Is accessibility too expensive?

Accessibility has a cost. It is undoubtedly more expensive considering accessibility, familiarising oneself with relevant concepts, implementing them and testing them adequately, rather than completely ignoring these aspects.

From this point of view, the argument is completely legitimate. However, the real issue is different. Is it morally acceptable taking the decision to make a website accessible or not, for example for people with disabilities, basing the choice exclusively on economic considerations? At a certain point, the issue shifts from the technical level to the philosophical one. It has to do with a moral and ethical consideration that involves personal beliefs, a worldview and, at times, firsthand experiences.

A person with disabilities, or those who have a close relationship with them, will certainly be more sensitive to these issues, responding with greater involvement than those who believe that accessibility is a distant and irrelevant issue in their daily lives. Those who see people with disabilities as an isolated minority with no impact on their reality will hardly understand the value of inclusion.

Regardless of your personal opinion on how much to invest in accessibility, from June 28th 2025 the issue will become mandatory: the new european legislation on accessibilità will come into force. We are talking about the European Accessibility Act, which will enforce specific requirements for certain products and services. In many cases, there won't be a choice anymore: accessibility will have to be implemented, willingly or not.

As we clarified in our article "European Accessibility Act: what changes in June 2025", among the products and services concerned, websites are included. However, the list foreseen by the legislation is much wider and includes general categories, which leaves space for interpretations. Ultimately, it has to do with a large number of areas in which someone will have to start to deal with accessibility. Besides websites, also mobile applications, e-readers, self-service terminals, digital services like e-commerce, banking and even the transport sector are involved.

The European Accessibility Act (EAA) requires simple and effective planning and design for all these systems, affecting not only accessibility but also improving general usability and the users' ability to get information from the offered services.

Because from June 28, 2025, the EAA will become a binding standard across the European Union. If you develop software or hardware that falls under the categories and do not comply with the regulation, you could face fines. This shows that the European Union takes accessibility seriously. Some might be outraged that this has become a legal requirement, but there are two answers to this concern.

First of all, the topic is not entirely new. Obligations related to accessibility already existed, although until now they mainly applied to public institutions. These regulations are now simply extended to other sectors, including private and commercial entities.

What is sad is that it takes rules and the threat of sanctions to move consciences. Shouldn’t the awareness that it is the right thing to do be enough? Evidently this is not the case, otherwise the EAA would not have been necessary. The second answer concerns our perception on the subject of accessibility.

Accessibility is often considered as something that only concerns a small part of the population, a minority that can be easily ignored. This vision is wrong. When it comes to persons with disabilities, people tend to only think in extremes. For example, one thinks about those who are completely blind, ignoring a wide range of intermediate conditions. 

In our team, many of us cannot see perfectly without glasses or contact lenses. Also, there are people in general that do not perceive colours or three-dimensionality. This is also true for hearing: as we age, our frequency perception reduces. It's not only about who is profoundly deaf but also about who doesn't hear as well as in the past. This can become a serious obstacle if one relies on vocal assistants. All these people would benefit from a more inclusive approach.

The discussion can also be extended to those who, for a period, have a temporary disability, for example, someone who has broken a hand and has difficulty using the mouse. Even the use of simple language falls within accessibility. These are all aspects that affect us more than we think.

For this reason, the argument that there are not enough people with disabilities to justify investing in accessibility is misleading. Perhaps it is more accurate to ask how few people have no sensory limitations at all. When designing a website, we should not assume that all visitors will see and hear perfectly. Wouldn’t it be helpful to offer, for example, a theme with higher contrast or the option to choose a different colour scheme?

And wouldn’t it be useful for many people to offer subtitles and transcripts for video and audio content? Before you say that “nobody needs them”, think about how widespread subtitles are in short videos on YouTube Shorts or Instagram Reels. Many watch them in situations where they can’t use headphones, like on the bus or train. This also shows that in certain contexts one sense can support another when the latter cannot be fully used.

We should therefore feel morally obligated to ensure inclusion, not to exclude people superficially or unconsciously. The first step is not even that complicated. For websites, for example, it makes sense to adopt an approach based on semantic HTML, using the correct elements – header, footer, nav, main, and article, to improve the structure and accessibility for screen readers. It will not be perfect, but it is a big step forward.

The same goes for ARIA attributes, which have been available for years and which not only help screen readers but also improve how search engines understand your site. In the end, it's all about semantics. Accessibility and SEO are not at odds; they actually go hand in hand.

There needs to be a much greater focus on accessibility and inclusion. People who cannot see or hear perfectly face significant obstacles in the digital world, much more than we realise. And the more our lives become digital, the more critical it becomes to ensure that no one is left behind.