At the moment, I’m sitting on the fence.

I’m excited about the opportunities AI could offer to better include disabled people within events. Where technology has been developed with disability as a leading thought - such as improvements in screen readers, captioning and speech recognition - it can make a hugely positive difference.

But I’m also anxious about its potential to do completely the opposite.

AI learns from data. The more data and interaction it has, the more it learns to recognise patterns, make predictions and ultimately make decisions.

The problem is that the data it learns from has been shaped by us.

And humans have biases.

That means the prejudices, assumptions and stereotypes which already lead to discrimination can become embedded within AI-driven technology. 

Rather than removing bias, there is a very real danger that technology simply learns it - and then applies it at scale.

Adding AI to existing systems won't automatically solve the problem. In fact, if we're not careful, it could reinforce it.

  • AI is already finding its way into venue selection, seating plans, meeting scheduling, content production, attendee communications and event technology. That can make our lives easier. But only if the technology works for the people we're asking to use it.

  • Imagine you have a visual impairment and can't access AI-generated communications. What if interactive technology relies on gesture recognition? What if a keypad has small buttons or requires a particular grip? What if an automated process simply doesn't recognise someone's requirements because they fall outside the data it has learnt from?

  • Venues aren't always fully accessible. Content isn't consistently delivered accessibly. Event infrastructure, formats and flows aren't always designed with different needs in mind. And crucially, we still don't involve enough people with lived experience when we're designing event experiences.

  • Who was this designed and tested with?

    Were disabled people and people with different access requirements involved?

  • Who might struggle to access or use it?

    Don't just test the 'normal' user journey.

  • Is there an accessible alternative?

    What happens when the technology doesn't work for somebody?

  • Are we gathering the right information?

    The more we understand the different people using our events, the better decisions we can make.

  • Have we involved people with lived experience?

    Not after implementation - while we're making the decisions.

Imagine if we deliberately learnt from all the people who might enter our event spaces - people with visible and invisible disabilities, different ages, backgrounds and identities - and used that knowledge to shape the technology we adopt.

Then imagine the data and insight we'd create as a result.

We could harness event technology to personalise and enhance experiences without leaving people behind.

Now that's AI I'd want to invest in.

Rachel Belliere-Wilson

is an access and inclusion educator, consultant, coach and working mother with physical disability and 30 years of experience in the live events arena. Rachel writes a column for our monthy newsletter, Ops News

Sign Up For Ops News
Accessibility & Inclusion Soutions - Bachel B W