Category Archives: Media

by | March 26, 2012 · 11:52 am

The e-reader versus the “real” book

NZ Book Month logoThis month is New Zealand Book Month. A comparison between the supposedly beleaguered book and the upstart e-reader and e-books seemed like a good topic for a post. I love books. I have hundreds of them. And that is part of the problem. I am fast running out of space for them on my shelves. Almost every house I have ever lived in very soon needed more bookshelves. So when a friend let me try out her e-book reader I could see the advantages once I found it would be accessible for me. My experience is of the Kobo. I haven’t tried any others, but many of the advantages and disadvantages will be similar.

E-reader advantages

  • Size An e-book is easier to handle so I can take bulky books anywhere. I don’t have to fit a heavy book into my handbag and I can take multiple titles when I travel and always have something to read.
  • Price It is usually cheaper to buy e-books and many classics which are out of copyright are free to download from sites like Project Gutenberg.
  • Accessibility I can read books which have small print in hard copy by setting the largest clearest print size on the e-reader. The screen is not back lit which is more restful for me. I can more comfortably hold the e-reader closer to my eyes than a large and heavy book.
  • Portability for other long documents and ergonomic benefits I can download reports to read in comfort rather than having to wastefully print them, or read long documents on my PC screen. This is an ergonomic aspect of accessibility often not considered. It contributes to increased sociability when I’m not shut away from others with my PC.
  • Disposability If I am only going to read a book once it won’t take up physical space and I won’t feel bad about getting rid of it.
  • Availability I can immediately acquire a book to read any time of the day or night, whether the library or bookshops are open or not.
  • A clean page I can carefully clean the screen of my e-reader. Library books become worn, and people eat their lunch over them, sometimes even off them I think!

Disadvantages

  • Less reading time when flying I have to switch it off for take-off and landing, which limits reading time on planes, especially short flights
  • Power E-readers have to have their batteries charged, which can be inconvenient if you forget to check power levels and run out at the very moment when the murderer is about to be revealed
  • Faults Downloading can sometimes be a pain and occasionally the free Guttenberg versions don’t work, which is annoying if you can’t download again immediately when a book fails partly read.
  • The full sensuous reading experience An e-book is no substitute for the rewarding physical and sensory experience of the real thing. The look, feel and even the smell of a book is something uniquely special. The anticipation of revelations to come when a book is new and unopened has a particular excitement.
  • Browsing experience The experience of an online bookshop is not the same as a “real” bookshop where I love to browse.  and talk to knowledgeable booksellers about books we love.
  • Illustrations If there are any, are in black and white only. That will probably change and I have not yet investigated the e-reader possibilities of our iPad.
  • Annotations Although I was brought up not to write in books, I do occasionally highlight something in an index, or mark a quote I can flick to quickly. Not so easy on an e-reader.

Conclusion

I won’t be giving up regular books any time soon. E-readers and hard copy books each have an important place in my reading life. They both bring to me the physical, intellectual, spiritual and imaginative world through the “printed” word in the English language. But I may limit my hard copy acquisitions to those I want to keep and enjoy for the total experience, especially for those books which are a beautiful objects in their own right, art books, and books I may want to refer to on a regular basis. The e-reader will be a useful travel companion and source of more everyday reading matter for work and pleasure.

I have to confess I bought several books just the other day for all the above reasons!

Leave a Comment

Filed under Information Accessibility, Media, The Arts

by | July 11, 2011 · 11:00 am

The eight-point media disability language guide

I love Radio New Zealand. I am a passionate fan of the great programmes they make and play. As a professional journalist I have contributed to several of their programmes over the years, and made an award winning documentary. But the one thing that makes me grit my teeth is the language some broadcasters use around disability. Of course they are no worse than any other media. Everyone does it.

I don’t like to whinge without offering a solution. So here is a little guide, not new I know, and I have written on the subject before in this blog Language disables us but a few simple pointers might be useful and help some people avoid annoying euphemisms such as “differently abled.” This term has never been generally used in New Zealand except by a few US inspired educators who have since learned the error of their ways.  We are not freaks with “special” powers. Using such language gets in the way of whatever else you as a journalist or broadcaster are trying to say.
In New Zealand the terms “disabled people” or “people with disabilities” are usually considered accurate and respectful for general use. Either will do. Some people want to be thought of as people first, rather than focusing on disability.

I prefer “disabled people” because it is shorter, easier to type, and reflects my identity. More importantly it explains an understanding that I have a vision impairment. Disability is what happens to me when the society I live in is designed to exclude people who have impairments, not usually intentionally. Some examples for me are the squitchy fonts people use on the essential bits of their business cards, the horrible Wellington bus signage, the paling of the Internet and the thoughtless use of language that diminishes my humanity.

There are a few points for journos and broadcasters who want to avoid the latter.

  1. “Disableist” language is like sexist and racist language and can have the same kind of negative impact on individuals and groups of people.
  2. Do use the terms disabled people or people with disabilities when talking or writing about us.
  3. Do use neutral language. A person has a condition, rather than suffering from it, they may use a wheelchair rather than being confined to it. Negatively loaded terms such as “the disabled” or “handicapped” are not neutral and are generally loathed.
  4. Do talk about a person’s impairment only if it is strictly relevant to the story.
  5. Do use language correctly – Use of the term schizophrenic when you mean you have a dilemma or feel torn about something is wrong. It means something quite different.
  6. Do use disability terminology in the right context, not as a term of abuse or insult.
  7. It is OK to refer to Deaf as Deaf, but culturally and linguistically Deaf are not hard of hearing.
  8. It is absolutely OK to ask if you are not sure, for example, I prefer, if it is necessary, to be referred to as “partially sighted” or “vision impaired” rather than “partially blind.” I am a positive person. Others may have their own preferences.

The language we use about others defines us more than them. It is not about being PC, simply about respecting the dignity of other people.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Disability Issues, Disability Rights, Media, Miscellaneous

by | May 13, 2011 · 9:53 am

Engaging with disabled people 4

I thought I had finished this series but recent events prompted this additional post.

Since 1987 I have spent a great deal of time consulting and engaging with disabled people. It started with the Royal Commission on Social Policy in 1987 and continued with setting up Equal Employment Opportunities (EEO) networks in the public service, through Non- Governmental Organisations processes and government committees and working parties. In 2001 we launched the NZ Disability Strategy after a huge national round of consultation. Then it was the Human Rights Commission Inquiry into Accessible Land Transport, The Human Rights Action Plan, and all the processes around the development of the Convention on the rights of persons with Disabilities, (CRPD) and so on. I have taken part in both sides of the process, as a professional within the consulting organisation, and among those disabled people and disabled people’s organisations being consulted.

So I was a tad taken aback the other day when a well-meaning public servant seemed to be going over well-trodden ground by politely asking a gathering of the disability community – How do you want us to engage with you? It was not so much the question itself as what seemed to be the assumed newness of the exercise.

The response from some was fairly predictable. A deep sigh, a list of preparatory reading, a quick lesson in recent history and a brisk request that the process simply be handed over to disabled people along with a reminder of “Nothing about us without us”.

But the fault is not with the individual public servant, who is usually well meaning and wanting to be respectful in the face of an audience which can be prickly at best and downright curmudgeonly at worst. Public servants, like the rest of us, often have to work with tight time frames and budgets. The problem is a lack of institutionalised knowledge, and inflexible and unresponsive bureaucratic processes in organisations meant to be for the public good. The wheel gets reinvented again, an unproductive and frustrating exercise for everyone.

So I thought I would develop a wee guide to help the hapless public servant new to disability to forge a respectful relationship with disabled people. Here are a few ‘do’s’ and ‘don’ts’ to get you started.

  • Don’t expect to be spoon fed – People get a bit tired of the constant question and the expectation that disabled people will always be available and willing to volunteer to answer questions on your terms. They get a bit tired, grumpy and overloaded just as you do.
  • Do your homework. Check up on what is already known about engaging with disabled people in your organisation. What structures, networks and processes are already established? Ask your colleagues. Check out what your organisation has done in the past. What worked? What didn’t?
  • Do discover that many of the problems you want to know about have already been described to a high standard and at great length by disabled people. Read the latest information produced by disabled people. I personally recommend Disability in Aotearoa New Zealand – a report on the Human Rights of Disabled People in Aotearoa New Zealand, published in 2010 by the Convention Coalition, a coalition of disabled people’s organisations. But there are many more.
  • Do learn a bit about disabled people and their organisations, which may be quite different from their service providers. Most of them have web sites.
  • Don’t expect the Office for Disability issues (ODI) to be everything to everyone. There is lots of useful information about engaging with disabled people on their web site, but they were originally established to do policy work. Other organisations have responsibilities to disabled people too, and leaving everything to the ODI creates the ghetto disabled people are desperate to avoid.
  • Do read the CRPD and learn about your organisation’s responsibilities towards disabled people. One or two government organisations are beginning that journey.
  • Do use other information in the public arena, the census and disability survey information from Statistics New Zealand, the CRPD and the Disability Strategy. If you can’t find essential information in the public arena demand that it is collected. Read publications such as To have an Ordinary Life – I could write a whole reading list.
  • You might even find some useful information in my previous posts on this topic or at AccEase.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Accessible Engagement, Disability Issues, Disability Rights, Information Accessibility, Media, Web Accessibility

by | April 29, 2011 · 11:38 am

Engaging with disabled people 3

One of the difficulties of engaging with the diverse community of disabled people is its “siloed” nature. Disabled people have been divided into very distinct disability groups. This is as much as a result of history as anything else. But the result is different services and different approaches to advocacy by and for groups of people with different impairments. Unfortunately this separation creates barriers to inclusion at the best of times, never mind times of crisis and disaster. Everyone has to work together in emergencies for the benefit of all and to make sure there is best use of scarce resources. Good preparation and building respectful and productive working relationships in better times will help enormously.

  • Take a pan-disability approach incorporating the principles of universal design and make information fully accessible to everyone, not just an ad hoc approach to one or two groups who are the most vocal or who manage to get some funding. It doesn’t have to mean that one size fits all either. Different people with different impairments will have different needs.
  • Recognise that capacity building and education in disaster preparedness may be necessary before the event for disabled people and emergency services people.
  • Make sure emergency centres are fully accessible and have at least one person on duty who has some knowledge about disability and have other resources available on call if at all possible.
  • Implement accessible processes so disabled people can help themselves and each other. The use of New Zealand Sign Language following the February quake is an excellent example. How might other groups of disabled people be included?
  • Engaging through individual advocacy and reference groups will not be the only answer. A variety of communication channels and engagement strategies are needed to reach everyone.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Accessible Engagement, Disability Issues, Disability Rights, Information Accessibility, Media, Web Accessibility