Why are there so few accessibility complaints from users?

Unfortunately, most websites and apps still have considerable accessibility problems. Yet, customer support staff usually receive only a few complaints related to these obstacles. Why is that?

Many users still meet barriers

Despite EU legislation, not a single website or app meets all accessibility requirements, according to the Swedish government agency monitoring the EU Web Accessibility Directive.

Metamatrix can confirm this situation after performing hundreds of accessibility audits.

Not many complain about accessibility

Still, customer support staff rarely report getting more than a handful complaints about accessibility. If any. Even in organizations from whom a law requires an accessible accessibility complaint form!

This does not mean that accessibility is overrated

On the surface, the lack of complaints seems to confirm the intutition expressed by some sceptics, that not many people need accessibility.

Person pondering, and saying that Almost nobody complained, so our accessibility is probably OK!

But we know for a fact that barriers are real.

When developers or managers believe the needs are exaggerated, they down-prioritize efforts to remove barriers. Which makes life even more challenging for persons with disabilities.

This article is an attempt to explain why there are so few complaints event though many are affected.

19 reasons why users don't report barriers

There isn't just one reason for the lack of users reporting accessibility problems. There are many.

The first one is that some users do not even notice the obstacle. A blind person may have no way to know that important content is accidentally hidden from screen reader access, for example.

Here, we present 18 more reasons in four categories:

1. Alternative actions

Action alternatives (described below)

Unless the website or app belongs to a government agency or other "monopolist", there's usually a competitor. So the easiest way to get past an accessibility problem is simply to go to the competitor instead. They're probably not perfect either, but with some luck, they do not have the same kind of barrier.
Sometimes, visiting the website or downloading the app wasn't really that necessary. In those cases, if there's a barrier, the user can simply abandon it. But really, this is discrimination in action.
Other times, a user might postpone using the service. Maybe the problem was only temporary? The problem, however, is that the user may not remember to come back later.
Some persons with disabilities have an assistant, a relative, a colleague or somebody else they can ask for help.

In a social media comment, Sara Sjoedin Scolari highlighted another important alternative, that I somehow had forgotten: Find a workaround!

All of these actions might solve the immediate situation, but they will not quickly remove the barrier, or make persons with disabilities more independent. Another way to deal with the situation is to report the problem instead...

2. Time and energy

Time and energy (described below)

Even if the user wants to help remove the barrier, there are often limiting factors in real life:

Most of us are busy. We have a meeting, a work task to complete, a child to pick up from kindergarten, or maybe a date. So at the time we get stuck, especially after trying for a while to overcome the obstacle, there may be simply no time to contact the owner of the website or app.
And even if we do have time, we may not have the energy it takes to describe the problem. Especially if much energy was drained while trying to use the inaccessible service.

3. Risks

Risks (described below)

Let's assume you decided you want to report the issue, and you do have some time and enough energy. Now is the time to think about possible implications. Unfortunately, not everybody will get past this stage, because:

Many people simply do not want to be the negative person who complains! However, many of them prefer to tell their friends, rather than to report. Not optimal for the brand...
Some users have previously had negative reactions, that make them hesitate. Such as staff who blame or question the user, saying things like: Did you really follow the manual? Is your software up to date? Are you sure that is what happened?
In fact, there is a slight risk that the problem is not in the app or website, but in how you used it. And getting exposed as a "stupid" user isn't an what most people are longing for.
You may not want to disclose your disability to the organization operating the app or website. What if that organization is leaking data about their users. What will happen if my insurance company gets to know about my disability? Or a potential employer?
You may not want anybody to know about your interest in this website or app. Reporting a barrier usually involves disclosing your name and possibly contact details.
Finally, it is possible that the website or app owner already knows about the problem, so you risk spending your time and effort in vain.

Another aspect, contributed in a social media comment by Sander Nijsingh, is that it can be difficult to know if the error is in the website/app or in my assistive technology (eg. screen reader), or other software. Sometimes, this explains why those who recieve the complaint respond defensively instead of saying thanks.

4. Practical obstacles

Practical challenges (described below)

Not that many users get this far, but for those who decide they have the time and energy, and are willing to take some risk, there are sometimes practical obstacles when it comes to reporting the accessibility problems:

Sometimes it is difficult to find the email address or feedback form - if there is one. Many organizations are so afraid of drowning in complaints that they hide their contact channels behind a labyrinth of FAQ lists and chatbots.
And if you finally find a feedback form, it might have so many mandatory fields that you don't understand, that quickly drain you of any remaining energy.
Ironically, even accessibility feedback forms are sometimes not accessible, potentially making them impossible to use for the only people who need them. Yes, I am looking at you, CAPTCHA.
And what if all of the above works just fine, but I am unable to describe the barrier? Or I don't remember how to reproduce the situation? Or I don't know exact name and version of my assistive technology, operating system or device? Will the form still validate? Will the recipient dismiss my report?

For certain services, it is possible to report accessibility problems to monitoring agencies instead. In Sweden, for example, there's the PTS accessibility complaints form. But the form explicitly says you will get no feedback. So you won't know when the problem has been fixed. In many cases is probably both nicer and quicker to tell those who can fix the problem than to report them to the government.

Combined, all of the above obstacles make complaints about accessibility very rare.

However, as Charles Hall pointed out in a social media comment, some complaints are in fact accessibility related "without the user or the feedback reviewer ever identifying it as such"! Formulations such as "do not understand" and "can not find" are clues that some complaints are caused by accessibility issues, even if they do not explicitly say so.

Say thanks, and fix the problem!

Organizations should be very thankful to anybody who has made the effort to report an accessibility problem!

This is a luxury!

You get a chance to improve, reducing the number of visitors/customers who need to go to a competitor, or become unhappy and complain about you to their peers.

Zoe Portlock says it's "absolute gold dust", and I agree.

Even if it can hurt a bit to learn about our own problems, don't shoot the messengers! They're your best friends! Say thanks, try to help them, and forward the information to somebody who can fix the problem. As Zoe says: Don't be too formal in your response. There's a person behind that message! Possibly a person suffering from your mistake.

Offer a "barrier bounty program"?

For security problems, there's something called "bug bounty programs", offering rewards to those who find and responsively report security problems (instead of exploiting them). Maybe consider something similar for accessibility problems?

But if you do, be careful. Only offer rewards for reports of serious problems that affect real people. Otherwise this could result in useless reports from superficial tests - and sales calls. Thanks to Mia Ahlgren for the caution.

Even better than having barriers reported, of course, is to have no barriers at all. We like to recommend the "butter spread method for accessibility", where accessibility and user involvement is considered throughout all phases of a product or service lifecycle.