A Call to Action: Captchas Limit Equal Access to Information
If you are like most people, you’ve probably never heard of a “captcha.” But if you’ve ever registered for a free service online, there’s a good chance you’ve seen one. The most frequently-used captchas are pictures of somewhat distorted letters and/or numbers. You, the computer user seeking to register for the service, are told to “type the characters you see in this picture.” By successfully completing this task, you are proving that you are a human being and not a computer program seeking to exploit the service in question. Of course what you’re really proving is that you are a sighted human being—or someone with access to a sighted human being. Captchas significantly limit equal access to information for users who are blind or visually impaired.
Captchas—completely automated public Turing tests to tell computers and humans apart—are becoming more and more common thanks to the proliferation of spam. First there was email spam, then instant messaging spam, and now—believe it or not—blog spam. I don’t like spam any more than you do and believe that it is in everyone’s best interest that spammers be thwarted. Most people agree. And that’s why, when Google introduced a captcha as a requirement for creating a new account at blogger.com, the blog-using public was thrilled. The problem is, of course, that a blind computer user wishing to start a blog no longer can—at least not without sighted assistance. And adding this requirement to blogger.com is not Google’s only use of captcha; simply their most recent. A blind user wanting to sign up for Google News Alerts, which is a very useful way to access the information you want or need, must get sighted assistance. The same is true for using Google’s newest tool: My Search History.
Google is not the only company to implement the use of captchas. For instance, Microsoft requires them of anyone wishing to sign up for a Hotmail account; Yahoo does the same for their email service. But Microsoft and Yahoo provide alternatives for users with visual impairments. Microsoft’s alternative is to provide a link labeled “I can’t see this picture.” Follow it and you’ll receive an auditory representation of the characters on the screen. This, of course, does not remove the access barrier for users who also have a hearing impairment, but at least it’s a step in the right direction. The alternative provided by Yahoo is to have the user fill out a form requesting that a customer service representative contact him/her by phone. This, of course, means that the visually impaired user does not have immediate access, but again, it’s a step in the right direction. Google does not provide any such alternative: You either type the characters on the screen, or you don’t get to use the service. Period.
There are undoubtedly other companies which have implemented captchas without an alternative means of access, and that must certainly be addressed. But Google has become a leader in the field of web-based access to, and communication of, information. As a result, their use of captcha means that users who are blind or visually impaired are denied access to one of the most widely-used services available. And as a leader, what Google implements is more likely to be implemented by others. That is why I feel it is critical for Google to understand that the use of captcha without an alternative means of access is not only wrong—or to use Google’s term, “evil”—but it is in direct violation of their corporate mission “to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful.”
Prior to the implementation of captcha on Blogger, I had written Google about this issue, and I know a few others have as well. Apparently we were not heard—or if we were heard, the needs of the few users who are blind were outweighed by the needs of the many users who are affected by the very real problem of spam. That is why I’m asking for your help. Google needs to hear from all of us. And not just individual consumers, family members, and service providers, but the companies for which we work, and the organizations to which we belong. If we can take a large enough stand to get noticed, perhaps we can put a stop to this latest, growing barrier to access.
Ways to contact Google:
1. [Send feedback to blogger support](http://www.blogger.com/problem.g?skiplogin=yes “Blogger support form”)
2. [Send feedback to Google Accounts support](mailto:accounts-support@google.com “Email Google Accounts support) (signing up for an account requires passing the captcha test)
3. [Send feedback to Google labs about My Search History](mailto:labs+hist-feedback@google.com “Email the My Search History team”), the latest (and highly-publicized) Google tool that requires a Google Account
4. Write, call, fax Google Headquarters:
1600 Amphitheatre Parkway
Mountain View, CA 94043
phone: 650-623-4000
fax: 650-618-1499
Thank you for your time.
—jd
April 25th, 2005 at 9:59 am
Inaccessible CAPTCHA is nothing short of a lock out of the blind!
I think we need to make it crystal clear that we’re not against the use of CAPTCHA and we understand the benefits and need for this kind of security. At the same time, we must also make it quite clear that there are accessible alternatives that must be implemented alongside visual verification!
We must figure out a way to make this clear and to stop the complete lock out of the blind from participation that is caused when CAPTCHA is implemented without accessibility!