The business case

Companies such as Tesco have made large investments in their websites to make them compatible with assistive technology.  Yet they have found that the improvements they have made have been a big hit with all the users of their site. 

There are many reasons someone may not be able to access your site:

• They may have a slow connection, a small screen, a text-only screen, etc;
• They may have an early version of a browser, a different browser entirely, a voice browser, or a different operating system;
• They may not have or be able to use a keyboard or mouse;
• They may have difficulty reading or comprehending text; or
• They may not speak or understand fluently the language in which the document is written.

“While most non-disabled users would agree that the Net is an powerful medium, can you imagine the impact on the life of a blind person?  The potential is there for instant online access to a wealth of information and services, such as news, educational materials, shopping, and banking – no need to wait for or rely on Braille or audio versions of printed materials, no transportation difficulties to overcome.  That’s thet potential.”
About.com, June 2001

Legal Implications

The introduction of the first DDA provisions in 1996 and then again in 1999 put accessible information on the agenda of many companies, in some cases for the first time. Section 21 of the Act, introduced on 1 October 1999, placed a duty on service providers to make information about their services accessible for blind and partially sighted people. This has significant implications for company websites. (RNIB report August 2000).  In particular:

• Since 2 December 1996, it has been unlawful for service providers to treat disabled people less favourably for a reason related to their disability.
• Since 1 October 1999, service providers have been required to make “reasonable adjustments” for disabled people, such as providing extra help or making changes to the way they provide their services.
• From 2004, service providers will also have to make “reasonable adjustments” to the physical features of their premises to overcome physical barriers to access.

Although no-one in the UK has been brought to trial for failing to provide an accessible service online, precedents already exist in other countries that have passed similar legislation.  The most noteworthy recent case concerned the Organising Committee for the Australian Olympic Games, and their IBM-designed website:

“In Australia, the Sydney Organising Committee of the Olympic Games and their IBM designed website were successfully sued under the Australian Disability Act last November.  Bruce Maguire, who is blind, was awarded AU$20,000 because he could not access www.olympics.com using his screen reading software.”
e.business, April 2001

“Sites failing to cater for disabled people are effectively shunning a consumer group with a combined spending power in excess of £50bn in the UK, according to the research group Aspect Internet”
New Media Age, 17 July 2001

“94% of FTSE 100 companies had websites with content formats and navigation tools that failed to meet the needs of users with disabilities.”
Financial Times, 20 July 2001