There has been a lot of buzz surrounding Accessibility Widgets lately. Most recently, in the news, the Federal Trade Commission took action against one of the biggest widget providers on the market. The company in question agreed to pay $1 million to settle allegations that it misrepresented the capabilities of its AI-powered web accessibility tool.

This settlement is a promising step forward for the disabled community for several reasons I will address. However, I want to talk about these tools from my perspective as a blind individual. Oftentimes, these widget providers’ target audience is the general public, who might not know anything about digital accessibility and what the best solution is for accessible content. I hope to highlight why these tools have been contentious throughout the blind community and inform those looking for a solution to make their online content accessible.

What is an accessibility widget?

Also referred to as an “overlay,” an accessibility widget is a JavaScript plugin that is easily installed on a website, typically using only one line of code. Overlays manipulate HTML elements to “fix” accessibility issues and offer features like screen readers, magnifiers, and color contrast tools. But these tools are limited.

Widgets rely on automated scanners to assess and fix issues on a website. The problem is that automated tools can only address about 30-40% of accessibility barriers, often missing complex issues like form labels or contextual information essential for users with assistive technology. This reliance on automated fixes and surface-level modifications fails to provide true accessibility because there is no human assessing if the fixes are accurate or thorough.

Widget can create barriers

Although intended to help, widgets come with Assistive Technology (A.T.) tools. From my experience, they interfere with my A.T. rather than enhance it. For example, a blind user entering a site with an overlay may encounter a voice prompt stating, “This website is overlay enabled.” Each page triggers the message, disrupting their screen reader and complicating navigation. Other common issues include overlapping elements when text enlargers are applied without adapting the site’s layout, often causing visual clutter and confusion.

I am accustomed to using my own A.T. and find those tools redundant or obstructive. It begs the question: why would I use the widget’s A.T. when I had to use my own to arrive at the website?

Privacy & Data

I genuinely tried to give these tools a shot at being practical; I spent some time configuring my settings in the Widgets menu and then moved on to do other things. After leaving the overlay-equipped website, I ended up on a different site where the same overlay was being used. I noticed that the settings I had chosen on the previous site had carried over to the new website, noting that these companies were not affiliated.

I thought it was convenient for a moment, but I quickly realized that It seemed to be tracking me. I don’t remember agreeing to that. But somehow, it captured my data and now had access to my information across any site using that brand of widget. Creepy. I then turned off all the chosen settings and never used them again. But I still wonder what information it might have of mine…

As it turns out, I’m not alone in this. In a fact sheet published by the community, including leaders in the digital accessibility world, others have experienced similar privacy concerns. Stating: “Adding an overlay to your site may run counter to end users’ preference for privacy and may create risk of noncompliance with GDPR, UK GDPR, CCPA, et al.”*

*Source, Overlay Fact Sheet.

Can overlays be helpful?

Some people enjoy using the tools provided by overlays. Things like reading masks, reading guides, and simple Zoom interventions can benefit those who are not native A.T.I users (meaning they have to use screen readers, zoom, or keyboard functions to navigate). For example, an elderly person may enjoy a website with a widget that allows them to use a reading guide because it helps ease the strain on their eyes. 

Conclusion 

From my experience, Widgets should not be the sole resource for an organization’s digital accessibility requirements. For most people, these tools just create more problems than they fix. I also believe they can contribute to a culture of disablism. 

I say that because there is no empathy to provide a robust accessibility solution, such as an audit with manual testing,  thorough remediation, and ongoing monitoring, as seen in the WCAG 2.1 AA standard. Instead, some businesses add a widget, say they’ve provided an accessible platform, and never think about accessibility again. Treating it as just a box to tick instead of considering the impact on their disabled users, which could be as high as 20%.

At this point, my stance on widgets is that they can be helpful if they are standardized. This would mean they don’t interfere with Assistive  Technology, the privacy concerns are addressed, and a comprehensive compliance program is performed on the website before a widget is installed. The overlay should only serve as a supplementary toolkit for those who need it, and the website should not become more challenging or different from its original design when the widget’s A.T. is in use.

For additional reading, you can download our Digital Accessibility Overlays fact sheet.