Blog

---

• Captioning

How to Create an SRT File

Elisa Lewis

•

April 16, 2025

Create your own SRT files [Free Template]

An SRT (.srt) file is one of the most common file formats for subtitling and/or captioning. ‘SRT’ stands for ‘SubRip Subtitle’ file. This format originated from the DVD-ripping software by the same name. SubRip would “rip” (or extract) subtitles and timings from live video, recorded video, and, of course, DVDs. Today, this format is widely supported by most media players and video software, and you can even create SRT files yourself.

SRT files offer a straightforward way to add captions to your videos. However, getting started can feel overwhelming. As industry leaders in captioning solutions, we’ve created a comprehensive guide to give you the lowdown on everything you need to know about SRT files – what they are, how to create them (on Mac and Windows), and why you should use them.

  FREE Template: Create an SRT Files  

What is an SRT file?

As we mentioned, SRT files are derived from the SubRip software. This software extracted subtitles and their timing information from video content as a text file. Today, creating an SRT text file is easy to do without needing special software, and we’ll show you how! But first, it’s helpful to understand how SRT files are formatted and the components they’re made up of.

The Anatomy of an SRT File

There are many types of caption formats, but SRT files are very simple. This makes them easy for people to read and even edit using a basic text editor. Each caption frame within an SRT file follows the same structure.

This simple structure allows web players to synchronize the text with the video playback accurately. While some advanced formatting like italics or positioning might be supported by certain video players, the core strength of SRT lies in its universal compatibility and readability.

Timecodes in SRT files follow this format: hours:minutes:seconds,milliseconds. The milliseconds are always shown with three decimal places. The start and end timecodes for each subtitle are separated by a double arrow (written as: – ->). After the timecodes and the subtitle text, you need to add a blank line to signal the start of the next subtitle. When you save your SRT file, make sure to use the .srt extension.

Why are SRT files so popular?

SRT files are widely used because they provide the following benefits:

• Wide Compatibility: SRT files work seamlessly with a vast range of media players, video hosting platforms, lecture capture software, and video editing tools.
• Human-Readable: Their plain text format makes them easy to understand, edit, and troubleshoot.
• Language Support: SRT files can accommodate characters from almost any language.
• Versatility: They can be used for both closed captions (including sound descriptions and other non-speech elements) and subtitles (primarily dialogue).

3Play Media includes seamless SRT captioning integrations with many popular platforms used for online video, including Facebook, YouTube, and Wistia.

  FREE Template: Create an SRT Files  

How to create SRT files:

The first step in creating an SRT file is to create the transcript for your video – depending on the operating system you’re using, the instructions may vary. Don’t worry, we’ve got you covered:

For Mac users

1. Open a new file in TextEdit
2. To begin, type the number 1 to indicate the beginning of the first caption sequence. To move on, press enter 
3. Enter the beginning and ending timecode, using the following format: hours:minutes:seconds,milliseconds – -> hours:minutes:seconds,milliseconds
4. When you’re finished, press enter
5. In the next line, begin typing your captions. It is best practice to limit captions to 32 characters, with 2 lines per caption – this ensures viewers aren’t forced to read too much too quickly, and that captions don’t take up too much space on the screen. Additionally ensure your captions comply with legal guidelines.*
6. After the last line of text in the sequence, press enter twice. Always leave a blank line to indicate a new caption sequence
7. After the blank line, type the number 2 to indicate the beginning of the second caption sequence and type your captions following SRT format. 
8. Repeat these steps until you have a completed transcript!
9. To save your file as an .srt, click Format → Make Plain Text, or you can use the keyboard shortcut Shift + Command + T
10. Then click File → Save. Under Save As, type the name of your file. Then, change the file extension from .txt to .srt 
11. Uncheck Hide Extension on the bottom left-hand side of the menu, as well as If no extension is provided, use “.txt”
12. Click Save. Congratulations – you are now ready to upload your captions!

For Windows users

1. Open a new file in Notepad
2. To begin, type the number 1 to indicate the beginning of the first caption sequence. To move on, press enter 
3. Enter the beginning and ending timecode, using the following format: hours:minutes:seconds,milliseconds –> hours:minutes:seconds,milliseconds
4. When you’re finished, press enter
5. In the next line, begin typing your captions. Best practices recommend limiting captions to 32 characters, with 2 lines per caption – this ensures viewers aren’t forced to read too much too quickly, and that captions don’t take up too much space on the screen. Additionally ensure your captions comply with legal guidelines.*
6. After the last line of text in the sequence, press enter twice. Always leave a blank line to indicate a new caption sequence
7. After the blank line, type the number 2 to indicate the beginning of the second caption sequence and type your captions following SRT format. 
8. Repeat these steps until you have a completed transcript! 
9. Then click File → Save. Under File Name, type the name of your file and include .srt at the end
10. Under Save as type select All Files
11. Click Save, and congratulations! You are now ready to upload your captions.

How to upload SRT files

The process of uploading your newly created SRT file may vary depending on which media player, lecture capture software, or video recording software you choose to upload your video to – that’s why we’ve written how-to guides for just about every platform you can think of, including YouTube, Canvas, and Zoom.

Read the Guide: How to Create SRT Files

*For more information on legal requirements and closed captioning guidelines, refer to our white papers:

DIY SRT Creation vs. professional captioning

SRT file creation is an easy (and free) solution to independently create captions on your own videos. However, those looking for DIY solutions should be aware that caption creation often additionally requires timecode creation, which typically makes the captioning process more time consuming. 

To avoid the requirement of setting your own timecodes, YouTube’s captioning tool is one alternative that automatically syncs captions with what is being spoken in the video. Using this tool, users can select a video from their YouTube account, manually add captions to that file, and the corresponding timecodes will automatically populate. This effectively eliminates the need to manually enter timecodes (unlike in SRT file creation) and can save DIY captioners some time. 

The length of time it takes to caption a video can vary, but largely depends on the length of the video itself, the captioner’s level of experience, and video quality. Typically, it could take an experienced transcriptionist 5-10 times a video’s length to transcribe captions – this means a five-minute video could take anywhere from 25 to 50 minutes to complete! If you’re creating your own captions and timecodes using an SRT file, it may take longer. 

There are numerous benefits to captioning your videos, so don’t let the time it takes to create captions prevent you from adding them to your video! Captioned video content has the ability to improve your SEO rankings and serve your content to new audiences – including viewers who are deaf or hard of hearing, those who know English as a second language, and even those who simply prefer using captions. 

Creating your own captions can be a cost-saver, but if you’re planning on captioning many videos or lengthy videos, consider hiring a captioning service. A full-service captioning solution ensures all of your captions are legally compliant and avoids the need to consider timecode creation in the captioning process. 

A good captioning service will take care of all the logistics for you. That’s why 3Play Media guarantees turnaround based on your schedule, and a 99.6% average accuracy rate. Before selecting a vendor, it’s important to research who exactly will be captioning your videos as well as how the captioning and transcription process works, to better understand their rates.

Think you’re ready to start writing SRT captions? Get started today

This post was originally published on March 8, 2017 by Sofia Enamorado & has since been updated for accuracy, freshness, and clarity.

About the author

Elisa Lewis

Elisa Lewis is a Senior Marketing Manager at 3Play Media, where she leads content and brand strategy. She is passionate about accessibility, storytelling, and building connections through communication.

The post How to Create an SRT File appeared first on 3Play Media.

Blog

---

• Captioning

Closed Captioning vs. Subtitles: What’s the Difference and Why it Matters for Accessibility (Including EAA)

3Play Media

•

April 11, 2025

Watch the Webinar: How the EAA Impacts Global Business

Captions and subtitles are important timed text solutions that make video content accessible to all audiences. But over the last several years, the two have become clouded with questions and confusion, with the top concern being “What’s the difference between captions and subtitles?”

Many experts have weighed in, slapping labels to “captions” and “subtitles” in order to give each a singular, yet narrow definition. Now, some of these definitions may be correct, but they’re often only partially so. Why? 

Captions and subtitles are a lot more complex than most people realize. While they may seem interchangeable, understanding the differences between captions and subtitles is not only crucial for selecting the most appropriate option to enhance viewer experience and reach, but it also carries significant weight when addressing legal and accessibility requirements. For organizations and content creators serving the European market, this understanding is paramount for ensuring compliance with the European Accessibility Act (EAA).

In this blog, we’re diving head-first into the captions vs. subtitles debate. We’ll define timed text, captions, and subtitles; review the various types of captions and subtitles; and explore why they’ve become such a source of confusion in recent years.

What is a timed text?

A timed text is a text-based file that includes timing information. 

In the accessibility space, timed text files are usually intended to pair the transcription of dialogue and/or sound to media. The timing information allows the text to be synchronized to specific time codes of media. Both captions and subtitles are forms of timed text.

What are captions?

Captions were introduced to accommodate D/deaf and hard of hearing television viewers in the early 1970s. Eventually, captions became a mandated requirement for broadcast television in the United States.

Captions provide a textual transcript of a video’s dialogue, sound effects, and music. Captions are designed for use by D/deaf and hard of hearing audiences, but have gained popularity with all audiences. 

Standard closed captioning style: white text on a black box.

Captions appear as white text over a black box by default, but can sometimes be customized by viewers, depending on where media is being viewed.  Placement varies, but is often centered at the bottom of the screen for readability. When graphics or text appear in the lower third of the video, captions are typically placed at the top of the screen.

608 Captions

608 closed captions (also known as CEA-608, EIA-608, or Line 21 captions) were the standard captioning type for analog television transmission. 608 captions are unable to be customized by viewers, though they are compatible with digital television.

708 Captions

708 closed captions (also known as CEA-708/EIA-708/CTA-708 captions) are the newer standard captioning type for digital television. 708 captions are customizable by viewers, but are not compatible with analog television.

What are subtitles?

Subtitles were introduced in the 1930s, when silent film transitioned to “talkies,” or film with spoken audio, in order to accommodate foreign audiences who didn’t understand the language used in a film. 

Subtitles provide a textual translation of a video’s dialogue. Traditionally, subtitles assume the viewer can hear the audio but cannot understand the language. The exception to this is subtitles for the D/deaf and hard of hearing, which assume the viewer cannot hear the audio or understand the language.

Common subtitle style: white text with black dropshadow, no background.

Subtitles mimicking the appearance of closed captions.

Subtitles can appear in a variety of styles, but often appear as white or yellow text outlined in black, or with a black dropshadow. It is also common for subtitles to mimic the appearance of captions. Placement varies, but is often centered at the bottom of the screen for readability and ease in translation. When graphics or text appear in the lower third of the video, subtitles are typically placed just above the graphic/text. Subtitles can sometimes be customized by viewers, depending on where media is being viewed.

non-SDH

Non-subtitles for the d/Deaf and hard of hearing (non-SDH) are traditionally referred to as just “subtitles.” Non-SDH are designed for viewers who can hear the dialogue and non-dialogue information but cannot understand the language. The only transcribed element of non-SDH is dialogue. On-screen graphics or words may also be transcribed, when time allows for the translation of these elements.

SDH

Subtitles for the D/deaf and hard of hearing (SDH) assume the end user cannot hear the dialogue and include important non-dialogue information such as sound effects, music, and speaker identification.

SDH were originally designed for viewers who cannot understand the language, but are increasingly used in place of captions on some video platforms and services.

Forced Narrative

Forced narrative (FN) subtitles, also known as forced subtitles, clarify pertinent information meant to be understood by the viewer. FN subtitles are overlaid text used to clarify dialogue, burned-in texted graphics, and other information that is not otherwise explained or easily understood by the viewer. 

Why Do Caption and Subtitle Choices Matter for European Accessibility Act (EAA) Compliance?

Learn how 3Play can support you in becoming EAA compliant

Why are captions sometimes called subtitles and vice versa?

Captions and subtitles are infamous for being confused with one another, and there’s a few reasons for this. Let’s take a quick look at how global differences in terminology and the increased usage of SDH have been adding chaos to the CC vs. subs discourse.

Global Terminology Differences

Outside of the United States and Canada (for example: the UK, Ireland, and most other countries), video subtitling and captioning are usually considered one and the same. In other words, the use of the term “video subtitling” does not distinguish between subtitles used for foreign language translation, and captioning used to aid the D/deaf and hard-of-hearing audiences.

The globalization of video content across corporate, education, and entertainment industries has greatly impacted how viewers use the terms “captions” and “subtitles”. It can be hard for viewers to understand the difference between the two when different entities label their accessible timed text files based on regional preferences. 

SDH = CC…for some

Because of the aforementioned globalization of video content, closed captions and subtitles for the D/deaf and hard of hearing are now commonly mistaken for one another. It’s easy to see why: they both serve D/deaf and hard of hearing audiences and often look alike.

But SDH and captions are different. SDH were initially designed to accommodate D/deaf and hard of hearing audiences who could not understand the language. But over the past few years, SDH have been used in place of captions on platforms where traditional captions are not supported. Sometimes the platform will refer to SDH as “SDH”; other times, they may be called “CC”. There are even cases where they could be called both, e.g. “CC/SDH”.

Captions vs. Subtitles

Because of the many nuances involved in defining captions and subtitles, it’s hard to compare both in general terms. To get to the heart of the individual differences between them, it’s important to break captions and subtitles down into their individual types.

There’s a lot of nuance missing from the captions vs. subtitles discourse, and the complexities of each won’t go away anytime soon. In the broadest sense, each serves a different purpose with a common goal:

• Captions provide an accessible way for viewers who cannot hear audio to watch video.
• Subtitles provide an accessible way for speakers of any language to watch video.

Video accessibility is the string that ties captions and subtitles together, but there are ways to move beyond generalization of these accessibility solutions. The question of “what’s the difference between captions vs. subtitles?” is one that will always require us to break it down further. By comparing and contrasting the individual types of captions and subtitles, we can begin to grasp the differences between the two a lot more easily. 

This blog post was originally published by Sofia Leiva on August 14, 2016, and was updated on June 22, 2021 by Kelly Mahoney. It has since been updated again for comprehensiveness, clarity, and accuracy.

About the author

3Play Media

The post Closed Captioning vs. Subtitles: What’s the Difference and Why it Matters for Accessibility (Including EAA) appeared first on 3Play Media.

Blog

---

• Audio Description

Does Your Video Need Extended or Standard Description?

Aj Beltis

•

March 19, 2025

If you’re trying to make your videos more accessible, you’re probably looking into perfecting their audio descriptions. 

However, creating audio descriptions is no easy feat. Audio describers often have to make difficult choices and judgment calls. They must decide what to describe, when to describe, and how to describe visual content to ensure a video is accessible. This task is especially difficult when you have a lot of content to describe, but only a second or two to voice that description. 

These considerations frequently create a dilemma for audio describers – how can I provide accurate and high-quality descriptions in an appropriate amount of time? 

Here’s where extended audio description comes in – and it’s a useful option for those who both create and consume video content with audio descriptions. 

But before we get to that, let’s dive into the necessity that is audio description.

Download the FREE Beginner’s Guide to Audio Description

What is Audio Description?

Audio description is the translation of visual images to audible language for the primary benefit of people who are blind or have low vision. It describes what’s being portrayed on-screen so people who have trouble seeing a screen can understand what actions are occurring, what facial expressions are being shown, and what the background scenery looks like – among other key visuals. 

Audio description’s main purpose is to make content accessible to a wider audience. In our Allied episode about the what, how, and why of audio description, Dr. Joel Snyder explains the considerations that go into writing successful descriptions:

“We have to limit what we describe out of necessity, and because it’s better description if we really try to understand we’re in service to the people listening and to the people who have created the art form we’re working with. So if we’re really listening, we’re really observing, we tell what’s most critical to an understanding of the image.

Sometimes a visual element that’s not even very prominent is important because it shows up later in the film, or a particular act or action is foreshadowed that way. We want to know what’s going on in the artist’s head and pick up on that.”

When Is Audio Description Necessary in a Video?

As a general guideline, audio description should be used when there is information portrayed through visual means that is required for understanding. 

For instance: on-screen text, changes in speaker, facial expressions, costumes, and scene changes all give context that helps us better understand and enjoy content. If these elements are not audio-described, a viewer who cannot see the screen will have trouble comprehending the content. 

While this guideline may sound simple, the specific needs for description vary case by case. For example, a movie trailer with little dialogue will have plenty of room for descriptions, while an advanced physics lecture with heavy dialogue may not have enough natural pauses to effectively describe what’s happening on-screen. 

Luckily, there are options when it comes to what type of audio description is best for your content. This is where standard vs. extended audio description comes into play.

Standard Audio Description

Standard audio description allows snippets of narration to be interspersed within the natural pauses in dialogue of the original content. This type of audio description works very well for videos that have lengthy pauses in dialogue, and a limited amount of visual detail that needs to be described or do not contain any speech. Standard audio description may be the only option for videos that absolutely cannot have their duration changed, including most broadcast content. 

When done well, audio descriptions enhance the original piece rather than distract from it. With standard audio description, the describer can add concise descriptions of the visual content where space allows, like the example below. You’ll notice that the original video source plays continuously, and information is described in the pauses throughout.  One thing to keep in mind for standard audio description is that the requirement to only add descriptions where there are spaces in the audible speech may lead to surprising results regarding which details are described, how concise the descriptions are, and exactly when in the video timeline they appear. For example, it is better to describe the most important details a little earlier or later than to skip those details entirely.

Extended Audio Description

Videos that lack natural pauses or contain an excess of important visual information can be tricky to describe without interrupting the original audio or exceeding the duration of the frame being described. In these cases, extended audio description is necessary. 

Unlike standard audio description, extended audio description is not constrained to the natural pauses of a video, but rather allows you to pause the original source content to make room for description as needed.

Some situations where extended audio description might be required include:

• Text-heavy videos, like recordings of slideshows or lectures.
• Dialogue-heavy videos, as audio description shouldn’t drown out what people are saying. 
• Noisy videos containing important music or sound, as audio description could detract from these elements. 
• Videos with short cuts and/or extremely detailed frames. Otherwise, by the time an audio description for that shot is complete, the video may already be on the next cut. 
• Videos adhering to WCAG 2.2 Level AAA, which requires extended audio description – when necessary – for accessibility compliance. 

The video below features extended description. When you press play, the video and description begin playing. Then, the source video pauses temporarily while the description continues. After that portion of the description is complete, the video resumes playing again. This happens several times throughout the video. 

Take a look!

If your video doesn’t have enough space to fit a standard audio description, extended is the way to go. 

3Play’s Process

Learn About 3Play Media’s Audio Description Services 

At 3Play Media, we offer white glove support at every step of the process to ensure all of your media accessibility needs are met – especially with our audio description services. These services come with plenty of flexibility in involvement from humans and AI to provide the ideal AD for your videos. 

When placing an order for audio description, you will first choose the speaker type if your account settings allow for it. You’ll be able to choose between AI-generated synthesized speech or a voice artist. 

Next, you’ll have the option to select standard or extended audio description. You’ll also notice a “choose for me” option. 

Your writing can be done either by human describers or entirely by AI – the same as with your voicework. The option for AI lets you balance the cost and timeline of your project while ensuring a quality recording every time.  

3Play’s recommendation is an automated process that evaluates the audio track of your video for natural pauses in speech. This process doesn’t take into consideration any visual aspects of your video; it’s merely a gauge of how much space is available in your audio track for description. 

If minimal audio is detected throughout the video, your file will process at the standard level. If a high volume of audio is detected, your file will be processed with extended audio description. If you’re ordering audio description from a file that has already been transcribed, the recommended audio description level will be visible directly on the file. However, if you’re ordering audio description at the same time that you order transcription, you won’t see the recommended level before the file is complete.

Regardless of the service level your video requires, adding audio description to your videos makes your content more accessible and provides many additional benefits for your audience

Learn More About Audio Description

About the author

Aj Beltis

The post Does Your Video Need Extended or Standard Description? appeared first on 3Play Media.

Blog

---

• Accessibility

Top Work from Home Jobs in Digital Accessibility

3Play Media

•

March 14, 2024

If you’re looking for a work from home job that helps make the digital world more inclusive and accessible, then these top three jobs may be the perfect fit.

1. Transcription Jobs

  Work from Home No Experience Necessary Flexible Schedule Weekly Paycheck Contract Work 

A transcription job is perfect for those who are seeking complete control of their schedule, weekly paychecks, and the opportunity for a work from home job.

For transcription jobs, you will need a computer and a strong network connection. A good pair of headphones is also strongly suggested.

Most organizations do not require previous experience. At 3Play, we seek transcriptionist who have:

• Excellent written communication skills
• Excellent command of English grammar and punctuation
• Proficiency with internet research and reference resources
• Ability to manage projects and work independently

Learn more about being a 3Play transcriptionist.

2. Translator Jobs

  Work from Home No Experience Necessary Multilingual Opportunity Flexible Schedule Weekly Paycheck Contract Work  

As a remote translator, you’ll leverage your language skills to bring video and audio content to life in your target language(s).

With the freedom to work from the comfort of your home, you can set your own schedule and immerse yourself in an array of exciting projects spanish entertainment, sports, education, and business.

For linguist jobs, you will need a computer and a strong network connection. A good pair of headphones is also strongly suggested.

Most organizations do not require previous experience. At 3Play, we seek translators who have:

• Excellent written communication skills in your target language
• Excellent command of English grammar and punctuation
• Proficiency with internet research and reference resources
• Ability to manage projects and work independently

Learn more about 3Play’s online translation jobs..

3. Accessibility Tester

  Work from Home Experience/Knowledge Necessary Salary Postion Full Time Employee 

As an accessibility tester, you will be tasked with ensuring websites, applications, and tools are compliant with federal accessibility standards.

You will need to have knowledge of the ADA, Section 508, and WCAG 2.0/2.1 compliance and how they relate to website and application accessibility.

Experience with JAWS, NVDA, VoiceOver, Zoomtext, and Talkback are also necessary.

On a daily basis, you could be:

• Using assistive technologies, like screen reader software, to test the accessibility of a website
• Document issues and make recommendations for solutions and best practices
• Educate engineers, executives, and other relevant parties on accessibility standards and their importance

Search available accessibility tester jobs

4. Help Blind Individuals Live Independently

  Work from Home No Experience Necessary Flexible Schedule Contract Work 

As an Aira agent, you help to guide blind individuals through their day to day lives. This is truly a rewarding work from home job!

Using smart glass technology, the blind user wears smart glasses that have a camera and network connectivity to help the agent guide the user through their requests.

The platform works similarly to Uber when a blind user will make a request to connect with an agent.

Aira agents are trained and certified via the company, no experience is necessary. The application process involves:

• Pre-Screening process – similar to 911 operator training
• Training with an experience Aira team member on how to use the Agent Dashboard and emergency protocols
• Training on “Aira Phraseology
• Certification process, background check, and confidentialily agreements

Learn more about Aira and available positions.

Finding the Perfect Work from Home Job

When looking for a work from home job, make sure you access all the possibilities. There are many opportunities that can fit your skills, schedule, and interests.

Do you know other work from home jobs? Let us know in the comments.

About the author

3Play Media

The post Top Work from Home Jobs in Digital Accessibility appeared first on 3Play Media.

Blog

---

• Accessibility

Key Takeaways from UsableNet’s 2023 Year-End Digital Accessibility Lawsuit Report

3Play Media

•

January 19, 2024

UsableNet’s 2023 Year-End Digital Accessibility Lawsuit Report

UsableNet, a leader in the digital accessibility and usability space, ensures that the digital world and its contents (i.e., websites, videos, and mobile apps) are free of barriers and accessible to all users.

Each year, UsableNet releases reports covering the top trends in regard to the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) and digital accessibility lawsuits. The organization’s research team reviews ADA lawsuits filed in federal court or in state court in New York, Florida, or California.

The year-end ADA report includes data from thousands of lawsuits filed against businesses between January 1, 2023, to December 31, 2023. As in previous years, these businesses have been targeted for violating the ADA.

We recommend downloading the full report and reviewing the findings for yourself, especially if you’re an accessibility advocate or interested in web development. 

In this blog post, we’ll cover the key takeaways from UsableNet’s year-end report and what trends to consider as you navigate 2024.

Digital Accessibility Lawsuits Remain On the Rise

In 2023, plaintiffs filed over 4,600 ADA lawsuits, with the majority filed in New York, Florida, and California. This is because the courts and judges in these states are most familiar with ADA web accessibility cases and often rule in favor of the plaintiff. As of the end of 2023, the number of digital accessibility lawsuits continues to rise, and New York had more federal and state law filings than any other state. In the report, UsableNet indicates this because of a few reasons:

• To be sued, businesses do not need to be located in New York State—they only need customers in the state. 
• Courts in New York don’t require businesses to have a physical location.
• Some of the most active plaintiffs and plaintiff attorney firms are based in New York. 

Image courtesy of UsableNet

According to a blog by Jason Taylor for UsableNet, lawsuits filed in federal court in New York increasingly require detailed filings, leading some plaintiff law firms to move their digital accessibility lawsuits to state courts in New York instead. Taylor notes in the blog that these lawsuits “allege violations of the New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL), the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL), and the New York State Civil Rights Law (NYSCRL).”

Of note, a new trend of federal lawsuits emerged in New Jersey and Wisconsin, which had no digital accessibility filings in 2022 but had 33 and 11 cases filed in 2023, respectively. Additionally, lawsuits in California declined in 2023 after federal and state courts ruled in 2022 that a physical location was necessary for plaintiffs to file an ADA-based web accessibility lawsuit. 

Lainey Feingold’s Perspective on the Growing Number of Digital Accessibility Lawsuits

Internationally recognized disability rights lawyer, author, and speaker Lainey Feingold shared her concerns with the growing number of digital accessibility lawsuits during her annual Digital Accessibility Legal Update with 3Play Media.

Lainey said that while these numbers can be jarring, change in civil rights enforcement isn’t achieved with fear. Sharing the results of these cases can help provide greater context around the ethics of the case. Watch her speak about this topic in a brief clip from Part One of our 2023 Digital Accessibility Legal Update:

Leading ADA Law Firms Continue to File Most Digital Accessibility Cases

The following top ten plaintiff firms file over 80% of federally filed digital ADA lawsuits, and 2023 has seen three new firms join the list. In contrast, the top 10 defense firms represent around 20% of ADA lawsuits.

Image courtesy of UsableNet

Additionally, as discussed in UsableNet’s mid-year report, new plaintiff firms joined the list in 2023, indicating increased legal engagement with digital accessibility cases and their end users. Based on data from federally filed ADA-based lawsuits, the new firms entering the list include The Law Office of Noor Saab; Nye, Stirling, Hale, Miller & Sweet LLP; and Adams & Associates, P.A.

However, growth in plaintiff firms did not extend to the other side. The stagnant list of defense firms and less consistent representation by top firms suggest a lack of engagement with defendants in ADA cases due to the tendency for courts to favor plaintiffs regarding digital accessibility.

E-commerce Continues to Receive the Most Lawsuits

Staying on trend with 2022’s UsableNet report, e-commerce companies continue to top the list of industries most targeted by ADA-based digital accessibility lawsuits. By the end of 2023, e-commerce made up 82% of lawsuits, followed by food service and education at 7% and 4%, respectively.

Image courtesy of UsableNet

According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s Annual Retail Trade Survey (ARTS), e-commerce sales increased by 43% in the first year of the pandemic. But these trends are not new. The e-commerce industry was growing rapidly before the pandemic and had consistently received the most digital accessibility lawsuits in recent years; however, the pandemic caused a pronounced shift in consumer behaviors that gave the e-commerce industry a boom in sales.

According to UsableNet’s report, 21% of the top 500 e-commerce websites received an ADA-based lawsuit in 2023. Over the last five years, 82% of the top 500 e-commerce websites received an ADA-based lawsuit.

There are many reasons why e-commerce sites are prone to digital accessibility lawsuits, including their complex nature, multiple sites and mobile apps, consistently changing content, and connection to a physical location. Examples of companies with a nexus include brick-and-mortar retailers and restaurants, both of which needed to pivot during the pandemic to online sales to stay in business.

What does the ADA say about online accessibility?

Education Rounds Out the Top Three Targeted Industries

The education industry jumped to number three on the list of industries most targeted by ADA lawsuits in 2023. This movement is unsurprising, given the recent spotlight on accessibility in higher education and a number of high-profile lawsuits against colleges and universities. According to UsableNet’s report, one active plaintiff firm filed 100 of the 104 lawsuits against education organizations in 2023.

Image courtesy of UsableNet

May 2023’s joint Department of Education (DOE) and Department of Justice (DOJ) “Dear Colleague” letter provided one of the most direct and comprehensive assessments to date on how the ADA and Section 504 apply to online content produced by higher education institutions. UsableNet suggests that this could be the reason for the rise in education lawsuits. 

The May 2023 “Dear Colleague” letter discusses the requirements colleges, universities, and postsecondary institutions must adhere to in order to remain compliant with the ADA. Further, the letter indicates that the DOE and DOJ will actively pursue enforcement actions for noncompliant entities. This updated guidance, in conjunction with the DOJ’s looming web accessibility updates, cements the importance and prioritization of digital accessibility in the education sector.

Smaller Companies Are Continued Targets

For years, large organizations were the main target of ADA lawsuits, but smaller companies (defined as having an annual revenue of under $25 million) received 73% of lawsuits in 2023.

Image courtesy of UsableNet

This figure will likely continue climbing for smaller businesses, as many of the largest companies have already been the target of ADA lawsuits in the past decade and have subsequently remediated their digital presence and/or developed robust accessibility programs.

In 2024, it will be critical for smaller companies and businesses to take action to make their websites and digital presence fully accessible now that plaintiffs and firms continue to move their attention beyond large e-commerce entities. 

Accessibility Widgets and Overlays Are Not Enough for ADA Compliance

Accessibility widgets and overlays are solutions designed to bring sweeping accessibility compliance over the entirety of a website. Unfortunately, these solutions often have issues and are not usually endorsed by disabled users.

UsableNet tracks if a website uses an accessibility widget on the day a lawsuit is filed. In 2023, over 900 businesses with an accessibility widget or overlay on their website received a lawsuit, representing a 62% increase from 2022, according to the report.

Image courtesy of UsableNet

The trend of filing ADA-based complaints and lawsuits against companies using accessibility widgets is likely to continue, as full ADA or WCAG compliance cannot be achieved using overlays or widgets alone. 

The world’s top disability thought leaders, accessibility experts, disabled users, attorneys, and more are counted among endorsers and signatories of the Overlay Fact Sheet, a resource providing helpful, detailed information on the strengths and weaknesses of accessibility overlays and widgets. Read the Overlay Fact Sheet in full to learn more about these solutions and how they impact disabled end users.

What the UsableNet Year-End Report Signals for Media Accessibility in 2024

When we talk about web and digital accessibility, media also falls into the conversation. Websites are the primary targets for ADA-based lawsuits, making up 97% of total digital accessibility lawsuits, and video accessibility makes up less than 1%, according to the report. However, it’s important to note that video accessibility is still essential to making a website accessible. As technology expands into every aspect of our lives, much of the web and its contents, including video and audio, remain inaccessible to disabled users.

A number of businesses and organizations have been sued for failing to make their videos and podcasts accessible, just like with websites. Netflix, Amazon, and FedEx have all been sued for having inaccessible videos, while podcast platforms SiriusXM, Stitcher, and Pandora were sued for not offering transcripts. Those not in the entertainment or commerce spaces, like UC Berkeley, have also faced legal challenges for a lack of accessible content. These lawsuits have set a strong precedent that the ADA usually applies to video and audio content—even when there is no nexus to a physical location.

According to UsableNet, the plaintiff in an ADA web accessibility lawsuit will likely have a visual disability. Most of the more than 4,000 ADA web accessibility lawsuits filed in 2022 and the nearly 16,000 ADA web accessibility lawsuits filed in the last five years had plaintiffs with visual disabilities. Plaintiffs with auditory disabilities came in second. Claims filed by people with hearing disabilities often focused on digital accessibility issues for video, such as a lack of captions or missing audio descriptions.

For a video to be accessible and compliant with WCAG 2.0 Level AA, it must include services such as captioning and audio description and be hosted on an accessible video player. For a podcast to be accessible, it must have transcripts.

There is no quick fix to accessibility, so businesses must invest in reputable solutions. 3Play Media has been a leader in the media accessibility space since 2008 and provides solutions to make your media fully accessible.  

There is still much work to be done regarding digital accessibility. But as further guidance and regulations on web accessibility are made available in the U.S., we hope to see the number of ADA-based digital accessibility lawsuits decrease.

In the meantime, businesses must be proactive regarding digital accessibility. By prioritizing accessibility, organizations can create inclusive digital experiences for all users while also having the added benefit of avoiding potential ADA violations and lawsuits.

This blog was originally published by Rebecca Klein on February 28, 2023, and updated by Jena Wallace on July 19, 2023. It has since been updated for accuracy, clarity, and freshness.

This blog post is written for educational and general information purposes only and does not constitute specific legal advice. This blog should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.

About the author

3Play Media

The post Key Takeaways from UsableNet’s 2023 Year-End Digital Accessibility Lawsuit Report appeared first on 3Play Media.

Blog

---

• Legislation & Compliance

Takeaways from Lainey Feingold’s 2023 Digital Accessibility Legal Update

3Play Media

•

January 11, 2024

Digital Accessibility Legal Update with Lainey Feingold – Part One [Free Webinar]

At the end of each year, Lainey Feingold joins 3Play Media to share her annual digital accessibility legal update. Because 2023 was such an impactful year for digital accessibility news and cases, Lainey split this legal update into two comprehensive sessions that covered the latest information about the United States’ legal landscape, an overview of global law and policy, and strategies for staying ahead of the legal curve when it comes to digital accessibility.

Read on to discover the top takeaways from Part One and Part Two of our 2023 Digital Accessibility Legal Update with Lainey Feingold, or quickly jump to a digital accessibility takeaway below:

Digital Accessibility & the United States Legal Landscape

In Part One of our 2023 Digital Accessibility Legal Update, Lainey spoke about what digital accessibility is, why accessibility is a civil right, current and proposed laws and regulations, best practices to stay ahead of the legal curve, and more.

Lainey began by defining digital accessibility as disability inclusion in all things technology and the intentional practices that make the inclusion happen. She described digital accessibility as a door, explaining that “without accessibility, the doors of today’s society are closed, are locked up tight for people with disabilities.” Lainey also sees digital accessibility as a bridge–on one side are people with disabilities; on the other are technology and content. Accessibility is the bridge connecting the two.

Current United States Digital Accessibility Laws & Regulations

Lainey provided an overview and brief summarization of United States federal laws and regulations that reference digital accessibility, including:

• Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): Largest part of the U.S. digital accessibility framework. The ADA prevents discrimination and promotes effective communication with people with disabilities.
• Section 504 and Section 508: When receiving federal funds, programs and services must be available to everyone–this includes accessibility. Technology and content must also be accessible for people to do their jobs.
• Air Carriers Access Act: Requires airline websites and kiosks to be accessible.
• False Claims Act: When selling something to the government and claiming it is accessible, but it is not, you could be in violation of this federal act, such as in this California Parks False Claims Act case.
• Affordable Care Act (ACA) Section 1557: When receiving federal funds and part of the ACA, technology must be accessible.
• 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act (CVAA): Requires accessibility in communication systems, such as captions and audio description.

Lainey then discussed Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) and how they play into existing legal frameworks in the United States. While WCAG is not specifically written into the ADA, she pointed out that WCAG gives you the tools to avoid discrimination and effectively communicate by building accessible websites.

Further, she explained that the Department of Justice uses WCAG when enforcing the ADA:

Lainey mentioned the introduction of WCAG 2.2 back in October, stating that she does not expect to see any immediate court decisions or Justice Department action happening, but that “eventually, it will roll in.”

What’s On the Horizon for Digital Accessibility in the United States

Lainey discussed what’s on the horizon for digital accessibility law in the United States, including proposed laws and possible regulations. She urged awareness of these potential laws, regulations, and guidances due to the impact they could have on digital accessibility:

Proposed Laws to Watch

• Website and Software Applications Law: A federal law introduced into Congress last year that focuses on the importance of regulations and holding accountable those who are not only covered by the ADA, but developers and people involved in the creation of technology.
• Communications, Video, and Technology Accessibility Act (CVTA): An update to the CVAA that aims to strengthen and expand requirements for captioning, audio description, sign language, and more.
• CA Bill AB 1757: A pending California bill to modify the requirements for filing a lawsuit and aims to incentivize accessibility compliance.

Possible Regulations to Watch

• Web and mobile: Further pending regulations by the DOJ for state and local governments. Lainey noted that the ADA already requires state and local governments to have accessible websites and mobile apps.
• Self-service transaction terminals and kiosks: Pending regulations which have been in the works for a long time. Lainey mentions on her website that “many legal cases require kiosks to work for disabled people.”
• Healthcare & HHS 504 Update: Health and Human Services is doing a 504 update to strengthen the original regulations, which have not been updated since 1977.
• ACA update: The ACA has regulations from 2020 and aim to make them stronger with this update.
• Video conferencing: The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has a rulemaking process underway on video conferencing to make accessibility requirements more specific.
• Department of Education: Intends to strengthen and protect rights for students with disabilities; no action yet.

Guidances to Be Aware Of

• DOJ & HHS Telehealth Guidance (07/2022): Lainey suggests anyone involved in health care review this guidance, as it contains valuable specifics about what the law already requires.

• DOJ & EEOC AI Hiring Tool Guidance (05/2022): Guidance created by the DOJ and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on AI hiring tools. Lainey suggests reviewing if you use AI hiring tools or are a person with a disability impacted by the use of AI hiring tools.

• Joint DOJ & DOE Dear Colleague Letter (07/2023): One of the most direct and comprehensive assessments to date on how the ADA and Section 504 apply to online content produced by higher education institutions.

How Current Digital Accessibility Laws and Regulations Are Implemented in the US

Lainey wrapped up Part One of our legal update by discussing the implementation of U.S. digital accessibility laws and regulations. She stressed the importance of digging deeper into customer feedback around accessibility. Rather than framing them as complaints, she urges organizations to think of them as opportunities to ensure the civil rights of people with disabilities are respected, protected, and enforced.

Lainey then divided implementation actions into her favorites and least favorites for the year, providing quick overviews of each and why she felt they were good or bad for digital accessibility.

Lainey’s Favorite Legal Implementations

DOJ Digital Accessibility Actions 

Lainey noted that the DOJ’s actions around digital accessibility are very important because they show they are not waiting, such as in these cases: Oklahoma Mobile App Accessibility and Texas County Election Website Accessibility. She said entities covered by the ADA also should not wait to make digital properties accessible.

California Parks Website Accessibility Case

Lainey expressed her satisfaction with how this challenging case was handled and recently settled. The case involved a lawsuit against a contracted web developer of the California Parks System website. The developer claimed that the website was accessible, but it was not. This first-of-its-kind digital accessibility case referenced the False Claims Act.

Enforcement in Education

Lainey noted there is a lot of good enforcement action happening in the education space and that the settlements of such cases should be taken as a roadmap for how to do accessibility within higher educational institutions. She cited cases against Los Angeles Community College District (LACCD) and City University of New York (CUNY) as examples of this from the past year. Watch her speak about this in a brief clip from Part One of our 2023 Digital Accessibility Legal Update:

Enforcement in Employment

There are active cases to enforce the ADA when it comes to employment. Lainey noted that ADP pivoted to structured negotiation and that just because a lawsuit is filed does not mean that there needs to be fighting. She also mentioned that just because a company gets sued for accessibility reasons does not mean they’re a bad company. For example, she pointed out that both Workday and ADP have very strong accessibility teams, but “sometimes things go wrong.”

Kiosk Accessibility Enforcement

Lainey noted two cases involving kiosks from Quest Diagnostics and Labcorp which are being handled by the American Council of the Blind (ACB) and DC-based lawyer Matt Handley. You can find more information on kiosk legal action on Lainey’s Kiosk Legal Issues Tracker on her website.

Voting

Lainey said that in the voting space, there is much private sector effort around accessible voting with the National Federation of the Blind (NFB) and ACB being involved in many cases. She added that many of these cases have dealt with voting information, accessible voting machines, and accessible ballots.

Virtual Reality (VR) Accessibility

Panarra v. HTC Corporation marked one of the first and only cases around captioning in VR. With the lawsuit successfully settled, HTC agreed to provide resources to support developers to caption their content and will add captioning requirements for future titles.

Podcast Accessibility

Lainey briefly discussed podcast accessibility and a long-running case by the NAD against Sirius XM. She noted that this case is still in litigation. Learn more about making podcasts accessible through transcripts.

Lainey’s Least Favorite Legal Implementations

The Number of Accessibility Lawsuits

Lainey shared her concerns with the growing number of accessibility lawsuits:

She said that while these numbers can be jarring, change in civil rights enforcement isn’t achieved with fear. Sharing the results of these cases can help provide greater context around the ethics of the case. Watch her speak about this in a brief clip from Part One of our 2023 Digital Accessibility Legal Update:

Overlays and Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP)

Lainey says that the use of overlays are not unrelated to the rising number of accessibility lawsuits because organizations are looking for quick fixes. She strongly encourages reviewing the Overlay Fact Sheet to get a greater understanding of overlays and their impact on people with disabilities.

Related to overlays is SLAPP, which stands for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. Lainey is concerned with the cases by overlay companies against disability advocates who have vocally advocated against the use of overlays. She notes that this isn’t exclusive to the U.S., with global lawsuits popping up by overlay companies against advocates.

Supreme Court Laufer Case

A U.S. Supreme Court case, Acheson Hotels vs. Deborah Laufer, had Lainey worried because it could risk the legitimate use of testers in many different types of cases. The case has since been decided as “moot” by the Supreme Court, which she says is a great outcome for disability rights and accessibility.

Watch Part One of our 2023 Digital Accessibility Legal Update with Lainey Feingold  

Global Accessibility Law and Policy

Digital Accessibility Legal Update with Lainey Feingold – Part Two [Free Webinar]

In Part Two of our 2023 Digital Accessibility Legal Update, Lainey provided a snapshot of current global accessibility law and policy, and shared strategies and ideas for staying ahead of the legal curve no matter where you are.

Lainey kicked off the second part of our 2023 Digital Accessibility Update by discussing accessibility on a global level. She reiterated that accessibility is a civil right and a human right. She shared that over 35 people from around the world helped her compile her Digital Accessibility Global Law and Policy page on her website. This has provided her with information about law and policy worldwide, but she noted that she remains curious about how these laws and policies are being enforced.

A Snapshot of Global Laws

United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (UNCRPD)

Lainey shared that 185 countries have ratified the UNCRPD, which includes Article 9, Accessibility. She shares that she likes this article because it begins with the why:

Lainey noted that “ironically,” the United States did not ratify the UNCRPD, but this is because there is an understanding that much of the UNCRPD is based on the ADA.

European Union’s European Accessibility Act

Lainey believes the European Accessibility Act is an exciting development in the world of accessibility. Overall it creates accessibility requirements for products and services. The European Accessibility Act goes into effect in June of 2025 and will apply to anyone manufacturing products and services that will be placed in the European Market. Lainey uses the European Disability Forum as one of the main resources she relies on about this topic.

The First African Accessibility Standards

Lainey highlighted Kenya’s accessibility efforts in Africa. They are the first country in Africa to adopt accessibility standards, as of 2022. She says they were adopted thanks to the advocacy and organization of many people. Nigeria is also on Lainey’s radar, as they have been building an accessibility community through grassroots efforts.

India: A Digital-First Nation

Lainey is excited by India’s accessibility efforts. She is hopeful about India’s laws and policies because of the involvement of people with disabilities, including blind lawyers:

Lainey traveled to India in December of 2023 and plans to add more updates to her website based on what she learned.

Lainey Feingold’s Best Practices for Staying Ahead of the Law

Understand the “Accessibility Cookie”

Lainey likes to compare accessibility to a cookie with many ingredients. The variety of ingredients represents many different parts of accessibility. She says that the ingredients needed to understand the “accessibility cookie” include:

• Hire and engage with people with disabilities
• Create transparency with accessibility statements
• Do testing and training with and by disabled people
• Understand that digital accessibility is an ethical mandate
• Consider accessibility in the design and development process early on as opposed to the last-minute
• Ensure your procurement team understands accessibility
• Create a policy and culture of accessibility at your organization
• Collaborate with people with disabilities: work with them, consult with them, break down silos within your organization
• Take accessibility feedback seriously and don’t take shortcuts

Accessible Procurement

Lainey expanded on the procurement process and shared that “the slogan for accessible procurement is ‘don’t buy broken things.’” She underscored that whoever is on a procurement team must understand accessibility and pointed to the $66 million California Parks Website case as an important example when it comes to public sector procurement.

Compliance and the Law: Use High-Quality Resources

Lainey said compliance and the law are the “salt” in the “accessibility cookie.” You need salt in cookies, but too little salt or too much salt can make for a bad cookie. She suggests staying up to date with the law by using high-quality resources, which she shares in her slide deck for Part Two.

Lainey then shared the top four things to remember if an organization finds itself with a lawsuit:

• Hire a responsible lawyer
• Don’t be demoralized
• Don’t look for a quick fix
• Let the lawsuit be a spark for sustainable success

How to Talk About the Law and Digital Accessibility

Lainey closed out Part Two of the 2023 Digital Accessibility Legal Update by discussing how to talk about the law without fear and create long-lasting, sustainable accessibility. She curated the following tips to keep in mind as you navigate the legalities of digital accessibility:

Use Key Ideas

Lainey noted that accessibility laws were created by the advocacy of people with disabilities. Remember that accessibility is a civil right and a human right:

Keep the Focus on People

Remember to focus on people and the impacts that the law has on them. Blind workers cannot check vacation time with inaccessible HR software. D/deaf learners cannot access podcasts if a transcript isn’t provided. Blind campers can’t make state park reservations on an inaccessible website. Lainey suggests to frame legal cases as “this was an experience of a person with disabilities of exclusion” as opposed to “somebody got hit with a lawsuit.”

Understand Your Stakeholders

Lainey stressed understanding of who you may be talking to when it comes to accessibility. She stated the importance of being curious so that you can find out what stakeholders care about and what their blockers are:

Do Not Use Fear

Lainey suggested that you avoid using fear when talking about the law. You wouldn’t lead with fear if you want something from a neighbor, a child, a parent, a partner, etc. So you shouldn’t lead with fear in conversations about the law.

She also believes that you don’t have to be a shark to get what you want in the legal space. She instead suggests taking the approach of being a dolphin. This is because dolphins are collaborative and communicative. She believes this better supports trust, kindness, empathy, and more when talking about digital accessibility and the law.

Watch the Part Two of our 2023 Digital Accessibility Legal Update with Lainey Feingold  

This blog was originally published by Rebecca Klein in January 2023 as “Q&A with Lainey Feingold: Digital Accessibility Legal Update.” This post is updated annually to reflect the latest in digital accessibility legal updates and for comprehensiveness, clarity, and accuracy.

This blog post is written for educational and general information purposes only, and does not constitute specific legal advice. This blog should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.

About the author

3Play Media

The post Takeaways from Lainey Feingold’s 2023 Digital Accessibility Legal Update appeared first on 3Play Media.

Blog

---

• Legislation & Compliance

Understanding WCAG Guidelines

3Play Media

•

September 22, 2023

WCAG 2.0 & Beyond: Modernizing Web Accessibility [Free eBook]

Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) remain among the most comprehensive and relevant accessibility standards since their inception over two decades ago. These guidelines offer a structured approach to creating digital content that is both accessible to all web users and compliant with worldwide legal requirements.

You may have recently heard about WCAG during an audit of your organization’s website. Or you may be well-acquainted with WCAG 2.0, but need further information about newer versions. Regardless of your WCAG knowledge, it’s important to have all of the information you need in your pursuit of web accessibility. In this blog, we aim to provide just that: a high-level overview of WCAG guidelines.

Understanding WCAG guidelines will not only allow you and your organization comply with many worldwide web accessibility laws, but will also help you gain a nuanced perspective of how all people–including those with disabilities–use the web. Read on to discover what WCAG is, why its guidelines are important, where it is referenced in the law, and how to learn more using 3Play’s free WCAG resources.

What is WCAG?

Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, or WCAG, is a set of guidelines for making digital content accessible for all users, including those with disabilities. WCAG was developed by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) nearly 30 years ago. 

WCAG has been continuously developed and updated, and has a few different versions. The two most relevant WCAG standards are WCAG 2.0 and WCAG 2.1. These versions and guidelines are most frequently referenced in laws and legal settlements across the world as the baseline for web accessibility.

In October 2023, W3C published WCAG 2.2. This version is now W3C’s recommendation and is expected to be referenced in future legal cases and legislation.

Overview of WCAG Versions & History

WCAG 1.0

WCAG 1.0 was released in 1999 and uses a set of guidelines. Each guideline has a checkpoint, which are priority 1, 2, or 3.

WCAG 2.0

WCAG 2.0 was released in 2008 and uses four design principles: perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust. Each principle has a guideline, and each guideline has success criteria, which are further categorized into levels A, AA, or AAA. Discover how WCAG 2.0 and its subsequent updates have modernized web accessibility.

WCAG 2.1

WCAG 2.1 was released in 2018 and is backwards compatible with WCAG 2.0. The 2.0 success criteria are the same as in 2.1, but 2.1 has additional guidelines. Learn more about the differences between versions 2.0 and 2.1.

WCAG 2.2

WCAG 2.2 was published in October of 2023. This version is backwards compatible with versions 2.0 and 2.1, with 9 additional guidelines as well as the removal of 4.1.1 Parsing. WCAG 2.2 is W3C’s current recommendation. Keep up with the latest WCAG 2.2 updates, and learn about the changes.

WCAG 3.0

WCAG 3.0 is considered a draft as of September 2023, with no current timeline for publishing. The current draft updates conformance levels to Bronze, Silver, and Gold. This draft also replaces Success Criteria with Outcomes, which is defined by W3C as “verifiable statements that allow testers to reliably determine if the content being evaluated satisfies the user needs identified in the Guideline.” Outcomes are expected to be assigned ratings, which will inform whether or not the website meets Bronze, Silver, or Gold conformance levels. Stay updated on the latest WCAG 3.0 draft, and learn what to expect as further updates are made.

Current WCAG Guidelines, Explained

POUR Principles

WCAG versions 2.0 and later follow four essential principles of accessibility: perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust. These are also referred to as the POUR Principles.

• Perceivable: Information and user interface components must be presentable to users in ways they can perceive.
• Operable: User interface components and navigation must be operable.
• Understandable: Information and the operation of user interface must be understandable.
• Robust: Content must be robust enough that it can be interpreted reliably by a wide variety of user agents, including assistive technologies.

Success Criteria

Under each guideline, success criteria are provided to allow WCAG to be used where requirements and conformance testing are needed. Success criteria have associated levels of conformance (A, AA, or AAA) to help you understand the most critical web accessibility needs. Learn more about Success Criteria conformance for WCAG.

For each guideline and success criteria, WCAG additionally contains techniques for meeting them. Sufficient techniques are considered to be reliable ways to meet success criteria. Advisory techniques are suggested ways to meet success criteria. Advisory techniques may not be sufficient to meet the full requirements of a given success criteria, but can often be helpful to some users who would not be able to access web content otherwise. Learn more about Techniques for WCAG Success Criteria.

Conformance Levels

Each guideline under WCAG 2.0 and beyond has a level of conformance assigned to each success criteria associated with it – Level A, AA, or AAA:

• Level A: The highest priority and usually easiest to achieve.
• Level AA: More comprehensive and often cited as the standard to meet.
• Level AAA: The strictest, most comprehensive accessible design standard, and therefore, the least common level to meet.

As you incorporate WCAG guidelines into your website’s design, use our free checklist to ensure compliance with the necessary success criteria and conformance levels you’re aiming to meet.

WCAG Video Accessibility Guidelines

Video accessibility guidelines are the same in both WCAG versions 2.0 and 2.1.

• Level A: (1.2.2) Captions are provided for all prerecorded audio content in synchronized media, except when the media is a media alternative for text and is clearly labeled as such. (1.2.3) An alternative for time-based media or audio description of the prerecorded video content is provided for synchronized media, except when the media is a media alternative for text and is clearly labeled as such.
• Level AA: In addition to Level A compliance: (1.2.4) Captions are provided for all live audio content in synchronized media. (1.2.5) Audio description is provided for all prerecorded video content in synchronized media.
• Level AAA: In addition to Level A and AA compliance: (1.2.6) Sign language interpretation is provided for all prerecorded audio content in synchronized media. (1.2.7) Where pauses in foreground audio are insufficient to allow audio descriptions to convey the sense of the video, extended audio description is provided for all prerecorded video content in synchronized media.

WCAG’s video accessibility guidelines are among the easiest to implement for a compliant and inclusive web experience. Discover everything you need to know about WCAG in the context of video accessibility.

How WCAG is modernizing the web

WCAG & the Law

In the United States, WCAG 2.0 AA or WCAG 2.1 AA is often referenced in legislative updates and documents like “Dear Colleague” letters. These legal callouts have set a precedent in many ADA-based cases, establishing WCAG as the standard for organizations to follow, as it provides the most comprehensive web accessibility guidelines available today.

United States

ADA

WCAG has been increasingly referenced in ADA-based lawsuits and settlements over the past decade. While it is not directly part of ADA legislation yet, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) often points to WCAG guidelines as an example of what standards organizations need to meet for optimal captioning and audio description compliance. 

The DOJ recently announced its intent to strengthen web and mobile accessibility under Title II of the ADA. Details of the proposed rule were made available on August 3, 2023. Read the full Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) or review the ADA’s Fact Sheet on the NPRM.

The NPRM references WCAG 2.1 Level AA as the technical standard state and local governments would need to follow, but it is important to remember that this proposed rule is just that… for now. The DOJ is soliciting feedback about the proposal through October 3, 2023, and encourages folks to submit their thoughts via regulations.gov or directly mailing comments to the DOJ.

Section 508

Enacted in 1973, the Rehabilitation Act originally addressed disability discrimination for federal entities or organizations receiving federal funding. Two amendments, Sections 504 and 508, broadened the act’s application to online video content.

Section 508 mandates accessibility for electronic media or IT in federal programs or services. While this section doesn’t explicitly extend beyond federal agencies, many states passed laws known as “little 508 laws” that extend the section’s reach to organizations that receive federal funding.

Section 508 requires compliance with WCAG 2.0 Level A and Level AA. Get a detailed overview and analysis of Section 508 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.

Canada

AODA

The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, otherwise known as the AODA, is an accessibility law based in Ontario, Canada, and it regulates standards across government, public, and private sectors. It was enacted in 2005 to create a barrier-free Ontario by 2025.

Under the AODA, all large private and non-profit organizations with 50 or more employees and all public sector organizations are required to make their websites accessible. 

The AODA mandates that web content and online video must conform to WCAG 2.0 AA success criteria with two exceptions: criteria 1.2.4 (live captions) and criteria 1.2.5 (audio descriptions). 

Learn more about how the AODA impacts web accessibility.

Worldwide

Around the world, a number of countries have adopted some form of WCAG in their respective accessibility laws. Some, such as Canada and Israel, require conformance with WCAG 2.0 and beyond. Others, like Japan, do not require WCAG, but reference it in legislation or have implemented similar/equivalent guidelines.

Discover how WCAG is being implemented worldwide.

Why You Should Implement WCAG Guidelines

WCAG was created to make the digital world more accessible to all. With over 1 billion people in the world with some form of a recognized disability, it’s imperative for organizations to prioritize accessible digital experiences.

By implementing WCAG 2.0, 2.1, or 2.2 Level AA-compliant website features, businesses, public entities, and individuals alike can ensure: 

• Accessibility is never an afterthought
• Equal access is provided to all
• Legal risks are minimized
• Market reach expands to billions of users

Committing to web accessibility can help your digital presence thrive. It is not only a social responsibility, but a strategic decision that allows everyone to succeed in the digital age. 

This blog post is written for educational and general information purposes only, and does not constitute specific legal advice. This blog should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.

About the author

3Play Media

The post Understanding WCAG Guidelines appeared first on 3Play Media.

Blog

---

• Audio Description

How to Make Your Captions and Audio Descriptions WCAG-Compliant

3Play Media

•

July 27, 2023

A Practical Guide to WCAG Video Accessibility Requirements [Free eBook] 

With digital accessibility lawsuits on the rise, compliance with Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2 is crucial for any organization with a web presence.

While there are many aspects to WCAG, captions and audio descriptions are among the easiest accessibility requirements to implement for a WCAG-compliant, inclusive, and user-friendly video experience.

But what exactly constitutes a WCAG-compliant video?

In this blog, we’ll provide an overview of the current WCAG standards for captions and audio descriptions, what makes them WCAG-compliant, the major lawsuits and settlements referencing these standards, and the direction WCAG compliance could take going forward.

The Standard: WCAG 2.0 Level AA

If you hear the term “WCAG compliant,” there’s a good chance it’s referring to WCAG 2.0 Level AA. That’s because, for years, WCAG 2.0 Level AA has been considered the primary standard for web accessibility. 

WCAG 2.0 Level AA is also the most commonly referenced standard in accessibility laws and policies around the globe and in the U.S. — including Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act.

To achieve WCAG 2.0 Level AA conformance, Level A standards must also be met. Below are captioning and audio description requirements for Levels A, AA, and AAA:

• Level A: (1.2.2) Captions are provided for all prerecorded audio content in synchronized media, except when the media is a media alternative for text and is clearly labeled as such. (1.2.3) An alternative for time-based media or audio description of the prerecorded video content is provided for synchronized media, except when the media is a media alternative for text and is clearly labeled as such.
• Level AA: In addition to Level A compliance: (1.2.4) Captions are provided for all live audio content in synchronized media. (1.2.5) Audio description is provided for all prerecorded video content in synchronized media.
• Level AAA: In addition to Level A and AA compliance: (1.2.6) Sign language interpretation is provided for all prerecorded audio content in synchronized media. (1.2.7) Where pauses in foreground audio are insufficient to allow audio descriptions to convey the sense of the video, extended audio description is provided for all prerecorded video content in synchronized media.

If you are trying to meet WCAG 2.0 Level AA standards, captions must be provided for both recorded and live video or audio content. To meet Level AA audio description requirements, audio descriptions must be “provided for all prerecorded video content in synchronized media.”

Want to go above and beyond standard WCAG 2.0 compliance? In addition to all of the A and AA requirements, sign language interpretation is needed for all recorded video or audio content. Extended audio descriptions are also required for videos with insufficient space for standard audio descriptions. That being said, the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) notes: “It is not recommended that Level AAA conformance be required as a general policy for entire sites because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA Success Criteria for some content.”

What makes captions or descriptions WCAG-compliant?

W3C, the group that authored WCAG, does not have exact compliance metrics for measuring the quality of captions and descriptions. This can make it tricky to know exactly what being WCAG-compliant means when it comes to video accessibility.

For example, an organization may be searching for particular metrics that dictate captions must be X percent accurate, or that descriptions must be X long or contain X amount of detail. But these metrics do not exist for WCAG at this time. 

Instead, WCAG takes a broader approach to accessibility by requiring all web content to obey each of the POUR principles:

• Perceivable: Information and user interface components must be presentable to users in ways they can perceive.
• Operable: User interface components and navigation must be operable.
• Understandable: Information and the operation of user interface must be understandable.
• Robust: Content must be robust enough that it can be interpreted reliably by a wide variety of user agents, including assistive technologies.

WCAG was designed around these four principles of accessibility to ensure that web content can be used by anyone.

How to achieve WCAG-compliant captions and audio descriptions

Fortunately, organizations have a global pool of resources and quality standards to pull from to ensure high-quality, WCAG-compliant captioning and audio description services.

General industry and compliance standards have been developed over time by accessibility experts and industry leaders, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) quality standards, the 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act (CVAA), and the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA). 

Captioning

3Play Media follows captioning best practices using information from the Described and Captioned Media Program’s (DCMP) Captioning Key, the FCC’s captioning quality standards for video programming, the expertise of tenured live and recorded captioners, and more.

Audio Description

3Play Media follows audio description best practices that draw from the DCMP Description Key, the American Council for the Blind’s (ACB) Audio Description Project (ADP), and the expertise of our tenured describers and voice actors.

Do your web videos comply with WCAG 2.1?

Legal Settlements Referencing WCAG

WCAG has been increasingly referenced in ADA-based lawsuits and settlements over the past decade. While it is not directly part of ADA legislation yet, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) often points to WCAG guidelines as an example of what standards organizations need to meet for optimal captioning and audio description compliance. 

The Biden-Harris administration has additionally signaled their alignment with WCAG guidelines, specifically calling out WCAG 2.1 Level AA compliance in the White House’s web accessibility statement.

edX

In 2015, edX, the online learning platform co-owned by Harvard and MIT, settled a complaint from the DOJ about accessibility issues on the edX website including failure to provide accurate and comprehensive captioning across video content in the platform’s courses.

edX agreed to make their website fully accessible, develop a web accessibility policy, and urge course providers to make web content accessible before publishing to edX. In this case, WCAG 2.0 Level AA was referenced as the standard for web accessibility practices including captioning.

Netflix

Netflix was sued by the ACB for not providing audio description on their streaming movies and shows. Netflix settled with ACB in 2016. This settlement agreement also adopted the WCAG 2.0 Level AA as the accessibility standard for audio description which Netflix would need to meet in remediating their video content. In the years since, Netflix has become one of the most dominant providers of streaming audio description on the web.

UC Berkeley

In December 2022, UC Berkeley and the DOJ entered into an agreement after an eight-year investigation into the accessibility of UC Berkeley’s online content. The Consent Decree requires UC Berkeley to make all online content accessible. 

While the initial investigation mainly applied to the university’s MOOC, UC BerkeleyX, the Consent Decree broadened the scope of affected online content to additionally include all publicly accessible websites on berkeley.edu and subdomains, as well as content published by UC Berkeley on third-party platforms like YouTube, Spotify, or Apple Podcasts. The settlement requires UC Berkeley to work towards making all digital media content conform to WCAG 2.0 Level AA standards.

The Future of WCAG Compliance

Further web and streaming-focused accessibility guidelines are expected in the near future, with the DOJ recently announcing its intent to strengthen web and mobile accessibility under Title II of the ADA:

Details of the proposed rule were made available on August 3, 2023. Read the full Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) or review the ADA’s Fact Sheet on the NPRM.

Based on past lawsuits and aforementioned settlements, most experts anticipated that U.S. guidelines would draw from WCAG 2.0 or 2.1 Level AA standards, and the NPRM does in fact reference WCAG 2.1 Level AA as the technical standard state and local governments would need to follow. 

It is important to remember that this proposed rule is just that… for now. The DOJ is soliciting feedback about the proposal through October 3, 2023, and encourages folks to submit their thoughts via regulations.gov or directly mailing comments to the DOJ.

This blog was originally published Patrick Loftus on April 24, 2018, as “How to Produce WCAG-Compliant Video Captions and Audio Descriptions” and has since been updated for comprehensiveness, clarity, and accuracy.

This blog post is written for educational and general information purposes only, and does not constitute specific legal advice. This blog should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.

About the author

3Play Media

The post How to Make Your Captions and Audio Descriptions WCAG-Compliant appeared first on 3Play Media.

Blog

---

• Legislation & Compliance

What Does the Latest DOE & DOJ Dear Colleague Letter Mean for Online Accessibility in Higher Education?

3Play Media

•

June 8, 2023

How the ADA Impacts Online Video Accessibility [Free eBook]

In a “Dear Colleague” letter released on May 19, 2023, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and Department of Education (DOE) highlight the ongoing efforts to address barriers that prevent people with disabilities from fully participating in online services, programs, and activities offered by colleges, universities, and other postsecondary institutions. 

The letter is particularly notable for being published jointly by both the DOE and DOJ, confirming the U.S. government’s alignment of priorities around online accessibility. In the letter, they reaffirm the responsibility of ensuring online accessibility and complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.

This joint DOE and DOJ “Dear Colleague” letter provides one of the most direct and comprehensive assessments to date on how the ADA and Section 504 apply to online content produced by higher education institutions.

But what does the latest “Dear Colleague” letter really mean for colleges and universities?

In this blog, we’ll explore the key takeaways from the joint DOE and DOJ “Dear Colleague” letter, where UC Berkeley’s Consent Decree with the DOJ fits in, and how higher education institutions may be impacted.

The May 2023 DOJ/DOE Dear Colleague Letter

In May 2023, the DOJ and DOE published a “Dear Colleague” letter on the topic of online accessibility at higher education institutions. The letter was broken down into four parts and covers:

• Barriers faced by people with disabilities when it comes to participation in online learning services, programs, and activities.
• How online accessibility is covered under the ADA and Section 504
• How the DOJ and DOE have addressed and enforced compliance to ensure online accessibility in higher education
• Guidance and resources for online accessibility

The decision by the DOJ and DOE to publish the “Dear Colleague” letter together sends a powerful message to the higher education industry at large: online accessibility must be prioritized for services, programs, and activities used by both students and the general public.

Let’s take a closer look at some of the key takeaways from the letter.

The DOJ and DOE Stress the Importance of Accessible Online Education

The DOJ and DOE note that in recent years, colleges, universities, and postsecondary institutions have increasingly relied on websites and third-party web platforms to provide services, programs, and activities for both students and the general public. 

However, the DOJ and DOE maintain that much of the online content produced by higher education remains inaccessible to disabled individuals who may use captions, screen readers, voice recognition software, and more.

The letter goes on to identify examples of specific digital content types and platforms that are used to distribute educational services, programs, and activities: 

• Learning platforms such as edX, Coursera, and Kadenze
• Podcasts and videos
• Social media and third-party media platforms such as YouTube, Spotify, and Apple Podcasts
• Other websites and platforms where higher education content (including lectures, sporting events, graduation ceremonies, and more) is distributed

The DOJ and DOE state that both students and the general public have a right to accessible content posted online by universities, in accordance with the ADA and Section 504:

What Does the ADA and Section 504 Say About Online Accessibility at Higher Education Institutions?

The DOJ and DOE reference two Federal U.S. laws, the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, throughout the latest “Dear Colleague” Letter. These laws provide the legal framework for how the government entities approach online accessibility.

The ADA and Section 504 require higher education institutions, both public and private, to provide equal opportunities for people with disabilities in all operations, including online. And by calling each of these regulations out, the DOJ and DOE are stating in no uncertain terms that the ADA and Section 504 apply to online content produced by higher education institutions.

The ADA

Title II of the ADA prohibits public institutions from denying qualified individuals with disabilities the opportunity to participate in or benefit from services, including online-based programming.

Title III of the ADA extends this protection for disabled individuals to private institutions.

The DOJ and DOE specify that public and private institutions “must take appropriate steps to ensure that communications with individuals with disabilities are as effective as communications with others.” This means that the DOJ and DOE expect higher education institutions to provide auxiliary aids and services, such as interpreters, captioning, accessible technology, and more.

Section 504

Section 504 requires that any institution receiving federal financial assistance provide appropriate auxiliary aids and services to ensure equal access for students with disabilities.

In the letter, the DOJ and DOE stress that because most public and private colleges, universities, and other postsecondary institutions receive financial assistance from the Department of Education, “all of their operations, including all their online programs and activities, are covered by Section 504.”

Dive into the ADA’s impact on online accessibility

Higher Ed Will Be Held Accountable for Inaccessible Content

The joint DOE and DOJ “Dear Colleague” letter dedicates its second half to discussing enforcement actions and guidance for navigating the creation of accessible online content. It also provides a review of recent compliance efforts and enforcement initiatives around digital and online accessibility, with a particular focus on the 2022 Consent Decree between UC Berkeley and the DOJ.

Both the DOE and DOJ share responsibility when it comes to enforcing compliance and addressing inaccessible higher education content. In addition to Berkeley’s Consent Decree, the letter notes that the DOE’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) has “resolved and monitored more than 1,000 cases in recent years related to digital access that were triggered by complaints of discrimination by members of the public.”

The letter adds that the OCR additionally launched 100 compliance reviews around digital accessibility in May of 2022, The reviews included a look at both public- and student-facing websites as well as educational platforms maintained by higher education institutions. In less than a year, the DOJ and DOE note that OCR has resolved over 50 of the compliance reviews.

What the Consent Decree Between UC Berkeley and DOJ Means for Higher Ed and Accessible Online Content

The DOJ conducted an eight-year investigation into the accessibility of the University of California at Berkeley’s (UC Berkeley) online content following a 2014 complaint submitted by the National Association of the Deaf (NAD). The original complaint alleged that many of the school’s online courses, lectures, and other content posted on UC Berkeley’s MOOC, UC BerkeleyX, were inaccessible to people who are D/deaf or hard of hearing due to a lack of captions.

In December 2022, a Consent Decree between UC Berkeley and the DOJ was approved. The Consent Decree requires UC Berkeley to make all online content accessible. While the initial investigation mainly applied to UC BerkeleyX, the Consent Decree broadened the scope of affected online content to additionally include all publicly accessible websites on berkeley.edu and subdomains, as well as content published by UC Berkeley on third-party platforms like YouTube, Spotify, or Apple Podcasts.

The Consent Decree also requires UC Berkeley to “revise its policies, train relevant personnel, designate a web accessibility coordinator, conduct accessibility testing of its online content, and hire an independent auditor to evaluate the accessibility of its content.”

The “Dear Colleague” letter’s focus on the UC Berkeley’s Consent Decree cements the DOE’s and DOJ’s shared initiative of making all higher education online content accessible. Furthermore, it offers a glimpse into where the DOJ and DOE may be heading when it comes to holding educational institutions accountable for inaccessible content.

Read the full DOJ and UC Berkeley Consent Decree.

How Higher Ed Institutions Should Proceed

With the DOE’s and DOJ’s holistic focus on digital accessibility in higher education and emphasis on compliance, many content producers and stakeholders at colleges, universities, and other postsecondary institutions may be wondering how to proceed. Fortunately, there are some easy ways to work towards optimal accessibility and stay ahead of the curve:

Learn from UC Berkeley

UC Berkeley’s Consent Decree with the DOJ set a new precedent for online accessibility in higher education. We have a helpful write-up of the takeaways and implications aimed at helping you determine next steps for your institution’s accessibility plan.

Caption Everything & Caption Well

The “Dear Colleague” letter references captioning multiple times throughout. It also references the idea of “meaningful video captions,” which implies that caption quality and accuracy may become a higher priority for the DOJ and DOE when reviewing compliance issues. This aspect is expanded upon in the UC Berkeley Consent Decree, when UC Berkeley’s YouTube channel was deemed inaccessible due to sole reliance on YouTube’s auto-generated captions without remediation.

Accessibility is More Than Video Captions

The letter touches on a broad range of accessibility issues and services that can remediate them. While captions remain a huge focus, the DOJ and DOE make it clear that other “auxiliary aids and services” are necessary for accessibility compliance. This includes screen reader compatibility, audio description, WCAG 2.0 compliance, podcast transcription, and more.

The joint DOE & DOJ “Dear Colleague” letter published in May 2023 provides some of the strongest guidance yet for web accessibility in higher education, but many of the themes are ones that have been hinted at in previous guidances and Consent Decrees over the past several years. 

The letter itself is a critical reminder about the necessity of online accessibility, but also functions as a strong statement to those in higher education that the DOJ and DOE expect all online content to be accessible going forward.

Read the full Dear Colleague Letter on Online Accessibility at Postsecondary Institutions.

This blog post is written for educational and general information purposes only, and does not constitute specific legal advice. This blog should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney.

About the author

3Play Media

The post What Does the Latest DOE & DOJ Dear Colleague Letter Mean for Online Accessibility in Higher Education? appeared first on 3Play Media.

Blog

---

• Accessibility

Web Captions Differ from 608 and 708 Broadcast Captions: Here’s Why

3Play Media

•

December 28, 2022

The Complete Guide to Caption Encoders [Free eBook]

The continued focus on streaming video and online media platforms has big implications for media accessibility services like closed captions and subtitles when it comes to how they work with web platforms. Nielsen reported in August 2022 that video streaming surpassed both traditional broadcast and cable television viewing consumption in July 2022. This is a new milestone for video delivered via IP. And because all broadcast television closed captions should meet CEA-608 or CTA-708 standards, where does that leave web-based platforms and videos? 

Many standalone web videos align with FCC regulations and utilize traditional 608 and 708 formatting standards. However, the revolution and continuous development of web closed captioning for various conferencing platforms or social media applications has resulted in formats that provide accessibility services for all viewers, but are supported by different caption application delivery methods. This has allowed for greater versatility, but has also created some inconsistencies between platforms and web captions. Let’s take a closer look at why.

What is a web-based video platform?

Web-based video platforms and players are technologies that enable users and organizations to host and publish videos directly on the web. They deliver content through the internet, which affects how closed captions must be added to video content. Captioning and accessibility standards for web video content varies, but a few major guidelines and recommendations include:

• Federal Communication Commission (FCC) requirements for the captioning of online video
• 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act (CVAA)
• Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
• Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0

Streaming services and OTT platforms often straddle the line between web platforms and broadcast television captioning. These kind of platforms may utilize a bit of both elements of web and traditional broadcast, though much is turning over to content delivery via IP, even when displayed on a television.

What are 608 and 708 broadcast captioning standards?

CEA-608 and CTA-708 are the primary broadcast television standards for the encryption and decryption of closed captioning data based on FCC guidelines. 608 closed captions are the standard for analog television transmissions; 708 closed captions are the standard for digital television transmissions. Despite being developed for analog television, 608 captions are still widely used alongside 708 captions due to their compatibility with digital televisions.

Web caption delivery

A major difference between captions going to web-based platforms and captions going to broadcast television is the delivery method. Broadcast television will always be transmitting captions via Line 21 or MPEG user data, depending on whether it follows 608 or 708 standards. Web-based platforms don’t necessarily follow the same data transmission methods as traditional broadcast television has.

Some web-based platforms may require encoder transmission (which does pair videos to 608/708-compliant Line 21 captioning data). Other web-based platforms may need an encoding alternative that does not utilize Line 21 data delivery methods. Some may simply utilize sidecar caption files instead of any kind of encoding workflow. 

Virtual Encoders

Virtual encoders function similarly to physical encoders, but don’t require a physical box and connection. These encoders are instead hosted via cloud, requiring clients to connect their stream digitally. Virtual encoders add captioning data and reroute the video stream to a desired platform like YouTube, Facebook, or Vimeo.

Encoding Alternatives

As broadcast streaming has evolved and technology has developed, there is less reason to use physical encoding equipment for digital streaming. Captions can sometimes be included as a separate entity on applications that have built caption functionality directly into their players, such as Zoom and YouTube.

Sidecar Caption Files

Sidecar caption files, such as an SRT or WEBVTT, are a commonly used timed text captioning file format. In television broadcasts, a sidecar file is usually embedded into the signal and allows for viewers to toggle captions on or off. In web videos, sidecar files are uploaded alongside a video. Sidecar files can often be manually edited in a text editor and may support caption styling elements such as placement and italics, but the display of these elements is dependent upon whether or not the player can decode them.

Integrations

Not all web platforms support integrations with captioning vendors, but a growing number of them do! At 3Play Media, we work with 30+ leading web platforms, players, and lecture capture systems to simplify captioning workflows for their users.

Integrations allow for push-button simplicity, letting you automate a captioning workflow without the hassle of additional logins and uploads. Integrations and customizable APIs help save time and assist in centralizing the captioning process for web videos.

How to tell if you need a caption encoder

How web captions have impacted media accessibility

The popular use of captions and subtitles have inspired hilarious internet memes. Source: r/memes on Reddit.

There is no question that the explosion of web videos over the past decade have driven innovation and visibility for media accessibility services like closed captions. Specifically, the impact on captions has made for an interesting trajectory that continues to evolve alongside technology.

Awareness

Web platforms and video players have helped in raising the awareness of the need for captions and subtitles. They’ve also increased their popularity to the point that as many as 80% of viewers with captions or subtitles turned on are using them for reasons other than hearing loss. Captions are more popular than ever, and much of it is thanks to the widespread availability of the service on web platforms, players, social media, and streaming video.

Versatility

Captions are no longer restricted to a one-size-fits-all broadcast television format; they are much more fluid and flexible when it comes to delivery to platforms, be it virtual encoding, built-in functionality, or sidecar files along for the ride with the viewer. This has created a space for innovative, versatile video captioning solutions and allowed technology to flourish as we begin to navigate beyond the pandemic.

Inconsistency

While web platforms have done a great job of making captions more easily available to viewers across the globe, the boom in the digital development of such platforms and players has come at the cost of consistency. Web captions are not the same everywhere you view them; their display, style, capabilities, and even technical specs tend to be a little different across players/platforms due to varying degrees of limitations and developments between them.

What to consider when ordering captions for web platforms

You may not technically be meeting 608 or 708 broadcast television standards when you add captions via a web-based platform due to the differences in caption application delivery methods; don’t panic–this is fine! Television broadcasts have differing requirements from web video content; and as the line continues to blur between the two–and will probably continue to do so–you may still be looking to meet the same standards. If this is the case, make sure that your captioning vendor creates captions that align with the formatting, stylistic, and accuracy requirements as set forth by the FCC, and discuss your options with experienced accessibility professionals.

Keep in mind that even if the captions are created to these standards, there are still limitations on certain platforms when it comes to aspects such as caption placement and italics. Some sidecar files can support them, but it’s dependent on whether the platform itself can support the additional formatting codes in the sidecar files. This means that even if a captioner styles a sidecar file to match television formatting, it’s up to the player or platform to correctly display them. Some web players are simply not at the point of being able to do this yet.

Concerned about compliance issues? FCC regulations and 608/708 closed captioning generally applies to programming that is broadcast on television (or was previously broadcast on television if displayed via the web.) Learn more about whether your content falls under these parameters.

This blog post is written for educational and general information purposes only, and does not constitute specific legal advice. This blog should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.

About the author

3Play Media

The post Web Captions Differ from 608 and 708 Broadcast Captions: Here’s Why appeared first on 3Play Media.

Blog

---

• Accessibility

eLearning Accessibility Laws

3Play Media

•

December 21, 2022

Guide to Digital and Communication Accessibility in Higher Education [Free webinar]

The two major disability rights laws in the United States — the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act — were passed long before the proliferation of the internet as we know it today.

However, these laws were written broadly with the intention that they would keep pace with evolving technology and our continued reliance on it.

In the world of education, where classrooms are becoming increasingly digital, these laws are meant to protect the rights of learners with disabilities that affect computer use.

This means that online learning content, like educational videos one might find in a traditional college course or a massive open online course (MOOC), must include accessibility features for students with disabilities. This blog will cover legal specifications that ensure accessible eLearning.

Accessible eLearning under the ADA 

Title II

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a civil right statute created to limit discriminatory practices towards individuals with disabilities. Both public and private entities are affected by the ADA. 

Title II of the ADA prohibits discrimination by all public entities at the federal, state, and local level. This includes public universities and any publicly available online learning materials. For example, eLearning video content must feature closed captions, audio description, and other accessibility best practices.

In December of 2022, a consent decree between the Department of Justice (DOJ) and UC Berkeley concerning the web accessibility of UC Berkeley’s online content was approved. The DOJ found that UC Berkeley was in violation of Title II of the ADA due to its inaccessible free online material. 

Under the agreement, UC Berkeley must comply with WCAG 2.0 Level AA. The consent decree between the DOJ and UC Berkeley provides a framework for what’s expected under Title II of the ADA for online educational content.

Title III

Title III of the ADA requires places of public accommodation, which includes private entities and places of education, to be accessible. Under Title III, no individual may be discriminated against on the basis of disability with regards to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, or accommodations of any “place of public accommodation” by any person who owns, leases (or leases to), or operates a place of public accommodation.

Numerous court cases involving the ADA and inaccessible websites have confirmed that websites are considered places of public accommodation. Cases like NAD v. MIT and NAD v. Harvard were triggered by the universities’ inaccurate auto captioning on their free online programming and platforms, such as YouTube, iTunesU, Harvard@Home, and MIT OpenCourseWare. Both MIT and Harvard eventually reached settlements that strengthened digital accessibility policies and required accurate captions.

The number of ADA-based lawsuits continues to increase. There were nearly 100 new lawsuits per week in the first half of 2022 alone. This number compares to 70 lawsuits per week in 2021.

To avoid litigation, any public-facing websites that act as an interface for taking courses, such as Coursera or Future Learn, should make their websites and multimedia content fully accessible.

Guide to Digital and Communication Accessibility in Higher Education: watch the webinar

Accessible eLearning under Section 504 

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is considered to be the first statute to declare civil rights for individuals with disabilities. This section of the Act declares that:

“No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States […] shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance or any program or activity conducted by any Executive agency or by the United States Postal Service.”

This law applies to any program or entity, including organizations and public or private universities, that receive federal funding. So, if your organization or institution receives any kind of federal funding (such as student aid or research grants) it could be considered a federally funded program and must ensure it does not exclude anyone with a disability from any program or activity, including participation in online learning activities.

The Rehabilitation Act and the ADA exist separately, but the ADA is generally perceived as an expansion of Section 504 that protects a broader range of individuals with disabilities. The above-mentioned lawsuits against Harvard and MIT alleged violations of Section 504 in addition to the ADA.

Accessible eLearning under Section 508

Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act requires that the electronic communications and information technologies, such as websites, email, or web documents of federal programs be accessible and operable in a variety of ways. 

Section 508 states that, “When developing, procuring, maintaining, or using electronic and information technology, each Federal department or agency […] shall ensure, unless an undue burden would be imposed on the department or agency, that the electronic and information technology allows, regardless of the type of medium of the technology, individuals with disabilities […] to have access to and use of information and data that is comparable to the access of [those] who are not individuals with disabilities.”

The World Wide Web Consortium’s collection of Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) is quickly becoming the international standard for web accessibility. The Section 508 Refresh directly references WCAG 2.0, thereby broadening its coverage to all content covered under Section 508. The refresh covers more documents, more technology, and more people, as WCAG specifies levels of compliance – Level A, Level AA, and Level AAA – in addition to testable provisions.

This law only applies to federal programs. However, many US States and organizations have laws (known as “mini 508s”) that reference Section 508. So, if any institutions or organizations reside in one of those states or have organizational policies that reference Section 508, any MOOCs or other online learning content must be fully accessible or have auxiliary aids for people with sensory disabilities.

While it is up to some debate as to whether federally funded programs must comply with Section 508, there are certain stipulations that often require these programs to provide accessible technology and web content. For example, the Assistive Technology Act will not provide funding to states unless they guarantee that all programs – including colleges and universities – will comply with Section 508. 

With the boom in eLearning and remote education tools since the COVID-19 pandemic, the importance of accessible digital learning experiences continues to grow. Ensuring that your MOOC or educational video content is accessible will help you grow your student base, create an equitable learning experience, and avoid legal consequences.

About the author

3Play Media

The post eLearning Accessibility Laws appeared first on 3Play Media.

Blog

---

• Legislation & Compliance

Takeaways from UC Berkeley’s Consent Decree with the DOJ

3Play Media

•

December 15, 2022

How the ADA Impacts Online Video Accessibility [Free eBook]

After an eight-year investigation into the accessibility of UC Berkeley’s online content, the university and the Department of Justice (DOJ) finally came to an agreement: UC Berkeley will ensure its free online content is accessible to learners with a range of disabilities. A consent decree was approved on December 2, 2022, effective immediately. 

While the DOJ’s investigation began with a complaint about a lack of closed captions, it expanded to address media and web accessibility for all learners. Read on to learn more about the background of the investigation and the far-reaching impact of the consent decree.

Catch Up Quick

The DOJ agreement is the outcome of a 2014 complaint submitted by the National Association of the Deaf (NAD) alleging that many of the school’s online courses, lectures, and other content were inaccessible to people who are D/deaf or hard of hearing due to a lack of closed captions. At the time, massive open online courses (MOOCs) were gaining in popularity at universities across the country; however, many universities were not considering accessibility in their online content.

The NAD argued that UC Berkeley violated Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability by public entities. The government determined that the complaint was valid and notified UC Berkeley that it needed to address and eliminate its ADA violations. 

In response to the government’s Letter of Findings on August 30, 2016, UC Berkeley disagreed with the verdict and maintained that the school had “invested substantially in improving the accessibility of its online content.” Rather than complying with the accessibility order, UC Berkeley began removing more than 20,000 video and audio lectures from public view in 2017. By 2021, the DOJ said that UC Berkeley had still not addressed many of its accessibility barriers.

UC Berkeley’s poor web accessibility may surprise those who are aware of its revolutionary history. The Rolling Quads, a community of quadriplegic students in the 1960s, transformed UC Berkeley into one of the most physically accessible college campuses in the country at the time. The Rolling Quads also established the independent living movement, which expanded into a national effort that included the Section 504 sit-in and resulted in improved rights for the American disability community. 

However, as many other lawsuits have shown, compliance with the ADA or other disability rights laws for physical structures does not prevent an organization from being sued for an inaccessible digital presence.

Multiple other universities have been sued under remarkably similar circumstances for inaccessible online content. Cases such as NAD v. MIT and NAD v. Harvard were triggered by the universities’ inaccurate auto captioning on their free online programming and platforms, such as YouTube, iTunesU, Harvard@Home, and MIT OpenCourseWare. MIT and Harvard eventually reached settlements with the NAD that strengthened digital accessibility policies and required accurate captions.

The Consent Decree

What began as an investigation into closed captions for UC Berkeley’s online content now has a much wider scope, going beyond captions and addressing accessibility measures that account for people with all types of disabilities. 

While the initial investigation was only concerned with UC Berkeley’s MOOC, the resulting consent decree expands beyond UC BerkeleyX to all other entities at the university. The consent decree impacts both backlog and new content, establishing different timelines for both categories of content.

The DOJ agreement applies to UC Berkeley-controlled online content that falls into these three categories:

• Publicly accessible websites on berkeley.edu and subdomains
• UC Berkeley’s MOOC, UC BerkeleyX 
• Content published by UC Berkeley on third-party platforms such as YouTube, Spotify, or Apple Podcasts

Impact on Backlog Content

Backlog content is content published before the consent decree went into effect. It includes all of the content that UC Berkeley refused to caption and describe after the initial investigation and all existing content published by other entities at UC Berkeley. 

Within 9 months of the consent decree’s approval (by September 2023), all of UC BerkeleyX’s content, including audio and video, must conform to WCAG 2.0 Level AA. 

To comply with WCAG 2.0 Level AA and ensure equal access for individuals with a range of disabilities, UC Berkeley must implement closed captions, audio description, alternative text, and other accessibility best practices. 

Content on UC Berkeley’s website and its subdomains must conform to WCAG 2.0 Level AA within 18 months of approval (by June 2024); however, audio and video content made publicly available on the website prior to court approval must conform within 36 months (by December 2025).

All audio and video content that UC Berkeley published on public podcast platforms prior to December 22, 2022, must also conform to WCAG 2.0 Level AA within 36 months (by December 2025).

Other audio and video content hosted on a third-party platform that was either made publicly available within the 2 years preceding the consent decree’s approval or had at least 750 views as of December 22, 2022, must conform to WCAG 2.0, Level AA within 36 months (by December 2025).

Impact on New Content

New content is any content that has been made publicly available after the Court approved the consent decree in 2022. A university of this size regularly creates and publishes new educational material. Therefore, ensuring that all new content is accessible is also a big undertaking.

Within 9 months of the consent decree’s approval (by September 2023), video and audio content on UC Berkeley’s website and subdomains, as well as third-party platforms, must conform to WCAG 2.0 Level AA. This includes providing closed and live captions, audio description, alternative text, resizable text, and more. 

UC Berkeley will also be required to implement updated accessibility procedures, designate a web accessibility coordinator, conduct annual internal accessibility testing and training to those who handle online content on UC Berkeley’s behalf, provide an effective method of receiving and responding to feedback and requests from users, and hire an external auditor to review the accessibility of its content. 

UC Berkeley must report to the DOJ every 6 months on the state of its compliance during the 42 months the consent decree is in effect.

Learn How the ADA Impacts Online Video Accessibility

Implications for Educational Institutions

1. The consent decree provides a framework for how organizations and universities should approach making backlog and new content accessible.

Through the consent decree, the DOJ has made known its opinion about how organizations should handle web accessibility. The consent decree answers many questions about how to prioritize different types of content, providing clear guidelines on handling backlogs and new content. It additionally offers detailed timelines for each guideline based on specific content and platform type.

By referencing WCAG as the accessibility standard, the DOJ ensures that UC Berkeley in its entirety has clearly defined criteria to meet for captions, alternative text, audio description, and more. The consent decree can help organizations that are implementing media accessibility measures determine how to take action. For organizations trying to prioritize accessibility, this consent decree suggests taking these steps:

• If any part of your org has been a part of litigation, start by making all media associated with that entity fully accessible.
• Next, prioritize new content across all entities and platforms, including third-party platforms.
• Build a work-back plan to achieve WCAG 2.0 level AA compliance across all backlog content, with a target date by which you aim to have the backlog completely accessible.

2. YouTube’s auto captions alone are not accurate enough for accessibility.

UC Berkeley’s YouTube channel, which houses thousands of videos spanning a range of topics, was deemed inaccessible because they either lacked captions or relied solely on YouTube’s auto-generated captions. “Although UC Berkeley can remediate inaccurate or incomplete automatic captioning rendered by YouTube,” said the DOJ, “UC fails to do so.” The consent decree reinforces the importance of accurate captions and the problems that arise when auto captions aren’t remediated.

YouTube’s auto captions are notoriously inaccurate, which makes them inaccessible and detrimental to educational content. While inaccurate captions can prevent a student who is d/Deaf or hard of hearing from comprehending content, they can also impact hearing students: 80% of people who use captions aren’t d/Deaf or hard of hearing. Students use captions to improve learning comprehension and retention and stay engaged with lessons. Students with and without hearing loss rely on accurate captions as they learn material; reading inaccurate information makes learning difficult and sometimes impossible.

3. The DOJ will continue to conduct investigations and push WCAG as the national standard for web accessibility.

The COVID-19 pandemic pushed much of our lives online, including education. Though WCAG and other accessibility standards have been around for years or sometimes decades, their enforcement has increased exponentially in recent years. The pandemic has cemented online learning material as a significant part of the educational landscape and led to increased awareness of accessible online content, with WCAG as the standard.

The Biden administration has also demonstrated a growing focus on web accessibility and contributed to its enforcement. The administration released a statement declaring its dedication to web accessibility:

Our ongoing accessibility effort works towards conforming to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) version 2.1, level AA criteria. These guidelines not only help make web content accessible to users with sensory, cognitive and mobility disabilities, but ultimately to all users, regardless of ability.

While the consent decree only directly impacts UC Berkeley, it sends a message that the DOJ will continue to monitor whether other educational institutions are providing accessible content. The structure of the consent decree gives a sense of how the DOJ might react if it encounters an educational institution that’s publishing inaccessible content and suggests that the DOJ’s future recommendations will include WCAG.

4. Compliance with one accessibility requirement doesn’t protect organizations from other disability rights litigation.

The original investigation into UC Berkeley was concerned with a lack of captions on UC BerkeleyX for people who are d/Deaf or hard of hearing. The agreement expanded to include digital accessibility for people with physical disabilities or who are blind or low vision, in addition to those with hearing loss, at the entire organization of UC Berkeley.

While much of UC Berkeley’s online content is currently inaccessible to folks with a range of disabilities, any organization that captions its content is not protected from, for example, litigation requiring audio description, or vice versa. Accessibility measures must consider the needs of all users, including those with different disabilities.

5. The ADA includes podcast accessibility.

The consent decree specifically mentions that UC Berkeley’s podcasts must conform to WCAG 2.0 Level AA, meaning audio-only content must be transcribed. Litigation around podcast accessibility has been steadily growing, and the consent decree includes podcast transcription under the ADA as required by WCAG 2.0 Level AA. Any other educational institution creating podcasts should take note and ensure episodes are accurately transcribed.

6. The sooner you begin your accessibility journey, the easier and less litigious it will be.

Because UC Berkeley failed to implement accessibility measures before the government got involved, the school has a substantial backlog of inaccessible content. UC Berkeley’s now sizable accessibility project provides a tale of caution to organizations that are prolonging or avoiding accessibility. The failure to add captions also resulted in a significant expansion of the consent decree’s covered entities, encompassing the entirety of UC Berkeley.

If you find yourself in a similar situation, there are resources for you. Certain media accessibility providers, such as 3Play Media, are well suited to handle extensive archives of content. An effective captioning and audio description vendor will help you get up to speed by providing you with a navigable platform, great support, and a high-quality output.

The DOJ’s expansive agreement with UC Berkeley is a big step forward for digital accessibility in higher education. Online learning materials are constantly evolving and growing, and it’s imperative that everyone has equal access. 

This blog post is written for educational and general information purposes only, and does not constitute specific legal advice. This blog should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney.

About the author

3Play Media

The post Takeaways from UC Berkeley’s Consent Decree with the DOJ appeared first on 3Play Media.