Itis essential to recognize the time at which the American’s withDisabilities Act was established. Due to the creation of this act in 1990, there was no explicit reference to the extent of website accessibility because, the Internet was only emerging at this point. Over a fairly short period oftime, it was clear to see that websites started to play an increasingly moreimportant role in communication, social, and business atmospheres. Foragencies, websites allowed interactivity, convenience, and speed of service. However, this did not hold true for the disabled community where for instance, blindmembers of society could not understand what a certain online picture wasabout, even with additional technology assisting them, such as screen readers. This lead to several lawsuits, from people whoargued that these sites did not provide equal access and therefore, discriminated against disabled people. I am at the stance, which argues that lawsshould be enacted, so that government and business websites follow standards, which make their sites accessible to a wide range of users, who may rely ontheir services.
Since the ADA(Americans with Disabilities Act) is analogous to a Civil rights law, one coulddetermine that there are fundamentally negative rights involved. In otherwords, everyone has the ability to access the Internet at his or her own liberty. However, in some cases, positive rights must be applied when the Internetbecomes inaccessible to some users, in this instance, people with disabilities. When a website is created without taking into consideration the span of theiraudience, it becomes a problem. The ADA forces one to comply with and, in manycases, to reformat a website according to a set of standards. Critics arguethat the reconstruction of a website can be expensive for companies toimplement. However, a simple implementation of subtext next to a picture significantlyhelps one, who is blind, to understand a picture.
Additionally, business andthe government must routinely update and reformat their websites on a regularbasis, in order to be concurrent with new technology and software that is beingused. Furthermore, at a minimum websites are already obligated to meet theElectronic and Information Technology Accessibility standards. To take intoconsideration the needs of one with disabilities while reformatting a website isan instance where expense does not present a major obstacle for which services canchoose not to comply with standards. It is apparentthat there are many easy fixes in creating a website more user friendly forall.
For example, clearly identifyingwhat a link is supposed to do, instead of a “ click here” button. Also, as ofMarch 28th 2014, the Department of Justice increased the penaltiesfor the Violation of the ADA to a maximum first offense of $75, 000 and a secondary offense of up to$150, 000. Clearly, it is better to follow guidelines in the creation andmodification of websites. Also critics, who say that the ADA has establishedlaw without standards or regulations, are mistaken. The U. S. Department ofLabor and several other federal agencies including, the U.
S Department ofJustice, and the Federal Communications Commission, have a role in enforcingADA. Also, the ADA has published a list of comprehensive standards that can beeasily found online since June of 2003. Those who To conclude, I amat the stance that business and government websites should strive, to the bestof their ability, to provide full access to disabled people. There willcertainly be no “ exact” equivalent as to how a disabled person may interactwith a website’s services versus a non-disabled person. To take a more general view, there are difficulties even a non-disabled person may encounter while using awebsite.
However, if a set of alternatives can be found for these customers, then this will greatly reduce customer dissatisfaction and thus, law suits. Itwas a reported, through the U. S consensus bureau that approximately 1 out of 5people in the U. S have a disability. When put into this perspective, it isclearly in the service’s best financial interest and profit to appeal to thisparticular group of people, who compose a large chuck of society.
