[Vabs] comments from "Advocates for the Blind Sue Arizona State U. Over Kindle Use"

[NFBof Fx]

http://chronicle.com/wiredcampus/article/3864/advocates-for-the-blind-sue-arizona-state-u-over-kindle-use

The below article has dozens of comments by readers. The vast majority of
the comments are negative. Basically, they see the suit as a waste of time
and money and being promoted by greedy  lawyers. I think we should talk
about the comments at chapter meetings and discuss their merit. Being able
to effectively counter the below arguments would be a great advantage to us
in future debates.

Advocates for the Blind Sue Arizona State U. Over Kindle Use

The National Federation of the Blind and the American Council of the Blind
are suing Arizona State University for its use of the Amazon Kindle to
distribute
electronic textbooks to students, saying the device cannot be used by blind
students.

The groups say the Kindle has text-to-speech technology that reads books
aloud to blind students, but that the device’s menus do not offer a way for
blind
students to purchase books, select a book to read, or even to activate the
text-to-speech feature, according to a
joint statement
 by the two groups.

In a lawsuit filed last week, a journalism student was also named as a
plaintiff.

“While my peers will have instant access to their course materials in
electronic form, I will still have to wait weeks or months for accessible
texts to
be prepared for me,” said the student, Darrell Shandrow, in the groups’
statement. “These texts will not provide the access and features available
to other
students.”

In a statement to the
Library Journal,
 a university spokeswoman, Martha Dennis Christiansen, did not answer any
specific questions pertaining to the lawsuit.

“Arizona State University is committed to equal access for all students.
Disability Resource Centers are located on all ASU campuses. The centers
enable
students to establish eligibility and obtain services and accommodations for
qualified students with disabilities,” she said. “These efforts are focused
on providing the necessary tools so that all students with disabilities have
an equal opportunity to be successful in their academic pursuits.”

The complaint asked the Office for Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of
Education and the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice to
investigate
similar practices at Case Western Reserve University, the Darden School of
Business at the University of Virginia, Pace University,
Princeton University,
 and Reed College. —Marc Beja

Posted on Thursday July 2, 2009 |
Permalink |

Comments
list of 59 items
1. If you can’t adapt to the technology, the future will pass you by!
The majority should not be held back because of the limitations of a few!

— Dr. John    Jul 2, 04:34 PM
#

2. I suppose they could also complain that they don’t get color pictures and
illustrations in their books.

— Frank    Jul 2, 04:43 PM
#

3. “The majority should not be held back because of the limitations of a
few!”

And why don’t we get rid of the ADA while we’re at it… Give me a break.

— Nick    Jul 2, 04:44 PM
#

4. Why do they have to “sue” Arizona State? I imagine that thousands of
dollars of taxpayer money will be wasted on this case. Not that the issue
shouldn’t
be addressed, but why must everything be addressed at the hands of the
expensive legal system. Aren’t we teaching our students to communicate and
resolve
problems on their own and in more productive ways?

— Maura    Jul 2, 04:46 PM
#

5. Perhaps ASU will demand that Kindle make its text reading functional. The
problem is that publishers have pressured Amazon/Kindle to suppress the text
reading function already built into Kindle. If you want to complain about
too many lawsuits, direct your anger at publishers not students who need
this
technology. See:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2009/03/amazon-backs-off-on-kindles-text-to-speech.ars

— Susan    Jul 2, 04:58 PM
#

6. Why can’t the blind students find out if suitable resources are available
to them through their DRC, rather than suing the University because of
technology
selected for the masses? Blind students do have limitations; they can’t
drive, for example, yet that’s not a reason to sue anybody.

— Deborah    Jul 2, 04:59 PM
#

7. The issue here is equality of opportunity and the inherent accessibility
of e-books when they are properly implemented. As a blind student, who pays
the same tuition as my sighted peers, I feel I have an equal right to
participate on equal terms with my sighted peers. I’m insisting on
reasonable accommodations
in this case. The Kindle now features TTS. It is unfortunate that Amazon
chose not to make it accessible. E-books are simply binary data. The encoded
text
could be inherently accessible, but Amazon has chosen to wrap it up in a
format that can only be used by sighted people. All we’re asking is for an
equal
chance to participate using the same Kindle device with accessible books as
the sighted will enjoy as soon as the pilot program moves forward and Kindle
is adopted in more and more universities over time.

I issue a challenge to those of you who are commenting against our efforts
to attain greater accessibility. Close your eyes or put on a blindfold for a
few hours. Imagine how you would want to be treated if that condition were
permanent. Would you want to be excluded from society or included? How would
you feel if your spouse, daughter or son were blind or visually impaired?
Wouldn’t you want to see that they be afforded the same opportunities,
wherever
possible, as sighted people? Come on, my friends, think outside the box. I
am available for any and all constructive dialogue by e-mail at
editor at blindaccessjournal.com.

Best regards,

Darrell Shandrow
Accessibility Evangelist and ASU Cronkite School of Journalism Student
BlindAccessJournal.com

— Darrell Shandrow    Jul 2, 05:10 PM
#

8. Thanks, Darrell, I appreciate your point. Just wonder whether Amazon,
rather than ASU, should be the target of the suit?

— VK    Jul 2, 05:17 PM
#

9. Unsurprising from Another Student Unsatisfied (ASU). Not sure why so many
people are against the lawsuite? Obviously nobody is familiar with the
importance
of ADA, or has anyone in their family who is disabled. And yes, the legally
blind do in fact drive. Dr Joe, even the minority deserve equal access to
educational
resources.

— erik    Jul 2, 05:30 PM
#

10. The Kindle’s problems probably aren’t that hard to solve. But,
unfortunately, law suits are often the only way to get organizations to make
their services
accessible, and to send a loud and clear message to others to do the same.
If a university chooses to distribute textbooks via a device that’s not
accessible,
it should be held accountable.

I’m appalled by some of these comments, especially #1. “Dr. John,” do you
think we should make no accommodations for the disabled, even when such
accommodations
are not difficult to make and will hold no one else back?

Why would you assume that the majority will be held back by the few?
Technology is being held back by the disabled? OK. Tell that to Stephen
Hawking.

If anything, making technology accessible often introduces improvements for
everyone. Do you never ride an elevator?

We have a young woman who works in our office who uses a wheel chair. She’s
a brilliant writer and wonderful colleague. Maybe you need to meet someone
like
her to get some perspective. Can you imagine if we’d said, “sorry, we can’t
hire you — the best candidate by far — because we don’t have an accessible
women’s room in our building?” No, we renovated one of the bathrooms. It
would be stupid to hire the second-best person because of a bathroom, wouldn’t
it?

There’s no reason to deny a student access to textbooks. Improve the
technology.

— Willa    Jul 2, 05:46 PM
#

11. Dr. Joe, the legitimacy of a democracy is judged by how well it cares
for its minorities. As for why a lawsuit is the course of action: because
civil
society has ceded its duties to the legal sphere and all disputes are now
settled there. Want to put an end to this? Stop making comments like you did
here; that is the sort of stuff that demonstrates civil society will not
support helping the minority, and again, we have to defer to the law.

— Steve    Jul 2, 05:49 PM
#

12. The premise that using a Kindle that does not support certain functions
for visually impaired people is “blatant discrimination” (a claim that can
be
found on the last paragraph of the press release) is absurd. At best, this
sort of thinking is the result of “we’re all victims” gobbledygook that has
wandered into the legal system, the press and the Congress. The idea that
all devices can support every in an “equal fashion” without any
consideration
as to form factor, or other physical/cost issues, demonstrates a the
misguided thinking that has brought the country to the point where the
Federal Government
now has a $100T debt that it has assumed from the irrational thinking of
(primarily) the Congress.

While the Kindle is a reading device designed for people who are generally
sighted, and have use of both upper limits. It weighs about 10 ounces, and
has
been designed to have minimal functionality (like a book has minimal
functionality) in order to provide a form factor that is small enough and
light enough
to be attractive to millions of people who are willing to buy it, and use
it. If the Kindle were to have a much larger screen, or a bigger battery, or
a Braille interface, or a talking interface for the totally blind, or a
series of prosthetic appendages for a person who does not have the use of
his/her
arms/hands .. then it probably would not longer be the nice, cute little
device that it is .. nor cost $350.

If the issue here that the Kindle does not work easily for the blind, the
deaf, the armless, the comatose or those who do not understand how to
read—then
this lawsuit will not achieve much other than to provide a paycheck to some
very greedy people—paid for by the taxpayers.

One of the “named plaintiff’s” comments is telling. This fellow suggests
that he has to “wait weeks for materials to be prepared for him”. Perhaps
this
is the source of a problem that needs attention? Why? What exactly is the
format of the materials that are current used by this fellow? Does he pay
for
them, or are they provided by the taxpayer?

So, are all of his materials in provided for him Braille? How are these
materials provided? Why can’t the Braille conversions be done in advance?
Does ASU
have any automatic Brialle transcribers? And what about audio books? Are
these used by the Blind at ASU (or other schools)?

We also have to look at this claim that the Kindle “discriminates” against
people who are blind (or who don’t have a credit card, or who want to read
paper
books, or who hate the Internet, etc.). Blind people seem to be able to walk
in public places, having taken the time to learn the number of steps, the
sounds of the street, and sometimes with audio aids at intersections. Most
blind people learn how to do this with help, at first at least. So what
makes
the “named plaintiff” incapable of having someone teach him how to navigate
using the Kindle’s current interface? Of having the Library, say, provide
help
for the purchasing of books? Sure .. it’s not quite the same thing as being
able to do it yourself .. but the solution is obvious. (By the way, how do
totally blind people actually find books in large university libraries? Do
large university libraries routinely have Braille titles and Dewey Decimal
tags
on the books? If not, do blind people ask for help from librarians fetching
the books? So if they can ask for help fetching a paper, why not ask for
help
downloading an ebook?

Speech –to-text technologies have come a long way—
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speech_synthesis

There are a number of very reasonable “translators” now available for vision
impaired on the Internet:

http://www2.mpsaz.org/ataac/ataac2/tts/
http://www.tnauk.org.uk/
http://www.naturalreaders.com/

Soundtalking is one of the vendors used by on-line newspapers:
http://www.soundtalking.co.uk/soundtalking-services/text-to-audio.html

As to the issue of “discrimination”—how many newspapers and magazines, found
on newsstands worldwide, actually produce a Braille version? Seems to me
that
if the “named plaintiff” if not suing these organizations for “blatant
discrimination” based on the fact that they have not provided him with
Braille transcriptions
of everything ever printed—then that’s “discrimination” too? The “named
plaintiff” probably has an axe to grind against Amazon—which probably also
doesn’t
produce a Braille (or audio) version of every book it sells in paper format
either.

There are many, many technological solutions to supporting various
disabilities. But the reality is that none of the “alternatives” can
guarantee a 100%
equal (or better) outcome, relative to those students with normal
facilities. Moreover, there is no reason that a 10 once Kindle should become
a 5 pound
be-all-things-to-all-people device. There is every reason to believe that
special purpose solutions are more cost effective, as well as supportive of
the
needs of each particular disability.

The premise that any school has an obligation to provide an “accommodation”
for any “disability” is insane! For instance, there are many courses that
require
a student to use a microscope and to draw/describe what is seen through the
eyepiece. There are potentially trillions upon trillions of possible “views”
to be seen. How does a school provide an “accommodation” to someone who is
blind? Or how does a school provide accommodations for a blind person to
become
an Army Officer (or pilot) with the expectation of becoming a combat
officer? Or a neurosurgeon? (and the list goes on and on).

This lawsuit needs to be fought with courage and energy. Both Amazon and ASU
are being targeted for one reason or another. Hopefully, ASU will prevail.

— wayne martin    Jul 2, 09:09 PM
#

13. Some of the posts here are horrifying, like Mr. Wayne Martin’s above.

Arizona State is a public institution so yes, there is an obligation to
provide accommodations. No one is asking for a ‘better outcome’ as you
state.

All of the questions you ask reveal that you have no idea how a visually
impaired person lives and studies. Why is your first response to lash out
rather
than try and understand? We all don’t have to agree, but let’s at least
attempt to understand the experiences of others.

— BW    Jul 2, 09:32 PM
#

14. #12: Fascinating. First, you talk about the problems you believe are
inherent in making the Kindle accessible. Then, in the very same comment,
you talk
about how far text-to-speech technology has come. Were you aware that the
Kindle already possesses this feature to some degree? Do you really think
fully
enabling it will cause the Kindle to gain 5 pounds?

— Angela Matney    Jul 2, 10:37 PM
#

15. People with disabilities pay the same taxes as everyone else, and thus
deserve equal access to public amenities. It’s federal law, people.

The blatant anti-disability bigotry in here is astonishing. God forbid you
haters ever break a leg or anything and need a push up a ramp.

— Fred    Jul 2, 10:58 PM
#

16. #15. “The blatant anti-disability bigotry in here is astonishing.”

Why, when someone presents an opposing point-of-view, do we resort to
calling them “bigots?”

— Denny, Alaska    Jul 2, 11:10 PM
#

17. So many people talk about the advantage to the blind to have text speak
enabled on Kindle for the blind, what about auditory learners. Many times
helping
someone with a disability also brings about technology that helps us all in
one way or another.

— Rena Freed    Jul 2, 11:43 PM
#

18. Looks like a good publicity stunt, but I don’t see how the plaintiffs
can win it; if ASU is like my university, they already regularly provide at
no
cost (except for a little planning by the student) many alternatives to
kindle text such as laptops that can read the same textbooks and of course,
large
print and Braille versions. I wonder what the real motive is then. Who will
benefit from initiating this lawsuit?

— RClariana    Jul 2, 11:55 PM
#

19. I can’t even fathom how there are any actual grounds for a lawsuit here.
ASU makes whatever accommodations are necessary for disabled students. Just
because the medium of the book has changed doesn’t change the level of
accommodations the university will provide.

Let me ask the plaintiffs this: Does a printed textbook read aloud to you?
No? So the disability resource center makes accommodations for TTS or other
alternate
versions of the text for you. Does Kindle read aloud to you? It does? But
not the menus or purchasing lists? Then ASU will also make alternate
accommodations
for those functions as well. And are you being forced to use a Kindle? No?

I hope the plaintiffs realize they have no case and have just wasted our
state’s limited taxpayer dollars, and are additionally painting people with
disabilities
in a bad light. This was a bad move on their part that was almost certainly
pushed for by some lawyer seeing dollar signs.

— ASU Person    Jul 3, 03:21 AM
#

20. OK #19. Can’t the ASU students continue to use whatever method they are
currently using? Sighted students may not like to “Kindle” and buy a real
book.
It would be interesting what plaintiff had been using before Kindle and why
it is nit acceptable now. To me that is an ADA accomodation.

— Always Amazed    Jul 3, 08:12 AM
#

21. From the Amazon site: “Read-to-Me

With the new text-to-speech feature, Kindle can read every newspaper,
magazine, blog and book out loud to you, unless the book is disabled by the
rights
holder. You can switch back and forth between reading and listening, and
your spot is automatically saved. Pages automatically turn while the content
is
being read, so you can listen hands-free. You can choose from both male and
female voices which can be sped up or slowed down to suit your preference.
In the middle of a great book or article but have to jump in the car? Simply
turn on Text-to-Speech and listen on the go.”

— Always Amazed    Jul 3, 08:31 AM
#

22. The real point here is equality. Is ASU proposing the following:
(a) Sighted students order Kindle books and from these books get the
information necessary to complete course work; (b) Students who are blind
don’t get
books with the information necessary to complete the course work.
Come on, boys and girls. This is the 21st century. It’s unfortunate that
laws still have to be passed so that individuals are treated fairly (e.g.
the
ADA), but that just is what it is. If other (easily accessible and
appropriate) means of learning are available, then the problem is not so
great. On the
other hand, if students who are blind have no options for other “books,”
then the problem is one of fairness and equality. In this case, it’s
shocking
that some of the 21st century commenters here seem to think it’s okay to
deny some students access to education.

— Helen    Jul 3, 08:34 AM
#

23. A society is measured by how it treats its weakest members.

As a person with two blind siblings and with vision problems myself, it
amazes me that this particular electronic book would be adopted. It doesn’t
even
have a reverse text feature (black background, white letters) which is
“visual assistance 101” and which no doubt would help some of the partially
sighted
students, not to mention the devices’ limitations for reading the text out
loud.

Not a thoughtful selection if you are really interested in providing access.
Maybe this is why the myth of the “heroic handicapped” persists – the only
ones who succeed (and we hear about) have had to overcome many obstacles
like this one. The rest fall by the wayside.

— MSS    Jul 3, 08:55 AM
#

24. Okay, here’s the difference….if the students were required to use print
textbooks, the students with visual disabilities would go through their
center
as they usually do and volunteers would record the books.
HOWEVER, the university has decided to use Kindle, something that costs a
lot more than a print book —AND it has talking features. So far, so
good…HOWEVER
the MENU options are not accessible for those with sight issues. SO even
though the students have this accessible technology, it is really NOT!

Kinda like if you were in a wheelchair and your best friend brags about how
he thought about you when he built his house and there’s an accessible
bathroom,
and the sinks are all low enough and there’s a great couch just the right
size for you to get out of your chair and rest in comfort while you watch
the
big game — but he failed to do anything about the steps leading up to the
house.

These students deserve technology that works for them. Undoubtedly the
lawsuit wasn’t the first step. I suspect the school hadn’t been listening.

— Kathy    Jul 3, 09:02 AM
#

25. I say forget about the Kindle and all the hype. For some reason we have
this technolust attitude and think that anything new is better than what we
have used for years. Some technology is obviously game changing, but not all
is and this case points out how problems can arise with a new technology
that
outweigh the benefits. Technology is supposed to help us solve problems, not
create additional ones.

— Jay    Jul 3, 09:45 AM
#

26. This suit is NOT “the tail wagging the dog.” As a student with
vision-impairment, getting a textbook in accessible format is a major
hassle. Smaller
schools may not have a disability services program. And those that do, often
get back-logged.

If people with vision-impairment are part of the design equation from the
beginning, it is cost effective for everyone.

The faster we get through school and back to work, the more cost effective
it is for society.

— Gaylen Floy    Jul 3, 10:45 AM
#

27. I wonder if students coming in to college using Kindle (sighted or
otherwise) will be able to learn as effectively. How do you highlight,
earmark important
pages, write your thoughts and questions in the margins? In class how do you
place two books side by side and start a conversation using thoughts and
ideas
from both, while looking at them and flipping through them. I hope that
students are encouraged to try both this new technology and a traditional
book
to see what fits their learning style best. I remember some of my grad
classes where I brought multiple books to class and had written in them
almost as
much as the author. I am not sure this device would fit my learning style,
and I would look for the hard copy if my school offered both (I am assuming
ASU is offering both options).

— UP    Jul 3, 11:40 AM
#

28. Why don’t they sue GE over this whole light bulb thing? Some students
can read after dark, giving them an unfair advantage.

— Arnie Rimmer    Jul 3, 01:38 PM
#

29. You are all missing the point. Even though Kindle has text-to-speech
technology, most/many publishers, in conjunction with Amazon, have disabled
that
function for many texts.

In effect, students are not able to get the text-to-speech capability on
many works.

Additionally, if students are required to use Kindles to read extremely
recent texts, it can take weeks (usually months) to get those materials into
a braille
or Audiobooks for the Blind format.

In effect, ASU has chosen a technology that is not accessible to the blind
in many cases. If ASU requires students in a particular program/class to use
a Kindle, but Kindle/Amazon/book publishers have disabled (no pun intended)
the text-to-speech technology for the texts required for that class on that
Kindle, ASU has violated ADA.

True, suing Kindle/Amazon makes more sense from a consumer standpoint, but
ASU has clearly violated the stipulations of the law by requiring this
specific
technology from a OCR claim perspective.

— Oh Lawdy    Jul 3, 02:17 PM
#

30. It should not be that hard to force the e-book provider as by law or
contract to have an override for those persons who legally qualify to have
the
screen reader function activated even when the publisher otherwise deems it
disabled, and/or require the connectivity to a Braille playback device.
Actually
the fair use provisos already mandate this to some degree.

I have had a few blind employees in my past and it was usually not that hard
to set up the adaptations for their workstations. However we did run in to
software or media that had DRM attached to it what made it difficult to work
with.

Personally, I don’t like the e-book idea – I’d much rather have real book or
newspaper – not that I read many books, I don’t.

— MrBentor    Jul 3, 02:19 PM
#

31. “Make me blind that I might see, deaf that I might hear, and lame that I
might walk upright.”

You people who have no clue what it means to go through life with a
disability should heed the prayer above.

Go to a sporting event, concert, or show in a wheelchair where there is no
accessible seating and you will see, not the playing field, stage or actors,
but a bunch of butts because everyone stands and cares not that you can’t
see through them, nor stand yourself.

The ADA refers to REASONABLE accomodation. Any REASONABLE person could see
(forgive the irony) that what the plaintiffs are asking is not UNREASONABLE.
The fact that it is taxpayer dollars being spent makes their argument even
more compelling.

See what Helen (#22) says. Although the issue is about fairness it’s not
about equality. “Fairness” dictates equality of OPPORTUNITY, not equality of
outcome.
If, based on budgetary constraints alone, one has no access to the
technology available to students without disabilities, the outcome is
predetermined
to a great extent. That was why ADA was enacted.

Before you criticize the method of redress, walk a mile in the plaintiffs’
shoes. You might gain a whole new perspective on the darkness.

— cyberties    Jul 3, 03:30 PM
#

32. Wow. I guess I never expected educators to actually express that it is
inconvenient to help disabled people. I wish I could say I was surprised — I’ve
heard similarly discriminating statements from faculty at my institution as
well. Disappointing, given the philosophies of the field of education. As
for
statements regarding the majority being held back due to the “limitations of
the few…” Congratulations on your ability to be callous even in public.
Equality
is so much easier to espouse when it’s purely theoretical, isn’t it?

— Librarian    Jul 3, 03:45 PM
#

33. I hope that both Amazon and ASU will look upon this as a great
opportunity to collaborate together in modifying/adapting Kindle (as a
technology) to
serve the needs of individuals with visual challenges. Conversation and
collaboration would go a long way here – between all parties involved.

— A mom    Jul 3, 04:08 PM
#

34. Let’s assume that the ASU students talked to the administration and the
administration stonewalled or issued a non-response response. Otherwise, why
would the blind students sue? My father is blind and uses a variety of
technologies to read newspapers, letters, and the like. I thought about
getting
him a Kindle, but found out about this problem. What Kindle’s manufacturers
need to do is have a real field test with the blind to see if it works
properly.
The University is being sued because it required this Kindle for all
students. It simply places an unreasonable burden on the blind. These are
students
and the University dropped the ball here. If it can’t be fully accessible
for the blind students, then the University is in need of finding another
way
to make the new technology work for all students. Some other e-readers work
better for the blind, but don’t have the Kindle’s relationship with
amazon.com

— Derek W.    Jul 3, 05:32 PM
#

35. I work with the deaf and the blind students at our school and they tell
me that all too often teachers and administrators empathize with their
disability,
but don’t have the time, money or don’t want to put out the effort to
provide the “reasonable accommodations” necessary for students with such
afflictions.

As Gaylen Floy points out that if the blind and deaf are considered at the
beginning of design, solutions are much more cost effective. I would also
like
to put forth the idea of solutions for the deaf and blind also can also help
those with other disabilities like those with limited mobility. These
solutions
can also assist those who have trouble reading, or with limited English
skills.

The comments made for this article demonstrate the uphill battle those with
disabilities must face every day in our educational institutions.

— Cal Stanley    Jul 3, 07:14 PM
#

36. This is the kind of stupidity that forced my bank to put brail labels on
the drive through ATM.

— David K.    Jul 3, 07:57 PM
#

37. #36.: My bank’s only ATM is a drive through one. I don’t have a car, so
I walk up to it! Any person with a sight impairment would likely do the
same,
hence the need (NOT STUPIDITY) for Braile.

— Lib Sci Student    Jul 3, 08:33 PM
#

38. Braille labels on ATM keys aren’t at all a “kind of stupidity.” A
vision-impaired person may have to be driven to the bank, but will still
want and
need the dignity and security of inputting his/her own PIN number!

— Socrates    Jul 3, 08:36 PM
#

39. Lib Sci Student:

You’re a student? Then think. If all ATMs are made with Braille keys, then
some of these that appear in drive up ATMs will have Braille keys. This is
simple
logic. While I am really annoyed by this suit against ASU (what about those
who are sighted who want to use a Kindle?) the level of logic, evidence, or
even orthography on these posts falls far behind what I’d expect of folks
with an interest in higher ed. The failure of the “Gee whiz: Braille labels
on
ATMs in drive thrus!” crowd to apply common sense suggests the sort of
“blindness” to reason that necessitated the ADA in the first place.

— Tom in Raleigh    Jul 3, 09:09 PM
#

40. As much as I sympathize with the individuals with disabilities who’ve
posted in these comments, efforts to garner sympathy (“put yourselves in our
shoes…”)
are missing the point. This is a legal question, not an emotional one.

The textbooks used on Kindle are also available in print form (and are often
already available in alternate media for disabled students). They aren’t
“special”
textbooks that only exist on Kindle. Blind students can use the same
alternate accommodations that they always did. ASU is not “forcing” any
disabled student
to use the Kindle without any additional accommodations. I think this is a
political/PR move by the National Federation of the Blind to ensure that
ebook
readers are accessible. They know darn well that it’s Amazon who controls
the Kindle’s features. Amazon doesn’t have a duty to make its products
accessible,
so there’s no basis for a lawsuit there. However, they figure that if they
sue ASU, they’ll scare Amazon into thinking that universities won’t adopt
Kindle
unless it’s accessible, thus indirectly forcing Amazon to change the Kindle’s
features. My biggest problem is with what this is costing the Arizona
taxpayers.

— ASU Person    Jul 3, 09:46 PM
#

41. Asu Person: obviously the Kindle texts are not immediately available in
another format to blind students. As stated in the article:

“While my peers will have instant access to their course materials in
electronic form, I will still have to wait weeks or months for accessible
texts to
be prepared for me,” said the student, Darrell Shandrow, in the groups’
statement. “These texts will not provide the access and features available
to other
students.”

So think about it:
1. Some of Arizona taxpayers are people with disabilities

2.People with disabilities who have access to education and training will be
able to make a living and pay taxes.

3. People with disabilities denied such access will have to rely on SSI
payments and wont be able to work and wont pay taxes….

4. The tenor of your comment is that people with disabilities are “others,”
that you see them as outside of society, and you are ignorant of how much
they
are contributing.

— Kati    Jul 4, 12:54 AM
#

42. To ASU Person:

Why not just aver that “Some of my best friends are disabled.”

Your stupidity is belied by your last sentence.

If ASU had required the change in the first place, it would have cost
Arizona taxpayers far less than what they will have to pay WHEN the
plaintiff wins.
The fact that no one at ASU thought of requiring it shows, at best, a lack
of awareness of the daily impediments faced by disabled students, and at
worst
a callous disregard for any issue faced by disabled students.

I don’t want your sympathy, numb nuts. I want EQUALITY of opportunity.

— cyberties    Jul 4, 03:30 AM
#

43. First, the National Federation of the Blind and the American Council of
the Blind are doing this together. I’m not sure if this is a first, but
having
both major blindness advocacy groups on the same side is unusual and attests
to the virtue of the complaint. The Reading Coalition, which includes over
twenty groups representing visual and learning disabilities, worked for
months trying to get Amazon to extend text-to-speech to functionality and to
get
the Author’s Guild to remove restrictions blocking certain books. They also
spoke to the universities involved explaining that going forward with this
project prior to Amazon extending tex-to-speech to functionality would be a
violation of the ADA and urged them to use their influence with Amazon to
fix
it. This approach didn’t work, hence the need for a legal complaint. The
students who have come forward as plaintiffs in this case are heroes.

For those who assume the only limitation that blind people will have with
Kindle is in ordering and purchasing… Sighted Kindle users can mark their
place,
jump to page, research the meaning of a word and so on.

Bblind students who are now in college have already battled huge
accessibility and equality issues on a local level. Only ten percent of
blind kids are
taught to read Braille, despite the fact that of the mere thirty percent of
blind adults who work, over eighty percent read Braille. Parents with kids
who are legally blind, read large print below grade level and have
degenerative conditions which will lead to total blindness in young
adulthood, are told
their kids don’t need Braille and can “get by” with large print and recorded
books — which all have drawbacks. Society crushes them with low
expectations,
mixed messages, denied opportunities and a host of daily humiliations. That
any survive it is a miracle.

For those few who are taught Braille, parents have to fight tooth and nail,
often needing to educate the teachers who are supposed to be the experts.
Availability
is also a huge issue. A Braille novel is often delivered to a child when his
classmates have finished with it.

There’s a suit in Utah involving schools that provide Braille materials such
as tests which aren’t proof-read and are so incorrect that a student who
gives
the correct answer to the question as Brailled is wrong anyway. A
nine-year-old girl figured out what was going on and saved her tests to
proove it. If
any of you are truly interested in what is going on in America’s
“educational” system with regard to blind and visually impaired students, I
humbly refer
you to my series of articles on the Braille literacy crisis for the online
magazine American Chronicle:
www.americanchronicle.com/authors/view/3885

Those of you who believe blind people shouldn’t have the rights to the same
opportunities, be they social or technological, as the sighted should
remember
one fact. Most blind people grew up sighted. There is no race, religion,
economic class or family history which immunizes you from blindness. The CDC
recently
projected a three-fold increase in diabetic-related blindness among working
age Americans by 2050.

Your attitudes are remarkably ignorant, and I can’t wait to use some of your
comments in an upcoming article. You prove how deeply rooted are the
assumptions
that blind people have nothing to offer and the low expectations of the
so-called literate world. Perhaps you think the blind lawyers, mechanics,
chemists,
journalists, teachers and so on who have jobs are being humored?

— Donna Hill    Jul 4, 02:31 PM
#

44. While agreeing wholeheartedly with the ADA, I am also confused as to why
this is a lawsuit against ASU. ASU, like my university (and probably with a
lot more staff!), provides alternative-format textbooks upon request to
students with documented disabilities. I join the widespread disappointment
that
Amazon has not made the Kindle more accessible, but as far as I know the
Kindle is in fact more accessible to many students with disabilities than a
standard
print textbook (especially if the book in question includes the TTS
function), and no less accessible to visually impaired students. I don’t
understand
how the Kindle puts visually impaired students at a worse disadvantage than
paper textbooks, or how it makes the available alternative-format textbook
accommodations less reasonable than they were previously. Can someone
enlighten me?

— AdMinnie    Jul 4, 03:20 PM
#

45. Tom in Raleigh, didn’t you mean to agree with—rather than slam—Lib Sci
Student #37? You both make the same point.

— Anonny    Jul 4, 11:04 PM
#

46. In my entire life I’ve never been more disgusted by academics than I am
after reading the comments on this page. I imagine that some of the most
privileged
people on this planet — with high salaries and summers off — are among those
here who cannot summon basic compassion for the disabled. The WHOLE POINT
of technology is to improve the quality of life for people. And technology
surely can improve lives, until people are too short-sighted to ask it to.

— Hating academics at this moment    Jul 4, 11:19 PM
#

47. Why a lawsuit? Because lawsuits are the only enforcement mechanism in
the ADA. People with disabilities who are discriminated against have no
other
option but to sue when their civil rights are violated.

— Fred    Jul 4, 11:41 PM
#

48. Interestingly, Most of the Garbage In all the Above Posts seems to be
written by people making a Knee Jerk “Oh the Poor Blind Person” or “Oh look
at
the bigots” reaction.

If anyone actually cared to rtfa Its actually a pretty simple case.

ASU has Instituted a TRIAL program where they distribute E-books for classes
to students by way of the Amazon Kindle. The complaint is that this happens
“Instantly” leaving the blind student at a Disadvantage. This is no
different that the Sighted student going to the bookstore and purchasing a
Regular
Printed copy of a book “Instantly” while the blind student waits for a
Braile Translation, Or goes through a disability Office for assitance , In
either
scenario the Sighted Student has an Advantage, but accommodations are still
being made.

The Kindle is merely being used in this case to more easily distribute Text
books to students. Very much like some campus’s have rolled out Ipod Touch’s
to the student body with course video’s on them.

So Really there is no case to be made, Accommodations are still being made
Exactly as they have always been, and the overall system has not changed at
all.
The Addition of a new piece of technology is merely being used as an excuse
for a lawsuit.

And Please, If you have no reasoned discourse to add, Please don’t Follow up
with more Kneejerk “You Bigot blind hating individual” Comments.

— Bob    Jul 5, 09:58 AM
#

49. I hope ASU realizes the error of its ways quickly and remedies this
problem.

For those of you who find this ridiculous or frivolous, I challenge you to
get into a two story building without steps, ramps or ladders…. perhaps you
should
JUMP higher. Or, find your way around a dark schoolroom at night — or drive
without streetlights. Those ARE accommodations for sighted people that ASU,
state and federal money pays for…

Get over your ableist attitude and realize how much you CAN’T do without
supports like steps, lights, sounds, etc.

— Finzup!    Jul 5, 02:16 PM
#

50. Funny how many people miss the point of all of this. Two organizations
have filed a lawsuit claiming that ASU is violating the law. The issue here
is
whether ASU’s trial program using Kindles to display textbooks violates the
ADA. Instead of focusing on the true issue, most of the commenters have
resorted
to name-calling, speculation, stereotyping, and emotional outbursts.

My earlier posts were responded to with insults and name-calling.
Apparently, I am a bigoted numb-nuts. If that makes you feel better, then
fine. But all
the names in the world don’t distract from the facts of this lawsuit: ASU is
providing the same accommodations they always have, thus no real basis for
a lawsuit.

Those of you who are familiar enough with politics and law will recognize
this as an indirect attack on Amazon in an effort to get them to change the
Kindle.
This lawsuit, however, costs ASU money, and although the plaintiffs and
advocates for the blind may have legitimate concerns about the kindle, it is
wholly
unethical to make a third-party (ASU) bear the costs of defending themselves
in a lawsuit just to get Amazon to listen.

— ASU Person    Jul 5, 06:31 PM
#

51. While my peers will have instant access to their course materials in
electronic form, I will still have to wait weeks or months for accessible
texts
to be prepared for me,” said the student, Darrell Shandrow, in the groups’
statement.

In my opinion, this is the most disturbing point, if it is in fact true. I
would like to see data on how long it typically takes to accomodate a
request
for a text to be made available in braile. If it does indeed take months,
then how do visually impaired students function in a 16 week semester? I
would
really like to see data on this, not anecdotal accounts.

— PolSciProf.    Jul 5, 10:46 PM
#

52. Holy buckets!!! Are we all touchy… This is a simple issue to resolve by
appointing a campus “techy” to be available to set up the tool and download
appropriate material. That appears to be a “reasonable” solution.

Oh: For those of you who poo-paw ADA, we are all better people for it. So
get a grip.

— Dr. Bill    Jul 6, 10:22 AM
#

53. Don’t look now (pun intended), but Natl Fed Blind is currently funding
research for vehicle accommodations to enable the blind to drive. Yes, that’s
right – blind drivers! My son was on a senior design team this past year and
you would be amazed at the enthusiasm among sighted students to develop this
technology for their blind peers.

Let’s all take a step back and re-evaluate our comments on this blog. On
this anniversary of our country’s Declaration of Independence, we need to
realize
that independence and freedom are what this country was founded on. That
includes freedom and independence for ALL. I am proud to pay taxdollars for
research
and technologies that enable others with disabilities to gain independence,
productivity, and dignity.

Let’s all play nice with each other, okay?!

— CS    Jul 6, 01:27 PM
#

54. If you consider yourself “able bodied” but can’t read without glasses,
imagine how you would feel if you were forbidden to use glasses as part of
your
textbook license, and only then decide if you want to criticize the ASU
students as whiners. The difference btwn being “able bodied” and “disabled”
for
these students isn’t an inherent condition of their physical make-up, but
rather their access to text-to-speech technology that is already built into
the
Kindle. Why should they have to take prescious time out of their studies to
go to a special office to get books read for them when the technology is so
readily available. That makes no sense. Thanks to CS for making the
connection to independence and freedom—I was thinking the same thing, and
that only
sounds like hyperboli if you’ve never been denied a minor accommodation that
makes all the difference to you.

— GG    Jul 6, 03:41 PM
#

55. I may not be able to take philosophy courses again. Any disability is
expensive. Recordings for the blind, instead of being free is dependent on a
1,000
dollar
box that lets you read books.

The web is about opinions, you can find Encyclopedia entries, but if you
want to read a 400 page book, s I did often for 20 years or so, your not
likely
to find it.

Recording for the Blind and
Disabled had a lot of out of print books and were used to
working with students writing papers. They would send you a ten-20-twenty
page computer generated bibliographies. I cried when Panasonic stopped
making
light weight light touch tape
recorders.

Not all visually disabled people are legally blind—the eyes and the muscles
around them, the brain that controls
how you see letters, many people need to read serious work, not just the
trendy in-the-press topics.

— Visitingbird2    Jul 6, 08:59 PM
#

56. If this experiment were formulated as a proposal to NSF, how would it
fare for validity and conformance with human subject requirements?

The universities in the trial program for the Amazon Kindle are
participating in a major experiment on human subjects as well as the reading
devices and
textbook digital representation. Estimate 1000 students and 10% with
limitations handling the device or reading difficulties. accessibility and
usability
are major components of the experiment, also potential sources of harm to
students excluded or exposed to new hazards of learning via technology.
Assertions
that disability services will provide equal opportunities are also tested
and form part of the ultimate equation of costs and benefits.

The chronic textbook problem will not be solved by this trial and the market
will always be around. So why not wait for Amazon to fix its blunders on TTS
rather than proceed with an obviously tainted experiment? See
http://asyourworldchanges.wordpress.com
 for a demo of the reading and
accessibility issues.

— susan gerhart    Jul 7, 01:32 PM
#

57. I work in the Disability Services office of a University as a Document
Conversion specialist, so I’m rather intimately aware of the issues
surrounding
accessibility and learning more every day.

I don’t know if the NFB and ACB approached Amazon and Arizona State
University to point out that this technology is inaccessible before pursuing
litigation.
In any case, this lawsuit is an important one if it strives to rectify two
things:

The first exists in the culture of technological development and its failure
to incorporate what has come to be known as “Universal Design,” a
broad-spectrum
solution that produces buildings, products and environments that are usable
and effective for everyone, not just people with disabilities.

By making the Kindle inaccessible, the hugely popular Amazon remains part of
a culture that clearly doesn’t recognize the diversity of the population and
therefore fails to address its needs. It is doubtful any company intends to
marginalize anyone – but the lack of awareness on this issue is a problem
when
technology supposedly designed to improve people’s ability to learn is
leaving out entire sectors of the population. This perpetuates a culture of
poor
design and lack of access to those with disabilities. Alas, our office sees
this failure in technological development all the time.

>From a consumer standpoint, the only way a cultural shift will occur is for
educators, the disabled population and its advocates to put pressure on
companies
to include Universal Design in their product development. This happened some
time ago when Apple attempted to incorporate iTunes University, a Podcast
content delivery system inaccessible to blind/low-vision students, into
curricula across the country. The University of California refused to carry
iTunes
University until Apple redesigned its interface to accommodate screen
reading technology.

However, consumer choice – the decision to buy an accessible format instead
of the Kindle or iTunes – is a somewhat separate issue from the use of
inaccessible
technology in public education. Once it enters the educational sphere, it
not only becomes more ethically imperative to ensure accessibility, it
becomes
legally required under the ADA, which states that students with disabilities
must be afforded access equal to their non-disabled peers.

Based on the comments posted by readers above, it seems that technological
change is the less daunting of the two challenges. The cultural battle to
change
attitudes about what constitutes equal access has much further to go. The
non-disabled need to recognize that if a student with a disability has to
put
in more effort, navigate more bureaucracy, (e.g. go to a separate office to
get accessible materials and therefore wait longer for the material than
their
non-disabled peers because of the time required for conversion), that is not
equal access. Such a scenario may meet minimum standards under the ADA,
however,
an institution of higher learning which only provides “separate but equal”
conditions to its students fails to serve its purpose to promote equality
and
advancement for its students and the society into which they will eventually
enter. If these values are not implicit in higher education, most
Universities
outline them explicitly in their own mission statements. At a minimum, such
an institution should not promote ore incorporate inaccessible technology
such
as the Kindle into its curriculum if it strives to set (or even rise to)
such a standard.

— Jonathon Warnberg    Jul 7, 01:46 PM
#

58. Anyone here getting older? Welcome to the world of disabilities……you may
need some attitude adjustments.

— mk    Jul 7, 04:15 PM
#

59. I guess the points of both sides can be mute. I understand wanting the
current device to remain as it is. I understand wanting to use every
opportunity
to promote accessibility.

I also believe both sides want something affordable.

Every higher educational facility/campus will provide a personal assistant
to pick up where technology does not.

I don’t know how it feels, but I suppose it would be better to be
independent.

I also imagine it would eventually be cheaper for technology to pick up the
task especially since Text To Speech (TTS) is getting better, and the text
is
already in digital format. [i.e. no hourly wages spent-though most are work
study with little actual money being spent, but rather free tuition to add
an extra student]

It seems pointless, because perhaps advances may eventually be made anyway
by someone/company/device.

The current question is what will be the current outcome. Will it set a
precedent one way or the other.

Will the precedent hurt one side in the long run…. and eventually the other.

Will it cause the players to change.

Or will this allow both sides to win. Perhaps this is being instigated by
Amazon to get the publishers to allow TTS.

Granted the story mentioned TTS works just not in the menus and ‘store’. (
which is contrary to what comments have been made about publishers forcing
Amazon
to turn off TTS features.) It sounds like they just need to ask a librarian
or friend to turn on the TTS for a book. Which does not seem as tough as
making
a trek to the library to use its resources, and seems a lot faster than
waiting for the books to be printed in braille or read to CD.

“I will still have to wait weeks or months for accessible texts to be
prepared for me, and these texts will not provide the access and features
available
to other students. That is why I am standing up for myself and with other
blind Americans to end this blatant discrimination.”

Thanks

— Patrick    Jul 9, 09:25 AM
#

list end