Last year TV one’s Breakfast presenter Paul Henry made remarks that were offensive to disabled people, but in particular to members of People First, people with learning disabilities.  The resulting complaints process has vindicated their concern. The text of the statement broadcast by TV One is not an apology, and it doesn’t mention Paul Henry’s name. But the decision made by the Broadcasting Standards Authority is significant and worth reading in full.

It recognises that the denigration of Susan Boyle, while not harming her, did harm others, which is significant.

Here is the minimalist statement from Television New Zealand. (Paul Henry’s name is included in brackets.)

“Last year during ‘What’s In The Mags’, Breakfast screened comments about the singer Susan Boyle. The comments were made by a Breakfast presenter [Paul Henry] and concerned Ms Boyle’s intellectual disability.

TVNZ upheld viewers’ complaints that the comments breached the broadcasting standard requiring Good Taste and Decency. The presenter [Paul Henry] also made a public statement saying he had not intended to cause offence.

Eleven complainants were not satisfied with the action taken by TVNZ, and referred their complaints to the Broadcasting Standards Authority.

The Authority agreed with the complainants, finding that TVNZ had taken insufficient action to remedy the breach of standards. It noted that no statement or apology had been made on the Breakfast programme, and that the presenter’s [Paul Henry's] public statement was inconsistent with his comments and behaviour in the item.

The Authority said that to mock and belittle a person on account of her intellectual disability was contrary to common decency and a clear breach of the Good Taste and Decency standard.

The Authority ordered Television New Zealand to broadcast this statement.”

Thanks to the Human Rights Commission for distributing the text of the statement in their disability newsletter Manahau. (Manahau is well worth the free subscription, particularly if you want to keep up to date on human rights and disability.)

Mediawatch on Radio NZ took the case seriously enough to discuss implications of the case in depth on its Sunday morning programme. (August 1)

The action taken by disabled people and their supporters using complaints tools to stand up for their rights is a practical example of rights in action. They have won, and in winning have made a difference for everyone.

Bookmark to:

Two weeks ago I went to a two day forum run by the Welfare Working Group, and ever since I have been thinking about what I heard there and feeling a growing concern for the future of our welfare system.

Many of the presenters took a very statistical and quantitative approach to what they saw as the ‘problem’ of growing numbers of people on benefits. Taking such a “siloed” approach to the issue seems to me to be counter-productive. One of the reasons for the increase in numbers on benefits is the increasing economic and social inequality in New Zealand society. Without tackling that the problem will never be solved without draconian measures that will bring other side effects such as increasing crime, or the undermining of our precious democracy.

Since I am more familiar with disability issues I will write about disabled people. Disabled people face entrenched and widespread discrimination in education and employment, and particular groups of disabled people struggle to be recognised as valued and contributing members of society. Despite their best efforts they are often among the poorest people. The costs of living with disability, both the financial and opportunity costs are not understood well within the welfare system.

But most of all disabled people are often seen as a burden, a cost to be ‘carried’ by society, rather than a group of people with something to offer, on the asset side of the ledger. What is valued gets counted and invested in. What is not valued and invested in is discounted.

Bookmark to:

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)  has been ratified by 87 countries to date. Disabled people in these countries can make the most of the accessible information provisions in the preamble and articles nine and 21 of the Convention.

There are real opportunities created by the CRPD to engage with government, local and national, the wider public sector and the private sector to promote access to information. Working with other disabled people who experience barriers to information and with their supporters, disabled people can take charge of their own access to information. Taking an active and leadership role will mean disabled people’s human rights progress will be faster. Nothing about us without us!

Everyone will benefit from accessible information.

Everyone can:

1. Learn about the CRPD and human rights. The CRPD can be accessed in a variety of formats through the Office for Disability Issues web site, (ODI) It is available in every possible format, including New Zealand Sign Language and Maori. Articles nine and 21 contain the main provisions
2. Complain constructively and strategically, and as groups if that will be more influential, for example, report inaccessible web sites
3. Educate information providers about accessible information and how to provide it in ways that will be comprehensive and inclusive. Be prepared to work with them.
4. Engage with the wider community of print-disabled people to think and act strategically about priorities, working together to avoid “divide and rule” tactics. Strategic alliances between the different print disabled communities can go a long way towards preventing such tactics. People who are print disabled include; blind and partially sighted, Deaf, deaf/blind, those who cannot hold a book, those who need easy read because of cognitive disability, people who are dyslexic, brain injured, have memory loss, medication that impairs concentration and more.
5. Create a business case for the private sector in particular. They may respond more readily to numbers and $$$ than to a rights based case. The demographics become more compelling each year with a rapidly ageing population with higher rates of impairment. By 2031 26% of the New Zealand population will be over 65, and we know the older population has higher disability rates (Statistics New Zealand)
6. Get involved in the monitoring process. There are disability coalitions working on monitoring in many countries and disabled people must be involved in government implementation and reporting, (article 33.) That way you can usefully contribute to the reporting about information accessibility
7. Lastly, but importantly, acknowledge and celebrate best practice, progress and successful outcomes. Give credit where credit is due.

This post is taken from a keynote presented at the recent Australasian Round Table on Information Access for People with Print Disabilities conference. The full text will be published there and on the AccEase web site.

Bookmark to:

I have always been somewhat suspicious of simulations of disability, no matter what the context. How easy is it really to replicate someone’s experience? I use the analogy of labour and childbirth. While I might wish that long and uncomfortable experience of mine on a few males of my acquaintance, I defy modern physical science and psychology to do so. Without the psychological makeup of whatever kind, the preceding experience and the relevant anatomical makeup the simulation would be meaningless.

It goes without question that no one these days would suggest an attempt to simulate belonging to another race as a valid or ethical activity.

While simulation exercises may claim to give insight into the experience of impairment and disability, the so called insight can be positive or negative, depending on how the recipient processes the experience. They could end up believing that the utter helplessness or disempowerment they may feel in such an unfamiliar situation is the everyday experience of all disabled people, which would be counterproductive, and false.

Disabled people do not experience disability in this way. Even if the onset is sudden there is usually some way of learning to cope and adapt before being thrown into a newly unfamiliar world. Disabled people in my experience are very creative and adaptable.

It is one experience, that’s all it is. Disabled people are as different as everyone else, and each disabled person will experience their life in a different way, as non-disabled people do.

Disability simulation is not a game either. It often is in simulation exercises which is trivialising and rather insulting. While living with disability has its fun side, it is generally not a game.

Finally, and most importantly – What’s wrong with listening to our voices as disabled people? Our voices are valid and credible, and yes they will be different and reflect different experiences. But they will tell it like it is, from our perspective.

If non-disabled people want to make a difference to the lives of disabled people in a disabling world they should hear those voices and act on what they learn from disabled people themselves, rather than trying to appropriate our experience and reflect it through a non-disabled world view.

Simulating disability is like simulating labour and childbirth, impossible. Get over it.

Bookmark to:

Someone asked me this interesting question the other day in a communications context.

I answered the question in three ways.

Firstly what does it mean to me as someone with vision impairment? I want to be able to read information on screen and on paper comfortably with reasonable lighting and wearing my specs. That means a good sized clear, strong font, without huge blocks of text, preferably not right justified and with some clear white space around it. It is best on light coloured paper that isn’t shiny and is heavy enough so I can’t see the print on the other side through it.

People think that enlarging a copy on to A3 size paper will help. It doesn’t, and the weight and bulk of extra paper is annoyingly heavy as I walk to get around the city. It is helpful if people ask first before assuming what I need, or stick with best practice in publishing or web design.

I need text information on the screen to be clear and well laid out, with good intuitive navigation, and to the same criteria as text on the page. Links and navigation points should be obvious and of reasonable size. I will use my browser to enlarge. I won’t stay on a site that is infested with pdfs.

Colour contrast is important. Even enlarged grey text is inaccessible, and if I look too long at light print on a dark ground I will soon see nothing but stripes, which make me feel very strange, as does flickering or intrusive animated content not central to the purpose of the page.

I get a headache if I use the screen for too long so I won’t stay on sites that are hard for me to see.

People presenting powerpoint at conferences and such would help me by bringing the odd large, (one slide per page,) copies that they can make available for anyone who can’t see them well. That will avoid any fuss.

Like other disabled people I don’t want to be stigmatised or singled out because of accessibility. If someone is telling me what they have just written on the whiteboard they can do it tactfully, without belittling me or making me feel like a nuisance – “I am doing this for the benefit of Robyn.” Someone did that. It was an uncomfortable situation.

There is a common myth that accessibility on the web is about blindness and screen readers. It is about a whole lot more, although of course blind people don’t have so many choices about how they access information, and face huge barriers to information access.

But I do wish web designers and builders would think about the rest of us, partially sighted, Deaf, learning disabled, dyslexic, older, to name just a few, groups of people. The same applies to disabled people’s groups and service providers as well, who sometimes take a narrow view of who wants their information.

One other personal thing – Like most disabled people I am interested in a whole range of things, not just disability. Providers of information should therefore not make assumptions about the information people may or may not want. Disabled people are everywhere. We want to shop, go to the movies and the theatre, watch and participate in sports, go to work, party, travel, support our kids at school, in short, do the same things as everyone else. We need accessible information to do that.

We also need it to prepare for natural disasters, pandemics, and other medical situations, to be able to vote in elections, and have our day in court.

That leads to the second part of my answer to the question. As a human rights practitioner I believe that accessible communication is a very tangible way to respect the rights of everyone. These rights include translations of essential information into different languages and formats, and a multiplicity of channels and technologies.

Accessible information may be essential for people’s civil and political rights, the right to justice, to freedom of speech, even the right to life. Accessible information is also essential in the rights to education, work and health, among other rights. Accessible communication promotes participation and an inclusive and cohesive society.

Accessible communication is part of the international and New Zealand human rights framework, with specific provisions within the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, (CRPD.)  There will be more information about this after my presentation at the Round Table Conference later this month.

Lastly as a communications practitioner I can’t see how accessible communication can be avoided. Those who need accessibility are much bigger audiences than the 20% of the community who are disabled. By 2031 people over 65 will number around 26% of the population, now at around 13%. Forty percent of working age New Zealanders have difficulties with functional literacy and 20% of workers have English as a second language.

Accessible information and communication is simply the presentation of the same information delivered in a variety of channels and/or formats that meets each audience’s needs.

Accessibility is about an attitude. It is about a philosophical approach, about a valued audience, and the acceptance and understanding of the concept and principles of universal design. An accessible mindset acknowledges that good communication is about the customer or user and not all “about us.”

Bookmark to:

I am taking a break at the halfway point through my Ten points to Accessible Information series. The series will resume soon.

New Zealand tourism has to do more than grudgingly meet minimum standards, or international visitors will not return, and they will tell others of their bad experiences.

Where is customer service?

I don’t often write about physical access as it is not my area of expertise. But a friend of mine recently had some difficulty with public transport after completing the Rail Trail. The reasons that were offered for the refusals to take her powered wheelchair on public transport reminded me of how much disabled people are still seen as a problem to be avoided rather than valued customers to be served like anyone else. The so-called number-eight wire mentality and the innovative ‘can do’ attitude beloved of kiwis was sadly lacking in this instance. Not to mention simply providing good old-fashioned quality service to a fare-paying customer.

Accessible tourism is becoming increasingly ‘business as usual’ abroad and we are being left behind. The Rail Trail is promoted as an iconic twenty-first century southern experience, but this won’t wash internationally if the infrastructure to support it is still in the dark ages.

Accessible tourism should be the norm

I decided to have a look around the Interweb to see what I could find about accessible tourism in New Zealand. I found a few specialist tour operators whose websites vary in the quality of their accessibility. I would rather see general tourism services applying accessibility principles, but good luck to those providers for offering an accessible service where it would otherwise be lacking.

There is also a good New Zealand-based Accessible Tourism blog which keeps a watch on the accessible tourism scene in NZ and keeps up to date with international developments. It recently reviewed a report Domestic Tourism Market Segmentation prepared for the Ministry of Tourism which recognises baby boomers as a market segment, But the report identifies disability as a barrier to travel and the blog says

“the report reinforces the idea that it is a person’s disability that is a barrier, rather than  environments such as inaccessible transport and accommodation that are disabling.”

Tourism Ministry out of touch

Oh dear. The Ministry should know of the New Zealand Disability Strategy and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD,) which NZ has ratified. Both of these take a different view of barriers.  The approach taken by the report explains a great deal

I checked for information on “accessible tourism” on the very modern New Zealand.com – where you would expect to find it. I found none. I then tried the Ministry of Tourism site which gave me seven search results of which the first six were totally irrelevant and the seventh took me to an uninformative page with a link to “travel information for those with special needs” which is actually on NewZealand.com listed under “key facts”.  This  left me utterly confused.

Why was it so hard to find? Because  “Travel information for those with special needs” s not what most disabled people would look for.

This outdated page is indicative of the attitude. It reads as if disabled people are inconvenient parcels that have to be conveyed from one place to another and put up with, not welcomed, or even accommodated, (sorry about the pun.)

No one in my wide NZ and international (travelling) networks is likely to feel that the term “special needs” is acceptable when the generally recognised term is accessible tourism. Other travellers might have ‘wants’ or even ‘desires.’ Someone else has arbitrarily decided that disabled people have ’special needs’ (for ’special’ read second class).

The tone of the page is grudging. It does not reflect an understanding of the audience. With inspiring headings such as

• Disabled Facilities
• Accommodation for the disabled
• Transport for the Disabled, and
• Food Allergies

it is hardly an enticing read.

The tourism market is growing and the potential customer base is ageing, and with that come higher rates of disability. In tough times we need to see the market as it is and behave accordingly.

Bookmark to:

This in part of a series Ten points to accessible information.

You can present information in Braille, large print, Sign Language, or easy read, but it will still be useless if it cannot be understood.

Once again we are talking about clear and straightforward communication, familiar language, jargon free text and information that is well structured and easy to follow. This is true whether the information is presented in a web site that has clearly understandable navigation and other interactions such as forms, or in any other format.

Presenting the same information in a variety of alternative or supplemented representations can increase understanding. Text can be supplemented with informative illustrations and graphics, for example.

On the Web, this kind of multi-formatted presentation of information gives the lie to the argument that accessibility is boring. Here, text can be supplemented with illustrations, animations, audio, video and information in other formats. Some of these formats may be essential for comprehension by those with more significant cognitive or reading impairments.

Summaries of long and complex information, either on the web or elsewhere can also make information more understandable.

Understandable information as an element of accessibility will benefit everyone. Here is an example from my own recent experience. Last week I was watching a presentation during the CSUN 2010 tweetup.  Our so-called broadband was simply not keeping up. Because the presentation was live streaming I was missing bits and it was annoyingly difficult to understand what was being said. (I have hearing within the regular range.) Mostly I couldn’t read what was on the overheads being shown either. However the conference was thoughtfully providing captions, which loaded faster than the visual and audio so I could follow the presentation. Thanks guys.

Bookmark to:

This is part of a series Ten points to accessible information.

Accessible information is straightforward and direct, getting to the points quickly and simply. It avoids unnecessary words or jargon. It shares many features of plain English, including short uncomplicated sentences, and language familiar to users.

Concise information is easy to follow, expressing all the information that the user is looking for in a few words. It should, for example, enable users of web sites to complete their tasks quickly and easily.

Accessible information is brief but comprehensive.

This may not always be as easy in practice as it looks.  You can think about the information you want to convey as a pyramid, with the sharp point at the top being the most important. The most important piece of information is expressed as a short sentence in the first paragraph. The wide base of the pyramid represents the least important information as it might not be read.

Of course knowing your audience, being user focused, and knowing what is relevant will help you understand what your user is looking for.

Bookmark to:

This post is part of a series, Ten points to accessible information.

Information should be timely, that is, available to everyone at the same time, no matter what the format. It should not appear in other formats later. It should also be available for disabled and other print disabled people in time to be useful.

In the last post Accessible information is relevant I indicated the particular costs in time, effort and resources to disabled people when accessing information. It is therefore critical that information is available at the time it is needed, and gives people who need it the opportunity to make the best use of it. It is no use having to wait for information about an event until it is too late to register your attendance, to find out about election candidates when there is little time left to make your decision, or to learn about the closing date for a submission when it is too late for you, or too late to organise your group to submit. Accessing an using information will take longer for some disabled people and their organisations. This might seen to be stating the obvious perhaps, but in my experience it happens.

To make sure this happens smoothly good planning is essential, working back from the end date so that everyone is included.

Accessibility and the range of formats offered should be planned in from the start of any information or communications project. A last-minute addition will be more expensive and reach a smaller audience. Planning will prevent mistakes such as sending out print covering letters with non-print alternative format material.

Planning and budgeting for the time and resources necessary for a variety of formats and channels will ensure best practice processes are followed. Ultimately the best value for resources will be gained with careful planning and decision-making about who needs what and when.

A significant spin off from timely information is that disabled people will know they are as important as everyone else, critical if the message is to be communicated successfully.

Bookmark to:

This is the third in a series, Ten points to accessible information.

Focusing on the user is an important part of accessible information. The user also wants to be able to find relevant information. The two are, of course, closely related

Information providers must cut to the chase, and make sure they understand and provide what people really want. Give people the information they want most, rather than welcoming them to the web site, describing your policies and processes,  your vision, everything you do, your strategic direction, or how to use the site, (which should be obvious anyway,) or other wordy, jargon filled padding. The same goes for print information.

On the automated phone system don’t ask me to take even a short survey when I have to select from a raft of options. I want one piece of information about my account and I want it now, not later.
Don’t survey me about your service – just give it to me!

If your function is a complaints or claims body, for example, make sure people can find where and how to complain quickly and easily. ACC has changed its web site to do just that. It works.

The process of finding and using information has costs for disabled people, often more than for other people. These costs can be in terms of sheer effort, time as well as material resources. Costs are different for different people and impact on their use of information in different ways. Disabled people may also have fewer choices in the sources they use to access information.  They need to be able to quickly access relevant information with minimal effort.

If I can’t find the information I want quickly and easily on a web site I will pick up the phone and waste someone’s time until I get it.

And yes – if it works well for disabled people it will work well for everyone.

Bookmark to: