Accessibility myths: debunking 29 common misconceptions causing harm online

The field of web accessibility is plagued by myths and misconceptions. In an increasingly digital world, perpetuating these myths isn't just misguided—it's harmful.

I've decided to compile a list of myths I've heard, read, or been told. I knew there were many, but not this many.

Let's dismantle 29 (yes, twenty-nine!) of these dangerous misconceptions about accessibility before they create even more barriers that already exist for millions of users. According to the Journal of Consumer Affairs (Opens in a new window) , online inaccessibility of retail websites are affecting approximately 30 million disabled Americans.

And that's one sector in one country.

1. "Accessibility is only for people with disabilities"

You may think it's primarily for disabled people. But it's fascinating to learn how many accessibility features are actually benefiting a wider range of people.

For example, one part of accessibility includes readability, i.e. making a page easy to read and to consume. Everyone can benefit from that.

2. "Implementing accessibility is costly and time-consuming."

So is website redesign, branding, copywriting, etc. But they're still important, right? But are they more important than accessibility? One is not more important than another. They should be treated with equal level of respect and care.

It's more expensive and time-consuming to implement later than at the beginning or throughout the process. Plus, the benefits of accessibility outweigh the costs by a huge margin. (Opens in a new window)

3. "Screen readers can't handle complex websites"

Well, that's on the owner of said website, not because of the supposed fault of screen readers. More often than not, it also sounds like it has poor user experience that will affect everyone, not just disabled people.

4. "Automated testing tools can catch all accessibility issues"

There are very few areas where automated tools will do all the job without some form of human intervention. Cybersecurity, SEO, email marketing…any that can automate certain tasks for you: they're there to support you, not replace you.

The same applies to accessibility testing tools. When used correctly, they're useful, but it is only a small part of the overall task.

Accessibility is about real people, not just a tool.

5. "Developers are solely responsible for accessibility."

Developers are part of it, but "alone" is incorrect.

You don't need to be technical to make your website technical. Anyone can use the correct heading structures, add captions, create accurate alt texts, etc.

But developers do have their own responsibilities in making websites accessible.

6. "Captions and transcripts are only useful for deaf people"

A separate post on this site outlines the benefits of captions/subtitles for many people.

In fact, I listed 15 benefits of captions and how they contradict the notion that captions are "only useful for deaf people."

7. "Accessibility features are rarely used by most people"

This goes back to the previous idea that everyone can benefit from using video captions.

It's widely discussed that dark mode and text resizing, originally accessibility features, are now universally accepted (though it's still important to let users choose, as it's not suitable for everyone (Opens in a new window) ).

So much so, that it's normal to see them in various products.

8. "Making a website accessible will slow it down"

On the contrary, a well-executed accessibility strategy can make your website faster and provide a better, more seamless user experience.

After all, one aspect of accessibility is to make it fast for those with slow internet or to create a lightweight version that displays only text, allowing screen readers to focus on reading the text.

9. "Accessibility is a one-time fix"

Can you think of one thing online that is a one-off fix? I can't.

I worked in SEO, a constantly changing industry where what worked 20 years ago does not work today.

Things change all the time online, and this also applies to accessibility.

10. "People with disabilities don't use the internet much"

There are two ways to look at this. One is that it's an ignorant thing to say or assume and shows a lack of awareness and knowledge.

Another angle to consider is that disabled people WANT to use the internet but CAN'T because it's not accessible and there are no steps made to make it easier for them.

But every single one of us can do something about that.

11. "Accessibility is only about website design"

It's only part of it. This is why PurpleByte offers to work with designers, developers, product, digital, and compliance experts. The funny thing is that you can add more people to the list.

Because everyone can and should be involved in accessibility throughout an organisation.

12. "Alt text is unnecessary for decorative images"

This is almost correct. Alt text is important, but it should be left blank or written as null to signal to screen readers it's not relevant to the page and doesn't need to be read.

13. "Accessibility is just about adding alt text to images."

Again, alt text is a critical feature and shouldn't be ignored. However, it's far from the only consideration. Accessibility covers a wide range of practices that make digital content usable for people across a range of disabilities.

The (not so) funny thing is that alt text is actually among the easiest things everyone can add. But it's still not used enough. When it is used, it's used incorrectly or abused, like one recent Twitter/X meme where brands and individuals used alt text as a joke (Opens in a new window) .

14. "Accessibility and SEO are completely separate concerns."

Yes, on the face of it, they require separate skillsets and expertise. However, web accessibility and SEO correlate and work very closely together; by improving one, you will improve the other.

For example, using the correct heading structure (one H1, then H2, H3, H4) will create the correct page structure, enhance on-page SEO, and make it easier for screen readers to navigate.

Win-win.

15. "Accessibility and usability are the same thing"

Like the SEO angle above, there is an assumption that accessibility and usability are the same thing. Since the former is normally ignored, it is assumed that if usability is already undertaken in a project, that will automatically mean accessibility is being taken care of by default.

More often than not, UX/UI doesn't cover accessibility. You can have a fantastic user experience but still exclude people at the same time, sometimes unknowingly.

16. "Accessibility is only for blind people."

That's like saying the only disability existing in society is blindness or visual impairment.

Next!

17. "Accessibility is only about making things work for screen readers."

This is very similar to above, and we already know that's not true.

Next again!

18. "Accessibility limits design creativity and makes websites look boring."

Accessibility doesn't limit creativity; it sparks innovation. It challenges designers to think differently, leading to sleek, modern designs that are functional and visually appealing.

Many accessibility principles align with current design trends. High contrast and clear typography contribute to aesthetically pleasing layouts.

Companies like Apple prove that accessibility and stunning design can coexist. This results in more impactful websites that engage a wider audience (Opens in a new window) while their ads are also incredibly innovative and shows off their accessibility features in a hugely creative way:

Not to mention, non-disabled people will also use the accessibility features too. If you have used zoom in/out, dark mode, captions, text to speech or speech to text, you have used an accessibility setting.

19. "We don't have any disabled users, so we don't need to worry about accessibility."

This argument is fundamentally flawed.

First, many disabilities are invisible. You have users with hearing, cognitive, or motor impairments who just "get on with it" without complaining or by persevering. That is not exactly a smooth user experience or something that an abled person would tolerate.

Second, by not being accessible, you're actively excluding potential users who want to engage with your site but can't due to the website's barriers. And don't even think about using the excuse of "I can't see any barriers."

Finally, who would say no to attracting more customers by focusing on this market?

20. "Screen readers can't handle JavaScript, so we can't use it."

This myth is outdated and inaccurate as modern screen readers can handle JavaScript, which many rely on for enhanced functionality. In fact, it creates more dynamic and interactive experiences that benefit all users, including those using screen readers.

The key is to implement JavaScript in an accessible manner by following best practices like clean, semantic HTML5. When done correctly, it can improve accessibility by enabling features like form validation, live updates, and custom widgets that enhance the user experience for everyone.

21. "We can add accessibility later, after the main development is done."

While this is doable, it's not wise and it is a much more expensive process to follow.

But more importantly, by following this narrative, you are indicating that including those who require accessibility is not important for your overall strategy.

22. "Mobile-friendly design automatically means it's accessible."

Just because responsive/mobile-friendly websites are more streamlined, more touch-friendly, and more user-friendly, this does not directly correlate with a more accessible website.

23. "Accessibility is only important for government or public sector websites."

Some government agencies or public sector organisations aim for AAA compliance (the highest and hardest to achieve) to ensure the highest level of accessibility for all citizens. This is understandable due to the nature of the websites.

But that doesn't excuse other websites from putting in efforts to make their website accessible. If it matters to your audience, some will require accessibility, so it's on you to make it happen.

24. "A good solution is using a separate 'accessible version' of the site."

This one is mind-boggling.

For those who are old enough, the pre-responsive site gave us the glorious days of having a separate mobile site to the main site. This is when m(dot) was affixed to the beginning of all domains and sat alongside www(dot) that worked on desktop.

That didn't last long and it was

Let's not have an accessible version of a site. It will create more work, cost more, and lower the quality of the result.

25. "WCAG compliance guarantees a fully accessible experience for all users."

The most popular guideline to follow is WCAG. The keyword is "guideline" and it's there to guide you in making your digital product accessible.

Like anything related to the online world, it's impossible to have a "completed" website. It's equivalent to saying a "fully SEO optimised" or a "perfect" website, which are impossible, as is a "fully accessible" one.

The internet and web accessibility are constantly evolving.

26. "If we're compliant with one set of guidelines (e.g. WCAG), we're compliant with all."

This assumption is dangerously misleading. While WCAG is widely recognised and very comprehensive, it is not the only set of accessibility guidelines. Different countries and regions have their own laws and standards, like Section 508 in the US or the European Accessibility Act in the EU.

These guidelines often overlap, but they are not identical as they have unique requirements or interpretations. It is essential to consider multiple guidelines, conduct user testing, and seek feedback to ensure true accessibility for all users.

27. "Accessibility overlays or plugins can quickly fix all our accessibility problems."

Ah yes, the supposed solution that is accessibility overlay, where you can add a line of code or plugin to make your website magically accessible.

Avoid them at all cost and Overlay Fact Sheet does better job than anyone on why they should be avoided and also demonstrates the hundreds of accessibility experts have put their name down to agree with the reasonings.

28. "Once a site is made accessible, it stays accessible forever."

Like anything online, as technology changes, requirements change. Websites are constantly evolving, with new content, features, and design elements added regularly. Each update has the potential to introduce new accessibility barriers if not carefully implemented.

The same goes for accessibility standards and best practices, as they are continually evolving with those very same technology changes. A few years ago, what was considered fully accessible may not meet today's standards.

This is why WCAG has gone through several iterations, each raising the bar for accessibility due to how the internet has changed.

29. "We don't need to worry about it if our competitors aren't doing it."

Or, you can do better and lead the way by distinguishing yourself from the market and being better than them.

Just a thought!

Final thoughts

The digital world is constantly evolving, and so too must our approach to accessibility. These myths represent just a fraction of the misconceptions that continue to hinder progress in making the web truly inclusive. The intention of this post (and the overall purpose of PurpleByte) is to take a crucial step towards creating a more accessible online environment for everyone.

Remember, accessibility isn't just about compliance or ticking boxes—it's about people. It's about ensuring that everyone, regardless of their abilities, can fully participate in our increasingly digital society.

As we move forward, let's challenge ourselves and others to think beyond these myths. Let's view accessibility not as a burden, but as an opportunity—an opportunity to innovate, to reach wider audiences, and to create digital spaces that truly serve everyone.

I believe there are more myths out there that haven't been mentioned. So what other ones have you encountered?

I'd love to hear them below.