Web site accessibility awareness loses steam

• Posted by Brian
• Posted on August 29th, 2007
• View Comments

The company I work for is going green. Stacks of paper towels are being replaced with personally embroidered hand towels. A mountain bike has been provided to employees so that short errands can be run free of toxic emissions. Energy conservation is of utmost importance, and recycling bins are sure to be a mainstay. Going green it seems, is the fashionable thing to do these days, much like Web site accessibility was a few years ago.

Do not get me wrong, we should be environmentally conscious. Although countries may divide, Earth is everyone’s to share. It makes sense that employers should play some part in repairing a decaying ecosystem. Yet, I often wonder, what exactly fuels the drive for change in the mainstream? Is it purely a numbers game, a fiscal decision, a popularity contest, or maybe a portion of all three? The majority of organizations touting an ethical environment policy benefiting the advancement of mankind, are hiding behind Web sites that prevent some men (and women) from advancing much beyond the home page.

I am by no means an accessibility zealot, but the contradictions are certainly unmistakable. The delivery of dynamic and engaging content is on the rise, and companies are anxious to distinguish themselves from the hyper intensive Web 2.0 pack. This includes filling Web sites full of erroneous features, distracting animations, and a hardcore addiction to AJAX requests. A penchant for accessibility will never supply the traffic that Web 2.0 can, or garner the easy recognition that a green seal provides. Nevertheless, accessibility provides a definitive, measurable and valuable service.

Professional experience with Web site accessibility worth it’s weight in gold

In my previous job I was approached by an account manager to provide an estimate for an accessibility overhaul. A legacy client had settled a class-action lawsuit in the shadow of the National Federation of the Blind’s pending litigation against Target. Fearful of a long trial, lawyers fees, poor publicity, or a civil suit, it was decided a recode was the cheapest solution. It would be a significant undertaking to keep the current design while integrating a workable solution in a timely manner. To fully understand the requirements, an accessibility expert was contracted from a local university.

I have never been more educated in the workplace then when I watched videos of handicapped users trying to browse the Web. I thought I knew all there was to know after reading articles detailing the production of accessible Web sites and Web applications, but this experience was much more enlightening. A demonstration of screen reading software was given, and a lively conversation ensued regarding the spirit of the law versus the letter of the law. Accessibility it seems, is not a trendy or fun subject, and interpretations of accessibility vary depending on the circumstances.

Unhappy with the final estimate provided, the client balked. Deadlines were pushed, the scope of work was haggled, and delays were constant amidst the diminishing possibility of another lawsuit. Other more marketable initiatives were on the horizon, and the cost of accessibility was viewed principally as an annoyance. I left before a signed proposal was delivered, but not before receiving an education primer in Web site accessibility and the attitudes that foster change. These lessons would lead me into an estimate for a 1.5 million dollar deal (which we landed), that was to include a phase of accessibility research and development.

If you believe this client’s opinions on the importance of Web site accessibility should differ since the project was to start from scratch, then you would be wrong. Online retailers in this client’s space were beginning to experiment with inviting and cutting-edge technologies. Not wanting to be left behind, it was paramount that functionality synonymous with Web 2.0 and AJAX be included as a major component of the development. Strike one for accessibility. Close to a hundred content pages were also to be designed by the client, devoid of journalistic style, structured headings and paragraphs. It was mostly fluff. Strike two for accessibility. The final strike was a content management system that did not enforce accessible component design and development.

Again, I was out the door before the site launched, but it was an eye opener nonetheless. Both of the clients I mentioned were fully educated on the benefits of accessibility, but neither chose to invest the time or resources to make it happen. This is not a rare occurrence. Timelines are shortened, budgets dwindle, and the first thing to get cut is any feature that supports accessibility. It seems without enforcement, Web site accessibility awareness has lost steam and has all but dropped off the radar.

Nobody said change was easy

That brings me back to going green. How long will companies latch onto the movement when it costs them so little? It actually requires less of an investment from the top down, and employees must “suffer any burden” in order to promote positive results. What if no one, including management, was to leave the office during business hours. Forget the bike — it is required that all vehicles stay parked throughout the day. How about that mound of pop cans piling up by the pop machine? What if the recycling service charged you a dollar for every ounce of tin that needed hauling away? How about car pooling, water usage allotments, or a totally paperless work environment?

Okay, so I might be getting carried away, but you understand the analogy. If a company is going to publicly and proudly roll out green policies, then maybe accessibility should fly back onto the radar as well. The substance is the same in that they both seek to accomplish a similar goal — the betterment of daily living circumstances for all mankind, present and future. Whether that includes the air you breath, or the Internet you search.

Tags: accessibility, accessible news slider