Disability viewed as an aspect of multiculturalism

There’s an interesting post about people with disabilities on a blog targeting multicultural marketing and advertising titled,
Is the disabled market the next multicultural opportunity?


The post begins by discussing basic aspects of web accessibility with regards to Section 508 and the Americans with Disabilities Act, then goes on to support that explanation with information that should make every marketer, pollster, and politician take notice. Those paying attention should include our candidates for the upcoming presidential election.

The pure logistics echo what most in the disabilities service field know:

“So how big is this market? According to the aforementioned Census report - 51.2 million people (18.1% of the population) had some level of disability and 32.5 million (11.5% of the population) had a severe disability - About 10.7 million people ages 6 and over needed personal assistance with one or more activities of daily living (ADL) or instrumental activities of daily living (IADL)”
“- Among the population 15 and older, 2.7 million used a wheelchair. Another 9.1 million used an ambulatory aid such as a cane, crutches, or walker.”
“- Approximately 7.9 million people 15 and older had difficulty seeing words and letters in ordinary newspaper print, including 1.8 million people who reported being unable to see .”

For anybody whose profession is in marketing and advertising, they should consider:
“The next question is whether this is a lucrative market for companies to consider. DiversityInc.com put out an article in 2002 that people with disabilities maintain an aggregate income that exceeds $1 trillion, with $220 billion in discretionary spending power. “

And, finally, the piece offers up a good perspective of the scope and strength of the population of people with disabilities—
“To put all of this data in perspective, the disabled market is larger than the 44 million+ Hispanic population that spends $575 billion (according to Synovate’s 2004 U.S. Hispanic Market Report).”

Given the attention that the presidential candidates, especially those from the Democratic party, have been paying to the population of Hispanic voters, that last paragraph should resonate very loudly for politicians, as well as voters with disabilities. This group of individuals have the power of a very sizable voting block. It is up to you to use that power.

If you are not registered to vote, do it. When any runoff elections take place, vote. And, finally, hit the polls in November and make your vote count.

After you are registered to vote, there is one more thing to consider. The strength of the larger population relies on acting as a group in a unified manner. Become active in disability rights organizations. Read up and understand the issues that are going to impact your life. Write to your senators and representatives to let them know which way you want them to represent you. If they don’t vote to support your interests, get active in supporting a candidate who will support what is important to you.

Blog examines presidential candidates' stance on disability rights

In light of the current race for U.S. President that is underway, I can truly appreciate the effort
Wilbrod the Gnome
Has Put into his recent blog post,
Disability Rights and the Presidental Candidate: An Analysis.

In that post, Wilbrod examines available material from four presidential contenders, three of whom are still in the hunt, as they relate to disability rights. He has spent a good bit of time gathering and sharing the positions Democratic Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton and Republican Senator John McCain have taken, as well as that of former candidate Mitt Romney, who suspended his campaign last week.

What makes Wilbrod’s post worth considering, is that he is not merely quoting the candidates, but links to the referenced information. It is a very thorough, but obviusly time-consuming effort on his part. (Please forgive any typos, as I believe the depth of content more than makes up for those.)

One point of examination some may want to examine is near the end of the post and looks at how each candidate has approached the No Child Left Behind Act.

COAT, The Coalition of Organizations for Accessible Technology

All you outlaws, take note; there is a new sherrif in town.

COAT, the Coalition of Organizations for Accessible Technology, is a newly united gathering of established disability organizations working as a single entity to persuade the “powers that be” of the information technology sector, that providing accessibility is the right thing to do.

(I just learned about this worthy endeavor through Teri Adams’
Crip Chronicles,
An intelligent, thought-provoking blog written from her unique and interesting perspective on the world. I came across the Crip Chronicles through a news alert, but have found it compelling enough reading that I’ve included it in my regular RSS feeds. Check it out, I think you’ll find Teri’s writing interesting and worth your while.)

While the
official COAT press release
is dated December 17, 2007, I'm guessing that the year is a typo and it was probably issued this past December. Even if you find this to be a bit of old news, it is nonetheless an interesting gathering of some of the major disability rights organizations gathered for a single cause. You can see this list at the end of the press release.

The press release reads as follows:

Coalition of Organizations for Accessible Technology Launched For Full Disability Access in the 21st Century
WASHINGTON, March 13 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Get your COAT! Today, a new coalition of disability organizations was launched to advocate for legislative and regulatory safeguards that will ensure full access by people with disabilities to evolving high speed broadband, wireless and other Internet protocol (IP) technologies. The Coalition of Organizations for Accessible Technology, or "COAT," consists of over 45 national, regional, and community-based organizations dedicated to making sure that as our nation migrates from legacy public switched-based telecommunications to more versatile and innovative IP-based and other communication technologies, people with disabilities will not be left behind. Emerging digital and Internet-based technologies can provide people with disabilities with new opportunities for greater independence,integration, and privacy, but only if these are designed to be accessible.
The guiding principle of this Coalition will be to ensure the full inclusion of people with disabilities in all aspects of daily living through accessible, affordable and usable communication technologies as these continue to evolve. To this end, and in order to achieve equal access in the 21st century, COAT has identified the following initial broad objectives:
* Extend current disability protections under Sections 255 and 710 of the Communications Act to IP technologies with improved accountability and enforcement measures, to ensure more accessibility, usability and interoperability for all persons with disabilities, including persons who are aging.
* Expand the scope of devices that must transmit and display closed captions under the Decoder Circuitry Act from the present requirement of television sets with screens that are 13 inches or larger to video devices of all sizes, including recording and playback devices, that are designed to receive or display digital and Internet programming.
* Apply existing captioning obligations under Section 713 of the Communications Act to IPTV and other types of multi-channel video programming services that are commercially distributed over the Internet.
* Restore the video description rules originally promulgated by the FCC in 2000 (overturned by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit) and ensure that this access continues in the transition to digital television programming.
* Extend existing relay service obligations under Section 225 of the Communications Act to VoIP providers (i.e., extend the obligation to contribute to the interstate relay fund that supports these services), including obligations for greater outreach to consumers.
* Require accessible interfaces on video programming and playback devices, such as televisions, VCRs, and DVD players.
* Ensure that people with disabilities have equivalent access to emergency information through identification of barriers and implementation of solutions in current and new technologies, including solutions for achieving access by people with disabilities to 911 emergency PSAPs through the receipt of text and video.
* Ensure universal service fund availability for persons with disabilities (e.g., Lifeline/Link-up programs), to increase the number of people with disabilities as broadband users.
The above objectives were recommended in a report released by the National Council on Disability: The Need for Federal Legislation and Regulation Prohibiting Telecommunications and Information Services Discrimination, available at
http://www.ncd.gov/newsroom/publications/2006/discrimination.htm
(released
December 16, 2007).
COAT MEMBERS*

National organizations
1. Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing
2. Alliance for Technology Access
3. American Association of People with Disabilities
4. American Association of the Deaf-Blind
5. American Council of the Blind
6. American Deafness and Rehabilitation Association
7. American Foundation for the Blind
8. American Society for Deaf Children
9. Assistive Technology Industry Association
10. Association of Assistive Technology Act Programs
11. Association of Late-Deafened Adults
12. Communication Service for the Deaf
13. Conference of Educational Administrators of Schools and Programs for the Deaf
14. Deafness Research Foundation
15. Deaf Seniors of America
16. Gallaudet University
17. Gallaudet University Alumni Association
18. Hearing Loss Association of America
19. Helen Keller National Center
20. Inclusive Technologies
21. International Center for Disability Resources on the Internet
22. National Association for Parents of Children with Visual Impairments
23. National Association of the Deaf
24. National Black Deaf Advocates
25. National Catholic Office of the Deaf
26. National Court Reporters Association
27. National Cued Speech Association
28. Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf
29. Speech Communication Assistance by Telephone, Inc.
30. Telecommunications for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Inc.
31. USA Deaf Sports Federation
32. WGBH Media Access Group
33. World Institute on Disability

Regional and Community-Based Organizations
1. Association of Late Deafened Adults, East Bay - Northern California
2. Center on Deafness - Inland Empire
3. Deaf and Hard of Hearing Service Center, Inc. Fresno
4. Deaf and Hard of Hearing Service Center, Inc. Roanoke, Virginia
5. Deaf Community Services of San Diego, Inc.
6. Deaf Counseling, Advocacy and Referral Agency, San Leandro
7. Greater Los Angeles Agency on Deafness
8. Hearing Loss of Northwest Indiana Support Group for Hoosiers
9. Northern California Center on Deafness
10. North Carolina Governor's Advocacy Council for Persons with Disabilities
11. Northern Virginia Resource Center for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Persons
12. Orange County Deaf Equal Access Foundation
13. Roanoke Valley Club of the Deaf
14. San Diego - Hearing Loss Network
15. Tri-County GLAD