Searching for more information?

Loading
Published On: Wed, May 25th, 2011

For Government Websites, Where’s the carrot for accessibility?

Contributed by: Craig Thomler on May 25, 2011.
Stairs make a building inaccessible, not a whe...

Image by Dan Kunitz via Flickr

Possibly the hottest topic for Australian government web managers this year is ‘accessibility’, following on from the release of the Web Accessibility National Transition Strategy by AGIMO (the Australian Government Information Management Office).

The strategy confirmed the Australian Government’s adoption of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2 (WCAG 2.0) from the World-Wide Web Consortium (W3C), the premier global standards setting organisation for the Internet, as well as the mandatory timeframe for accessibility compliance by government agencies.

In speaking to people within agencies who are not directly in web areas, but who are commissioning, funding and filling websites with content, for the most part I have found they were unaware of the government’s accessibility requirements. A regular question was, “is this a new requirement?” and when told that accessibility requirements had been around for more than ten years and the Disability Discrimination Act since 1992, the reactions varied from surprise to anger – that they’d never been told before.

There’s also uncertainty and some anxiety about meeting the requirements, which still look like black magic to those new to the topic. Is an accessible PDF good enough? How do we know if it is a decorative or meaningful image? Can we use Facebook if it isn’t accessible? How do we add closed captions or transcripts to unscripted user-generated videos? Do we have to convert all PDF submissions to consultations into HTML? Are we funded for accessibility?

Agencies are coming to understand the need for accessibility, and the risks. However where’s the carrots?

At the moment there’s no real kudos for agencies that meet accessibility requirements. No recognition for complying, public mention of best practice examples or awards for high achievement.

Of course it could be argued that meeting the accessibility requirements is a given and no-one should be rewarded for complying with legal requirements they need to meet.

However humans are complex creatures and respond both to punishments and rewards. Public servants need acknowledgement for good work as much, if not more, than they require chastisement for bad.

I would like to see more opportunities to recognize the agencies who are best at meeting their accessibility obligations as well as mechanisms to identify and name the worst.

Do you agree – should there be acknowledgements for good accessibility practice?

Or is it a given that all agencies should meet without reward?

Post Author: Craig Thomler. Bio: Craig Thomler is regarded as one of Australia’s leading Government 2.0 advocates and practitioners. With a degree in Marketing and a background in the consumer goods industry, he has over fifteen years’ experience working in the online sector. As an entrepreneur he has founded and held senior roles at a number of early-stage technology and resources companies in Australia and overseas. Since 2006 he has worked in the Australian Public Service, where he has worked to improve public governance through strategic and innovative use of digital technologies. In 2009 Craig was awarded the inaugural Government 2.0 Individual Innovator Award by the Australian Government. He was recognised internationally in 2010 as one of the global ‘Top 10 Who are Changing the World of Internet and Politics’. He speaks regularly at events within Australia and overseas about Government 2.0 strategy and practice, blogs personally on the topic (http://egovau.blogspot.com) and is currently compiling a book on the future of Government 2.0 in Australia (http://www.gov2au.net).
//

About the Author

- Craig Thomler is regarded as one of Australia's leading Government 2.0 advocates and practitioners. With a degree in Marketing and a background in the consumer goods industry, he has over fifteen years’ experience working in the online sector. As an entrepreneur he has founded and held senior roles at a number of early-stage technology and resources companies in Australia and overseas. Since 2006 he has worked in the Australian Public Service, where he has worked to improve public governance through strategic and innovative use of digital technologies. In 2009 Craig was awarded the inaugural Government 2.0 Individual Innovator Award by the Australian Government. He was recognised internationally in 2010 as one of the global 'Top 10 Who are Changing the World of Internet and Politics'. He speaks regularly at events within Australia and overseas about Government 2.0 strategy and practice, blogs personally on the topic (http://egovau.blogspot.com) and is currently compiling a book on the future of Government 2.0 in Australia.

  • http://twitter.com/stommepoes Stomme poes

    Both. We should be able to just expect that gov’t sites and services are accessible. But most of them still aren’t. So they should be publicly lauded when they do things right.

    More importantly: private sector and commerce should be lauded when they get things right as well. I suspect good publicity works more for competitive commercial enterprises than for government agencies, unless they have some inter-agency competitiveness thing going on like at the CDC.

    For every article and tweet and whatever about how JetBlue is getting sued or how Target got sued, there needs to be a Lainey Feingold story as well.

    Oh joy, a captcha. Arg arg.

  • http://twitter.com/stommepoes Stomme poes

    Both. We should be able to just expect that gov’t sites and services are accessible. But most of them still aren’t. So they should be publicly lauded when they do things right.

    More importantly: private sector and commerce should be lauded when they get things right as well. I suspect good publicity works more for competitive commercial enterprises than for government agencies, unless they have some inter-agency competitiveness thing going on like at the CDC.

    For every article and tweet and whatever about how JetBlue is getting sued or how Target got sued, there needs to be a Lainey Feingold story as well.

    Oh joy, a captcha. Arg arg.

  • http://twitter.com/rguy84 Ryan Benson

    Where I work, we have an internal score card that says division x is in this percentile, and division is here. The intercompetition is slowly gaining. I cannot tell if it is to hit 100%, or myself and another is saying do it.

  • http://www.twitter.com/dboudreau Denis Boudreau

    Replace #wcag2 by #sgqri008 and you have a pretty good portrait of the situation within the Quebec govt here in Canada. We’re still looking for our carrots too. The stick, we’ve found a long time ago.

  • http://deswalsh.com Des Walsh

    Craig
    You are absolutely right. As you point out, the accessibility rules have been in place for years. Anyone who is surprised or – for heaven’s sake – angry, has not been paying attention. And yes, it’s time for some congratulation and celebration for the agencies who get it right and for those who are working systematically to get it right. Carrots rule ok!

Advertise with IZEA Media