How the Aktion Mensch is harming digital Accessibility in Germany

Aktion Mensch has experienced a sad decline in digital accessibility over the past 15 years. This decline reached its climax with their support of a German overlay provider and, consequently, its practices. Unfortunately, this decline had been brewing for quite some time.

For transparency: I worked for Aktion Mensch as a freelancer for a long time. However, I only use publicly available information, as I am still bound to confidentiality regarding internal matters. Since I left Aktion Mensch in October 2022, I have no current insider information anyway.

At Aktion Mensch, there are countless dedicated people who want to do something meaningful and sometimes even shake their heads at what they have to answer for externally. This doesn't change the fact that Aktion Mensch has become a problem child of digital accessibility.

You might ask whether this harsh criticism is justified. I think so. Aktion Mensch still has a significant impact in this area and a role model function that it currently doesn't deserve. At the same time, for some reason, it's considered more sacrosanct than the Vatican. Even the Vatican has to face criticism.

BIENE and Einfach für alle

Until 2010, Aktion Mensch was the go-to organization when it came to digital accessibility. Einfach für alle was the largest independent information portal for digital accessibility. The BIENE competition was the gathering of all the key players in the field of digital accessibility. Certainly, there's plenty to criticize, there always is, but there's no doubt that Aktion Mensch was the largest independent player in this area.

In 2010, the BIENE competition was put on hold, much like ABBA went on hiatus. After a few unambitious considerations, the project was buried without much communication. In my opinion, it was the management's lack of interest that led to the project's demise.

The "Easy for Everyone" portal (einfach für alle) was more or less carried along. A few pieces of content were added after 2010, but essentially, the portal hasn't been updated since and gradually lost relevance. It was then shut down a few years ago, also without much communication. The portal could have been kept up-to-date with relatively few resources, but even that lacked the will; it wasn't for lack of money.

The sad remnants. On their own main portal, aktion-mensch.de, a few irrelevant articles were posted and maintained. Aktion Mensch still benefits from its former reputation, which is why the articles are still fairly easy to find on Google. From a technical perspective, the articles aren't wrong, but they are superficial, which could be described as thin content.

The sad culmination was an article that positively highlighted an accessibility overlay, completely without any factual basis. Only after I pointed this out was the article corrected; by then, I had already left Aktion Mensch. Without wanting to toot my own horn, the only internal expert on digital accessibility also left with me.

The Low Point: Studies and Accessibility Overlays

Aktion Mensch reached its lowest point when it began funding a German accessibility overlay provider. Instead of making their own websites accessible, the funded organizations were supposed to use an overlay "temporarily."

Many accessibility overlay providers are known for using harsh marketing methods such as intimidation or false claims and for intimidating their critics with legal action. Aktion Mensch is well aware of this, yet the funding continued. Whether it is still being funded is unknown to me. It doesn't really matter who has become involved in such practices; despite knowing better, they have no place in digital accessibility.

That leaves the last major activity: a study on the accessibility of online shops with various partners. Unfortunately, this was a case of putting the fox in charge of the henhouse: The company's own online shop was not accessible by the deadline for the Accessibility Strengthening Act, as could be read in the accessibility statement from Aktion Mensch. This means that despite having conducted several rounds of this study on the accessibility of online shops and being practically the leading authority on digital accessibility in Germany, they failed to make their own online shop accessible on time. This hardly needs further comment.

Another major embarrassment was the funding of the Digital Accessibility Atlas, reportedly with a six-figure sum. The survey has so many methodological flaws that it would have failed everywhere. As mentioned above, Aktion Mensch clearly lacks expertise in digital accessibility; otherwise, they would hardly have funded it.p>

Non-Disabled People on the Front Lines

Unfortunately, Aktion Mensch is repeating the mistake made by many well-meaning institutions: non-disabled people appear as experts, while disabled people are presented as testimonials. Don't believe it? Feel free to check: non-disabled people explain accessibility, disabled people explain barriers. Once again, the narrative is reinforced that disabled people constantly need help and that they cannot be experts. To me, this has the unpleasant taste of discrimination.

Why So Little Criticism of Aktion Mensch?

Why is there so little criticism from the disability and accessibility community? Aktion Mensch is sacrosanct. Anyone who criticizes it has little chance of being included in funding programs or committees. You are excluded from expert consultations, even if you would be an obvious expert. Just look closely at who criticizes all sorts of things but doesn't mention Aktion Mensch, either positively or negatively, and is heavily funded by them. Unfortunately, that's almost everyone active in the field of disability. Silence is essentially bought.

With this post, I can be sure I'll never be invited by Aktion Mensch as an expert again. It doesn't really matter, since they're not doing anything relevant to digital accessibility anymore anyway, and it wouldn't be the first time I've been persona non grata. I can live with that. If the emperor has no clothes, then I'll say the emperor has no clothes.

However, there's a lot of unrest in the community. Many accessibility experts privately shake their heads when they hear the name Aktion Mensch. Unfortunately, there's no alternative, no neutral institution that speaks objectively and effectively about accessibility and drives the issue forward.

This isn't irreversible. With goodwill, it would be easy to revive the old tradition: there's plenty of room for a new "Easy for All" initiative, a modernized BIENE competition, and effective campaigns. The problem is that, from Aktion Mensch's perspective, there's no reason to do so. It hasn't yet lost its public image, and isn't that what it ultimately cares about? Digital accessibility is a difficult topic to communicate, one that generates less publicity than colorful inclusion images.