by | April 16, 2012 · 7:40 am

Health literacy for grown-ups

The other day my chiropractor recommended the Straighten Up New Zealand (SUNZ) programme. When I told him I could only find the kids’ version on the leaflet stand he explained that the kids’ version was the best as it was easier to understand. A pragmatic decision to use material designed for kids might just about be OK, if the adults’ version doesn’t work, but I feel patronised using something designed for children. Not the best way to engage my participation.

I wondered why the original material was developed without understanding the audience or testing the draft. Perhaps the kids’ version should be adapted for an adult audience, using the same simple style of drawings, plain English and large print in a easy to read font.

The SUNZ web site looked promising, with different audiences identified on the home page, although the slabs of bright colour are a bit hard on the eyes, but then the grown-ups page is all sad slabs of boring grey text, and the practitioners will need sunglasses for their page. This site cries out for some video, with captions and transcriptions of course.

Note – I didn’t check the web site for accessibility.

Straighten Up New Zealand - Grown ups introduction page - grey block text

Straighten Up New Zealand - Grown ups introduction page

Leave a Comment

Filed under Information Accessibility, Web Accessibility

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 | October 4, 2011 · 4:32 pm

6 ways to keep your web site accessible

You have built an accessible web site.  Everything is working well. Your task is finished. Unfortunately it isn’t. Over time things change, tweaks are made, sites are refreshed and new content and features are added.

A conscious effort has to be made to ensure there is no slippage from the original level of accessibility. It is a continuous process but does not need to be too hard or expensive.

1. Accessibility policy

Having good, clear, comprehensive accessibility policy and processes in place which are clearly communicated to create an ethos of accessibility and accountability will be a good start.

2. Staff training and expertise

All staff who work with the web site, especially new staff need to have clear expectations around their role in accessibility. They need to be able to use the right tools and have the necessary expertise. This is particularly true for content creators. Accessibility training may be helpful for them and for technical staff.

3. New content

All new content and features need to be accessible. Make sure documents for download in whatever format are produced to accessibility standards. All new images should have appropriate alt text, and new features such as video should have captions and transcripts.

4. Feedback and complaints

It should be easy and accessible for people to give feedback about the web site, and complaints about inaccessible features should be responded to promptly.

5. Reviews

The site should have regular expert accessibility reviews to pick up any faults that may have crept in since it was built.

6. Accessibility statement

A useful accessibility statement is good practice. It may outline the international and other standards the site meets, provide help to those using the site, and provide information about any inaccessible features of the site and alternative ways to access those features.

Over time the accessibility of the site may differ from the standard described in the statement. Update the statement if there are changes. Use the statement as a guide to maintain accessibility.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Information Accessibility, Web Accessibility

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