Transcript: Update on the Disney access court case

4 December 2011 Interview with Clarizza Fernandez

Roberta:  A law suit made against the Walt Disney Company theme parks and web sites by three blind women in the USA, has been settled out of court, ahead of its scheduled trial date of January 2012. Clarizza Fernandez, Content Producer for Digital Technology and Online Media at Media Access Australia, is here to tell us about the case and its implications for people with disabilities. Welcome Clarizza.

Clarizza:  Hello, thank you.

Roberta:  Now what was the outcome of the class action against the Company’s theme parks and websites and can you please tell us what it was all about?

Clarizza:  Okay, well in September last year, three blind women from California filed a law suit against the Walt Disney Company’s theme parks and websites because they claimed parks and it's websites were in violation of the American Disabilities Act. So the trial was supposed to carry on in January next year, but unfortunately it was settled out of court this month.

Roberta:  And can you describe the claims made again Disney and how there was a violation of the American with Disabilities Act?

Clarizza:  So there were two parts to the claim. Firstly was to do with the Company’s websites, so the women claimed that the websites could not be read by a screen reader and there was a whole lot of flash and video content which you can imagine for a vision or hearing impaired person, could be difficult to access.

And the content didn't provide alternative captioning and there was a lack of keyboard accessibility which is something many who lack motor skills rely on.  It was also hard for people with a disability to download and print reservations and the other part to the complaint was about the actual resorts and theme parks.

So the women claimed that they didn't accommodate to accessibility. So there was a lack of brail on maps, schedules, signs and restaurant menus and there was a lack of audio description technology available outdoors. And guests with guide dogs weren’t accommodated for.                 

Roberta:  Well, this case has influenced some changes made to accessibility at Disney theme Parks. Can you please tell us about the changes?

Clarizza:  So since the claims, Disney has made some new accessibility equipment available in their parks. They introduced what they called the Disney Handheld Device which provides audio descriptions for parks, surroundings and rides for guests who are vision impaired. There’s also closed captioning available on the device for people who are deaf or hearing impaired.

So vision and hearing impaired visitors to the park are able to receive information about outdoor areas, where things are, that sort of thing. And interestingly, Disney won an award in 2011. It's called the 2011 Access Awards which was presented by the American Foundation for the Blind.

Roberta:  That was in 2011?

Clarizza:  Yeah, that was this year.

Roberta:  So how has this case been significant for people with a disability, Clarizza?

Clarizza:  Well it's an important case because of course Disney is a very well known brand and it's a high profile company, so it also has a lot of affiliations with other websites and with other companies. So for example ESPN and the ABC television network in the US who they have partnerships with.

So the case would have brought a lot of attention, not just at Disney but to those affiliated media companies. So it would have put a spotlight on the issue of web accessibility and accessibility in general. Whether it's offline or online ‘cause these are some of the things that people just don't think about and being such a high profile company, it would have sparked a lot of debate and a lot of interest from many people.

There’s also two other high profile cases that I should mention. And they’ve been in the media recently, so one of them was the Jet Blue Airways case for example, which unfortunately was dropped. Similarly there was three blind customers who brought action against the airline last October because their website and kiosk check ins did not accommodate the needs of blind or vision impaired customers.

And the other big one the case against the Canadian Government, through a blind woman from Toronto who couldn't apply for Government jobs online which led to a Court ruling around Federal Government needing to make their websites accessible by 2012. But this is currently being appealed by the Canadian Government and that case is still in progress.

Roberta:  Well I hope it goes all the way.

Clarizza:  Yep, so I do I, so do we.

Roberta:  For information, news and developments on web accessibility, visit Media Access Australia’s website, www.mediaaccess.org.au and see the online media section. Thank you Clarizza for all of that.

Clarizza:  Okay thank you.

Roberta:  I’ve been speaking with Clarizza Fernandez, Content Producer for Digital Technology and Online Media at Media Access Australia.  And Media Access Australia are supporters of this program.