Monitoring eAccessibility in Europe: 2011 Annual Report

Although few countries have adopted policy instruments to ensure accessibility to television terminal equipment, those which have done so, appear to have adopted fairly strong policy instruments.

Figure . Status of television accessibility policy in EU and non-EU countries

Source: Own elaboration, 2011. Unit: Percentages

Figure . Status of television accessibility policy, by country

Source: Own elaboration, 2011. Unit: Percentages

Overall, United Kingdom scores the highest, followed by Spain, Canada, Czech Republic and USA. The remaining countries score below the average.

Scoring for accessibility to public television services is based on the following six questions:

1. 
   Are provisions to ensure accessibility to public television services in place? (No requirements or assumed role / Only voluntary, assumed public service role / Required by law, regulations or by licence or contract).
   
2. 
   Is subtitling required in public television? (No / Yes).
   
3. 
   Is audio description required in public television? (No / Yes).
   
4. 
   Is sign language required in public television? (No / Yes).
   
5. 
   Are public broadcasters required to ensure accessibility to their complementary web-based services? (No requirements or assumed role / Only voluntary, assumed public service role / Required by law, regulations or by licence or contract).
   
6. 
   Are public broadcasters required to ensure accessibility to their digital television services? (No requirements or assumed role / Only voluntary, assumed public service role / Required by law, regulations or by licence or contract).
   

The questions used for scoring accessibility to commercial television services are similar those used for public television services. As for public television, Spain and United Kingdom scored the highest on accessibility to commercial television services, followed by France and Canada. Most countries have more or less modest accessibility requirements for commercial television services than for public television services. However Ireland, Italy and Hugary seem hardly to have adopted any provision to ensure accessibility in commercial television. The case of Portugal is curious in that, having implementing important policies related to public television, its score on the accessibility of the commercial television is very low.

1. 
   Has the country introduced requirements for subtitling in digital television?
   
2. 
   Has the country introduced requirements for audio description in digital television?
   
3. 
   Has the country introduced requirements for audio subtitling in digital television?
   
4. 
   Has the country introduced requirements for sign language services in digital television?
   
5. 
   Has the country introduced requirements for accessibility information (Electronic Programme Guides) in digital television?
   

In most countries, accessibility requirements to digital television services are less developed than for analogue television services. Spain, United Kingdom and Greece appear to be particularly developed in this domain. On the other hand, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Portugal and Norway have not introduced any accessibility requirement in digital television.

Scoring for accessibility to Internet Protocol Television (IPTV) is based on the following three questions:

1. 
   Are cable/telephony companies required to ensure inclusion of access services (audio description, subtitling, audio subtitling, and sign language services) in provision of IPTV services? (No requirements or assumed role / Only voluntary, assumed public service role / Required by law, regulations or by licence or contract).
   
2. 
   Are telephony companies required to ensure inclusion of access services (audio description, subtitling, audio subtitling, and signing services) in provision of IPTV services? (No requirements or assumed role / Only voluntary, assumed public service role / Required by law, regulations or by licence or contract).
   
3. 
   Have national authorities reviewed accessibility requirements in industry standards used for IPTV delivery? (Nothing specific / Some actions, but weak or no clear deadlines / Regulations, standards or guidelines are currently being reviewed / New regulations, standards or guidelines have been adopted).
   

Scoring for accessibility to terminal equipment is based on the following two questions:

1. 
   Are provisions to ensure accessibility to analogue television terminal equipment, e.g. built-in caption decoding feature, in place?
   
2. 
   Are provisions to ensure accessibility to digital television terminal equipment, e.g. built-in caption decoding feature, in place?
   

United Kingdom, Australia, Canada and USA have adopted accessibility requirements for both analogue and digital terminal equipment. Spain and Portugal have adopted accessibility requirements for digital terminal equipment. The remaining countries seem to have implemented hardly any provisions to ensure accessibility to analogue and digital terminal equipments.

Scoring for the use of certification or labelling of accessibility in public television accessibility policy is based on the following two questions:

1. 
   To what extent is certification or labelling of accessibility in use in public television accessibility policy? (Certification or labelling not yet playing a significant role / Television accessibility certification or labelling is an integral part of policy approach).
   
2. 
   What kinds of certifications or labelling of television accessibility are most common in your country? (No certification / Self-declaration / NGO certification or label / Third-party certification).
   

Scoring for requirements to provide public information about accessible television services for end-users is based on the following three questions:

1. 
   Are public broadcasters required to provide information about accessible broadcasts to end-users?
   
2. 
   Are commercial broadcasters required to provide information about accessible broadcasts to end-users?
   
3. 
   Are retailers of television technology requested to provide information about accessible technology to end-users?
   

Spain, United Kingdom, France and Canada scored the highest on requirements to provide public information about accessible television services for end-users, followed by USA, Sweden and Australia. The remaining countries analysed do not show advances on this kind of requirements.

Scoring for research and development obligations for broadcasters is based on the following two questions:

1. 
   Are public broadcasters required to do research and development to enhance accessibility to television services?
   
2. 
   Are commercial broadcasters required to do research and development to enhance accessibility to television services? (No / Weak statement, narrow scope / Strong statement, wide scope).
   

Together with the certification and labelling of accessibility television services, research and development obligations for broadcasters seem not to have been introduced in most of the countries, with the exception of Ireland, the Netherlands, the UK and Norway, that have introduced some kind of research and development obligations for public and commercial broadcasters.