Ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon. My name is Guido Gybels, and I am the Director of New Technologies at the Royal National Institute for Deaf People in the UK. Today, I would like to discuss with you the state of affairs in accessibility of telecommunication services in Europe from the point of view of hard of hearing and deaf citizens.
But first of all, I thought it would be helpful to spend a few moments talking about the organisation that I represent. RNID, the Royal National Institute for Deaf People, founded in 1911, is the largest charity representing the interests of the 9 million deaf and hard of hearing people in the UK. We are a membership charity with well over 34.000 members, employing around 1.300 staff and we spent more than 40 million pounds during our last financial year trying to dramatically improve the lives of deaf, hard of hearing and speech-impaired people.
Our mission is to achieve a radically better quality of life for deaf and hard of hearing people. We do this of course by campaigning and lobbying, by providing information and raising awareness, but also by delivering training courses and consultancy on deafness in particular and disability in general. In addition, we are the largest single communication support provider in the UK and our services include sign language interpreters, lip speakers, as well as speech-to-text operators and note takers. RNID has also various educational programmes seeking lasting change in education for deaf and hard of hearing children and young people. Furthermore, we run comprehensive employment programmes to help deaf people into work and we operate care services for deaf and hard of hearing people with additional needs in care homes throughout the UK.
RNID of course also manages RNID Typetalk, the national telephone relay service that was founded in the late eighties, allowing textphone users to communicate with voice telephone users by translating text into voice and vice versa. Since a few years now we have established a Video Interpreting service that uses video conferencing technology for the purpose of remote sign language interpretation and recently we have extended this into a pilot BSL relay service.
RNID Sound Advantage is the main UK supplier of equipment and products for deaf and hard of hearing people and we have extensive and unique programmes for social, medical and technical research.
My own department is a research and development team consisting of engineers, scientists, computer programmers and researchers. We pursue every opportunity to harness information and communication technology to tear down the barriers to opportunity and fulfilment that sadly enough still exist in our modern world.
Many of you have heard me speak, on many occasions, about how the development of the Information Society has dramatically changed the way we live, educate, work, and also entertain ourselves. Telecommunication undoubtedly is one of the main pillars of this revolution and indeed the topic of my talk today.
Unfortunately, many of us don't fully appreciate the significance of the transformations we are living through, nor are most citizens aware of the societal impact and change the developing telecommunication sector has induced.
Trying to put this in perspective, and in an attempt to illustrate the rapid nature of the revolution we are experiencing, I have cast the whole of about 5 million years of human history on a 24-hour clock. Looking back at our history from such a perspective is quite a humbling, self-effacing experience. The start of the clock, at midnight, zero hours, zero minutes, zero seconds represents the appearance of hominoids, our biological ancestors. Homo sapiens doesn't materialise until 12 minutes past 7 in the evening. And all known history, every civilisation we have ever heard of, every historical figure whose name we know, every single documented event in human history only occupies the final 97 seconds of that day.
For the best part of the approximately 4 hours and 48 minutes on our clock that homo sapiens has roamed the earth, they did so as hunter-gatherers, a nomadic existence in which small groups of humans foraged the continents in search of food and with very little change in the way they lived over hundreds of thousands of years.
About 12,000 years ago, a revolutionary change occurred over a period of just a few centuries. This change is known as the Neolithic Revolution, when the nomadic lifestyle was gradually replaced with a sedentary existence. When mankind began farming, domesticating plants and animals, its way of life changed radically. The face of society was dramatically altered from one where the tribal structure of hunters and gatherers made place for an agricultural society and economy. This change allowed people to spend less time on roaming for food, allowed them to start building houses, communities, even nations, allowed individuals within those communities to specialise in other things than food hunting or gathering. We can hardly underestimate the consequences of this change, economically, culturally, socially. Indeed, one can say that this transition laid the foundation for what we understand to be civilisation itself.
And then, for almost 12,000 years, this agriculture-based society remained the basis on which the social order was built. It was a more recent, and not less revolutionary change that ended this world order. I am of course referring to the Industrial Revolution, which, just as much as the Neolithic Revolution, is completely overhauling the way people live, work, educate and even entertain themselves.
Now, don't get me wrong: science and technology have existed for a very long time and were there well before the Industrial Revolution. But only since the Industrial Revolution have they become the main factors in our changing societal order, with an ever-increasing impact on our daily lives. In our time, we have seen the emergence of information and communication technology as the driver behind the modern world. We call this new world the Information Society, and it means that in order to participate as citizens, in order to work, to shop, to go to school and even to have fun, we need to have access to ever increasing amounts of information and to the products and services that deliver it to us.
Telecommunication, the ability to communicate effectively with anyone, anytime and in any place, is such a dominant technology that if you want to fully participate in society as an individual, if you want to be a citizen with all opportunities for fulfilment in today's Europe, you need comprehensive and unfettered access to all those telecommunication services.
Never before in the history of mankind have we had access to such a wealth of information and communication as in those final fractions of a second of my 24-hour clock representing human history. Never before have we had such an arsenal of telecommunication tools, products and services to our disposal. And never before in the history of mankind have we been so reliant, so dependent on all these information and communication facilities in order to fully participate as a citizen in society.
Technological progress has brought great benefits to the world at large. It has great potential to overcome some of the physical barriers to opportunity and fulfilment that were believed to be unbreakable before. But this progress has also a dark side, one that hard of hearing and deaf people have experienced extensively in the last decade.
Yes, it is true: hard of hearing and deaf people are being confronted by serious problems in using telecommunications and as a result of this are losing out as individuals in the Information Society.
Society at large has already recognised that advances in science and technology can potentially divide our world in "haves" and "have-nots", in those who can and those who cannot. This phenomenon is called the Digital Divide and it has been the topic of debate for many years.
However, too often the focus of this discussion is on economic, educational and cultural aspects of the Divide. As people and organisations that represent the interests of hard of hearing, deaf, speech-impaired and indeed all disabled citizens, we should endeavour to bring accessibility and usability to the forefront of the argument.
Very simply put: hard of hearing and deaf people are losing out in their lives today, are missing opportunities now and are being excluded from certain aspects of modern life because the telecommunications industry has failed to deliver fully inclusive, fully accessible services and products. It is not the fault of hard of hearing people, it is not the fault of deaf people, it is the error of an industry that has fallen short of delivering to all citizens.
And why is this? Mainly because the focus on short-term profits and immediate results has obscured the longer term economic and social benefits of more inclusive strategies. This is not going to change unless all of us take action. We need to work together, not just as groups of hard of hearing people, but across the boundaries of abilities and preferences, to bring political, legislative and regulatory pressure to bear on the industry. We hold the key. It's up to us to force this issue. Do not expect any automatic or magical solution; do not expect fundamental change unless real action is taken by all of us.
Many of the access barriers that hard of hearing and deaf people face can be technically resolved in a sustainable and practical way. Yes, that's right: for the overall majority of problems that hard of hearing people face in telecoms, there are already technical solutions possible, indeed even implemented in some countries. Let me give you a few examples.
Since the advent of 2G mobile phones, or GSM phones as you might know them, hearing aid users have faced great difficulty in using mobile handsets with their hearing aid because of the problem of interference. TDMA signalling as typically used by these networks, sends a signal in bursted segments and this interferes with the hearing aid, causing obtrusive tones in the aid. Those of you who don't wear hearing aids, just think about the effect that you get when you bring a mobile phone close to stereos, televisions or PCs and the resulting sound that this creates. Neither the hearing aid industry, nor the mobile phone manufacturers have been particularly driven to solve this problem. Nevertheless, scientifically speaking we understand it rather well, and in recent years several potential solutions have been proposed. The only reason that we are now making some progress in this field is because the American regulator, the FCC, has issued a statement forcing manufacturers to make their products less prone to interference.
Another example that I cite very often is that of interactive texting, the ability to communicate in real-time using character-by-character text. Many severely hard of hearing and deaf people use textphones to communicate in this way, using text as a substitute for voice. However, while mobile phones allow text messages to be sent in the form of SMS, they do not have this real-time, character-by-character text functionality built-in. Again, not because it is technically not possible, not because the networks wouldn't be able to do it, but simply because the awareness about the needs of specific users to communicate in this way remains very low amongst the industry. At RNID, we have developed mobile textphones and they have been available to the British public for many years. But again, without action, without a regulatory framework, such specialised solutions often don't get onto the market in other countries.
I could continue: think about proper volume control and additional amplification in fixed and mobile phones that would make all the difference for many hard of hearing people, who without such technically extremely simple provisions, cannot use the phone and face social and economic isolation as a result. Think about neck loops for inductive coupling of mobile phones with hearing aid and the fact that they all come with different connectors, are very easily damaged and not widely available. None of this would be acceptable for mainstream consumer goods, like televisions or washing machines. So, why do people think it is acceptable for critical components like neck loops that, again, could mean the difference between being able to use a mobile and being excluded from it?
In the UK we have had a text-to-speech relay service, called RNID Typetalk, since the 80s. Through the relay, textphone users can communicate with voice phone users. An operator speaks what is being typed to the hearing party and converts the spoken answers back to text for the hard of hearing or deaf person. Recently, we have also started a Video Relay Service, which is using the same principle, but then using British Sign Language over a video link, allowing sign language users to communicate with hearing people using their native language, rather than English text. Such a Video Relay Service has also been available in the States for a while now. However, in many European countries they haven't even heard of relay services. RNID Typetalk takes on average 37,000 calls per week, a total of 1.8 million calls per year. This demonstrates that there is a great need for hard of hearing and deaf people to communicate with the rest of society. So, why are so many other European citizens deprived of such a vital service?
The problem is not that different people have different abilities and preferences. The real problem is that the world around us is often not shaped with that observation in mind. And when it comes to problems that are perceived to only apply to relatively smaller groups in society, then free market mechanisms alone are not enough. In telecommunications, free markets in a competitive environment have clearly not delivered. So, my message today has to be that strong, joint-up campaigning and lobbying is required from all of us if we wish to change this.
Politicians and regulators must be made aware of the problem and must be forced into taking action. Also don't forget the other part of my message: the technology already exists. It is being used today. Mobile textphones exist. Cordless neck loops and wireless connections to hearing aids have been demonstrated. Solutions to reduce or extinguish interference of mobile phones with hearing aids have been produced. Relay service have been around for decades. It can be done. It is done. Now, let's make sure everyone will get access to them. And let's be clear about this: it might be the right thing to do from an ethical and moral point of view, but what will really make politicians and businesses listen is the long term social, economic and business case.
And fortunately, it is a very strong case. Designing and building telecommunications as fully inclusive services will bring great economic gains to society. It has been demonstrated that inclusive design is not just better for certain groups of individuals, but actually benefits all users.
Websites that are build as accessible sites offer a faster, better, more efficient and more satisfying experience to all users, not just people with disabilities. In a European Union where the population is ageing significantly, better designed telephone services, the availability of text in support of or as substitute for voice, better volume controls, clearer sound through better microphones and speakers will all benefit not just severely hard of hearing people, but everyone in that growing segment of European citizens.
When I walk down Piccadilly in London, with all the traffic roaring around me, I would benefit from the same functions as used by hard of hearing or deaf people. So, by providing all this, the industry is actually not just meeting the needs of a specific, relatively small group, but is actually making their products and services more usable and attractive to everyone. In a highly competitive market, this could mean the difference between being the number one player or seeing your business put out of commission.
Inclusive design is therefore just another way of mainstreaming the needs and requirements of hard of hearing and deaf people in that it recognises the fact that everyone is unique and our ability to use telecoms is not statically defined, but changes with context and environment. By making these needs a mainstream aspect of product and service design, we will avoid the pitfalls of specialised, niche market products and services which are often not very well designed, unattractive, expensive, difficult to get and not very well integrated with the rest of technology.
From a government perspective, more inclusive and better telecommunications would mean that employment, health, education, indeed society at large, all become more accessible and more available to more citizens. It will bring the expertise, knowledge and motivation of many more citizens that are currently excluded into the economy and will thus bring benefits to the whole of society.
If none of these carrots are enough, we also have a few sticks to our disposal: human rights legislation and anti-discrimination laws are already in force across Europe. We need to use these instruments to their fullest extent. We do no longer, as a society, find it acceptable that you would discriminate against an individual based on their abilities. We need to say to the telecommunications sector: ladies and gentlemen: the message is clear: it is the law that you make your services and products fully accessible and usable.
Once again, this conference is a great forum for me to repeat this message that I have been delivering for many years. But, it is not enough. As often, I am preaching to the converted. Most of the people here already know about the problems. They experience every day that society is not a truly equal place. They suffer from the barriers in telecommunication. However, unless we carry that message to the world outside, unless we actively and tirelessly campaign, lobby, yes fight for these rights, unless we promote and actively support inclusive design, not just for ourselves, but for everyone that is burdened by barriers in the information society, nothing will change.
We need to work together. Not just organisations of hard of hearing people. We need to forge alliances with deafness groups and organisations but also beyond the boundaries of hearing loss. We must not be infighting; we must not compete with other disability organisations. We must join efforts, we must bundle our strengths and resources. If we do that, then all of us will benefit from it, and ultimately every single individual in society will gain as well. If we unite, we can make it happen. I was born in Belgium, and our national motto is "L'union fait la force". United we stand. Divided we will fail.
If we take up the challenge, maybe one day historians will not just refer to this era as the beginning of the Information Society, but also as the dawn of the Inclusive Society. A world where every individual, regardless of abilities and preferences, is able to fully participate as a citizen and to realise their full human potential. Let us transform this dream into reality.
Thank you very much for your attention.
Speech by Guido Gybels, given at the EFHOH Conference, The Hague, The Netherlands, on 8 April 2005.