible to the site impaired have apparently been followed by other businesses for several years, so those guidelines are expected now to be common knowledge. What kinds of guidelines? Font size, descriptive links (instead of Click Here links) and graphics titles all can make a site easier for visitors to access. AFB, The American Foundation for the Blind, offers Tips and Tricks to Improve Web Accessibility . It will be interesting to see if tips like these indeed become regulated standards.
My take: web designers should keep in mind any tools that can help them reach a maximum number of site visitors. My grandmother--had she lived during the Internet age--I think would have loved exploring the web. She began losing her vision when she was middle-aged, and lived to age 95. She tried to use many available resources despite her vision impairment (macular degeneration) including books and magazines on tape. She loved to share with me the latest Reader’s Digest anecdotes she said she’d “read” via her talking books.
With the burgeoning population of retirees who use the Internet to shop for everything from travel to grandkid’s toys, ad agencies should certainly consider accessibility needs as they build customer profiles. And of course vision impairment can affect people of all ages.
When a simple change to a website (font size, for example) makes a huge difference to consumers, that’s worth knowing about. Other advertising mediums will need, as well, to become aware of accessibility issues. But where do we draw the line between good business practices that help consumers and bad business practices that can be considered law-breaking?
Was Target making a statement (that their business wants to help all consumers, including the visually impaired) by settling the $6 million dollar lawsuit? Or would the courts actually have required them to pay that? And how far will companies have to go to be compliant in this tech age to accommodate various types of disabilities? I look forward to hearing thoughts from all of you on this topic.
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I think that there would be both pros and cons to limiting what a company can and can't do with their websites.
A pro to limiting what can and can't be done on a website is that it makes it more user-friendly for everyone - people who are blind or even colorblind.
But, I think more importantly, in today's day and age where everything is high-tech and all about being interactive, I think it's important that websites are able to be highly interactive and have great Flash design. It what makes one website stand out from all the rest.
To be honest, it is likely Target settled the case more for PR motives than due to an actual desire to change. That being said, I believe at least a basic level of accessibility (such as many of the 'Tips and Tricks' link suggestions) should be kept in consideration when designing and coding a web site. However, without artificially slowing down the proliferation of new technologies it seems that this issue won't be resolved soon. The big problem is three-fold: 1)that in many cases technology is moving faster than the guidelines. Section 508, which is a set of regulations used by Federal and many state agencies (and a guide for some private firms) for accessibility on the Web doesn't even cover newer versions of Flash or Ajax-driven rich media. 2) It is often easier to address complaints after-the-fact than plan for them in the first place. 3) Lastly, as the Web is considered a mainly visual medium, often the needs of the disabled do not come into consideration. None of these things I believe are due to malice or ill-intent, but perhaps more of a misunderstanding of the needs and desires of the disabled community to use this wonderful resource just like the rest of us.
(See this article for more information on Section 508 challenges: http://www.mediapost.com/publications/index.cfm?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=89639&passFuseAction=PublicationsSearch.showSearchReslts&art_searched=target%20lawsuit%20vision%20impaired&page_number=0)
Is it possible to cater to the needs of both parties, the disabled and the business who wants the latest and most visually intriguing technology on their site? I'm afraid I'm not the most technologically savvy, but it seems like businesses should only be required that their websites be navigable and usable by the disabled, and nothing further. Must every message and "extravagance" that a normal person can enjoy have to be relayable and transferrable so that the disabled can access the experience? I would argue that in the non-Web world, this is not the case. Persons in wheelchairs have designated seating areas in many places; they are free to be within a building but cannot park just anywhere. To impose the criteria that a business must not have anything or area unaccessible to persons in a wheelchair would be an unfair burden on the business. A website's criteria should be similar: A disabled person is welcome to use it and should be able to get what they need, but should not burden the business unduly or detract from the experience the business desires to give to their customers in general.
I think that making the site user friendly to everyone makes sense. I had never heard of this law before this article.It was interesting to hear that target was the one that was involved in the lawsuit because they are known as a very customer oriented company. I think that they would have had to pay money no matter what but they were smart to settle so they could get the good press.
I was think that there could be a whole new dot for the handicapped. And any company or website that wants to be involved ( of course their would be incentives, profit, looking good in the community...) would have lunch a accessible website. but i guess cost would come into play, thus getting advertisers who are all ready cutting back ads, so what is to say they will advertise on the same website twice. it is just an ides to keep the internet clean and organized. I don't even know if this is possible, it may be complete science fiction.
Post a Comment