You are viewing your 1 free article this month. Login to read more articles.
Organisers of publishing events are increasingly committing to hybrid, but are the people at the heart of this decision driving the change?
Two years into the pandemic, hybrid events are part of our daily lives. We settle down in the cosy, blue-lit glow as our screens spring to life. This is optional and convenient entertainment for some. For those of us who are disabled, chronically ill or clinically vulnerable, however, hybrid is essential. It is our portal to the cultural world which we every day—not just in a pandemic—are excluded from.
As the UK lifts restrictions and rushes back to a previous normal, the ability to access hybrid events offers us a continued lifeline. Lifeline may seem like a metaphor, but in order to be valued and included members of society, we need to participate equally. Critically, without the ability to participate safely from home, disabled people may literally risk our health and our lives.
The publishing industry’s commitment to preserve hybridity and accessibility is welcome. Within publishing, only eight per cent of the workforce are disabled, compared to almost 20 per cent of the UK working-age population, so this cannot be representative of our needs. Therefore, it is crucial that disabled voices are included across the publishing arena, reaching beyond the spots of vital consultation.
It seems that in the publishing industry’s hybrid offer so far, mostly able-bodied others make decisions, perhaps based on profit, or related to seat numbers, about what disabled people see, when we see it, and if we see it live or recorded
Disabled voices must be central to the conversation on hybrid and true inclusion based on equality. Given that the focus on hybrid strategy so far is mostly from larger-scale providers targeting larger audiences, might these efforts also be about the financial bottom line? If so, hybrid delivery risks placing The Purple Pound, not disabled people’s needs, at the centre of any inclusion strategy.
Within publishing’s hybrid events arena, there is tokenism. Some recent book festivals have offered hybrid with a mixture of online only and in-venue only events. Others offer an allocation of hybrid for big-ticket events only. Does this division of participation promote inclusion or exclusion?
It seems that in the publishing industry’s hybrid offer so far, mostly able-bodied others make decisions, perhaps based on profit, or related to seat numbers, about what disabled people see, when we see it, and if we see it live or recorded.
The Social Model of Disability considers that society’s physical and attitudinal barriers, prejudice, systemic exclusion and lack of adjustments are disabling people, not that people themselves are disabled. In adopting the Social Model, the responsibility is for society to change. The onus to actively include us is on governments, organisations, businesses and individuals to make the changes we need to include us.
Globally, our right to inclusion is recognised by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities. Article 30 states explicitly: for participation in cultural life, disabled people must be able to access and participate at an equal level. The Equality Act 2010 details that, in law, adjustments must be made to include, and not discriminate against, disabled people. Moving forward from the pandemic, such adjustments must include hybrid and online events.
To achieve this, the publishing industry as a whole—from large organisers to one-person events—must urgently engage with disabled people and with the concept of the Social Model of Disability. Talk to us, listen to what we need, and provide this for us.
So what do we need?
Firstly, in the current flurry to hold events, in-venue activities are being prioritised. Yet Claire Wade, co-founder of the Society of Authors With Disabilities and Chronic Illnesses group, feels that: “Before the pandemic very few people knew how to host a hybrid event, now the information is readily available. It’s simple and low cost to organise something that people with a range of different access needs can be a part of.”
Secondly, understanding this variety of access needs is paramount. For some, streaming with captions with good-quality voice recognition may suffice. Others who need to limit their screen time find it helpful when “recordings are made available afterwards so I can listen to the audio in bites at my own pace.” Recordings with good-quality captions and full, accurate transcripts, which can be replayed multiple times, enables fuller participation.
Third, equality must underpin inclusive programming. Disabled authors are frustrated some festivals are “choosing to only stream a selection of events—the ones they think of as big-ticket events—and this limits choice”. Non-inclusive programming also impacts disabled speakers when prioritising those present in the venue, leaving digitally attending speakers "being treated as afterthoughts”.
Fourth, publishing’s attitude to interactive hybrid events being a less effective option must change. One author feels that the notion “that co-operation and creativity are far better experienced in person... is being mythologised and then accepted as concrete everywhere—and it is bullshit.”
Fifth, ableist language to describe in-venue events, such as "watch" vs. "attend", "in-person", "real" and "live" must change. Another author says, “As a housebound person who can only take part in events ‘virtually’, is my life not real? I feel that the use of such words denigrates the virtual experience as less and not as good as—and by association, also those who need to use it.”
For any hybrid strategy to be inclusive of disabled people, the bottom line must always be our equal value to society. Not, as one disabled author described it, be “just a buzzword that is used to elevate the reputation of event organisers”.
As the world and the UK publishing industry rush to embrace the previous normal with predominantly in-venue events which exclude us, please remember: value and include disabled people as equals.
After all, in the words of the World Health Organisation: "Disability is part of being human."