Commenting Without Committing: A Reminder that Members Are Part of "They"

by Gary Wunder and Danielle McCann

As an organization, the question for the National Federation of the Blind seldom should be “do we do this or that?” Instead, it is answering the question “How can we do both?” The answer often depends on you and me. How much time and energy am I willing to give to the organization? How much of my limited treasury should I give to our shared movement? The amount of time and treasure that each of us can give will vary, but the question is always the same: how much of who I am and what I have am I willing to contribute to a cause larger than myself?

Recently, as we ramped up promotion of the Blind Driver Challenge, a thread sprang up in the comments on one of our Facebook posts about the Challenge. They were not written for publication but were part of what we might call a spirited chat. We have exercised some liberty in making this look better on paper, but we have not wanted to change the flavor of the discussion in any way. We have fixed spelling and punctuation as a courtesy to those posting and appreciate their engagement on a subject of real currency and interest today. Omitted are the long website addresses that were included, our belief being that anyone can Google if they wish to read the source material. Here is the discussion:

Nimer Jaber: Just imagine: We throw so much money at a project to drive a car while blind, but we can't make accessible currency. We don't have requirements for accessible appliances. We can't independently traverse through an airport because we don't have a way to get directionality from signs. Some lose jobs daily because of inaccessible technology, inaccessible office equipment, etc. We have no requirements for accessible pathways, thus making it more difficult and time-consuming (not impossible) to traverse through unknown large spaces such as train stations independently, even though they exist in other countries. We lack access to directionality on trails, thus making it more difficult to hike independently.

Much of our public transit systems, while including audible stop announcements, have the announcements pretty much inaudible due to older systems, broken speakers, etc., not to mention that we can't find the stops as they are not uniformly located in the same places. Not all stops have bus shelters, and not all bus poles look the same. We still rely on canes and dogs to get around even though we have tech that can literally take off and land a plane autonomously. Most doctor's office forms still remain inaccessible to this day, not to mention government forms and offices, meaning that I must give up my right to medical privacy in order to get these forms filled out. COVID testing remains inaccessible. And yet . . . the best we can do is say that we can live the life we want, we can drive cars, and we should use Aira to be independent.
 
Jamie Principato Crane: We are actively working on projects to address everything you listed here. But this isn’t mutually exclusive of signal boosting a cool endeavor a fellow blind man is undertaking to showcase some cool technology and his confidence in his ability to leverage it.
 
Nimer Jaber: Actively working on those things, huh? Well, I'm sorry, but I don't see the progress, and moreover, all the hundreds of thousands of dollars being sunk into this "endeavor" could have been used for those "efforts." Keep smoking whatever you're smoking though, as can anyone else who hasn't smelled the Kool-Aid. We don't need more platitudes and inspiration; we need results. Fact is, if NFB wanted results on many of the points I mentioned, which only scratch the surface of the struggles blind people face, we would have much more progress.

NFB is no different than ACB, or most any big entity. . . . They have lots of power but actually accomplish little these days to advance accessibility. In so many ways, we are regressing and moving backwards, and NFB, if they are doing something about these things, is moving in reverse.

Once I see results and NFB not opposing many of the issues I've outlined, I will be the first to say I was wrong, but sadly, that just isn't the case.

Jamie Principato Crane: COVID-19 At-Home Test Information | National Federation of the Blind
Access Technology Affordability Act (ATAA) (H.R. 2086/S. 815) | National Federation of the Blind
 
Nimer Jaber: Two years into a pandemic, and we finally have this, yep, amazing progress. And I'm still not aware of any accessible test. Access technology isn't fixing many of the issues I raised above. . . . In fact, AT devices are woefully out of date and aren't usable by the majority of our population for various reasons. Cost is a barrier, but a small one. Again, instead of parroting what NFB tells you, use your brain and come up with links addressing my points. . . . But you can't. Anyway, I'm done engaging with this silliness as I've made my points clear.

Jamie Principato Crane: Twenty-First Century Websites & Applications Accessibility Act | National Federation of the Blind

Nimer Jaber: I said nothing about websites in my post. Even if I had, again, more than twenty years after online applications, we finally have this. . . .

Jamie Principato Crane: Medical Device Nonvisual Accessibility Act (H.R. 4853) | National Federation of the Blind

Nimer Jaber: Medical device accessibility isn't the same as walking into a doctor's office and registering accessibly. Although, I admit that this would be progress for sure.

Jamie Principato Crane: Accessibility of Home Appliances

Nimer Jaber: What is the status of this? How long will we wait until NFB prioritizes this? Why haven't they yet?

Jamie Principato Crane: Research Program | National Federation of the Blind - There is more, but you get the idea and can Google as easily as I can. You simultaneously overestimate the "power" you believe the organization has and underestimate the breadth and depth of the initiatives they undertake, which are all each carried out by a very small percentage of the members. When and which things get prioritized depends on members raising the matter and often on members voting on it or otherwise organizing efforts around it. Some things happen faster and with less formality—for example, moving to address issues regarding COVID or certain cases of egregious discrimination such as guide dog users being denied rideshare services. But even in those cases, the NFB relies on blind people to come forward and raise the issues. So, in a sense, your post here is helpful. But there is a lot going on, and it isn’t just a tiny handful of people with boatloads of influence and money calling all the shots. It's more like dozens of tiny Rotary clubs that try to coordinate the actions and preferences of their members into a cohesive whole that then still has to navigate the similar mess that is our country's mainstream political system, the various preferences and priorities of the entities that do have power and money (various corporations, granting and research institutions, etc.), and in some cases the legal system at multiple layers.

Basically, stop waiting. Take action. This thread is a great start. So is your particular job.
 
Editor: Two things to note in the above exchange. 1. As Jamie pointed out, “When and which things get prioritized depends on members raising the matter and often on members voting on it or otherwise organizing efforts around it.” This means that if you’re a member of the Federation, you can certainly raise concerns and take action from within the organized blind movement. President Riccobono challenges us to find what’s next frequently. 2. As members, when folks talk about the Federation in third person, they are leaving themselves out. “The NFB needs to. . .” or “They should. . .” should be more like “We need to. . .” or “We should. . .” As members, we pledge to participate in the efforts of the Federation. The Braille on the membership coin says “together.”  That means that you are part of the movement; you are as welcome and encouraged to share your ideas to shape our priorities as board members and long-time leaders are.

Our collective tapping of canes and jingling of guide dogs’ collars are much louder than the clicks of a solitary keyboard. Could it be that it is safer to debate among ourselves, insulated by our keyboards and assistive technology, than it is to tackle the big problems, the big players, and the issues that will substantially change lives?

May we suggest that while dialog on social media is definitely appreciated, action is the only way we will continue to make progress.