Estée Lauder is on a #DisabilityDongle rampage; first with their recent awards bait makeup app for blind people that is still in beta, and now this. It is shocking, all of it is extractive it, and none of it grants any agency to the disabled people they're virtue signaling.
I just joined the hackathon to see what I can learn. There seems to be no way to identify as disabled, and there's no way to mark disability as a specialty. But there's lots of these folks...
Their "Inclusive Tech Report" is really upsetting. No longer amused, just shaken. It's clear they won't succeed, but how much harm they do to disabled people in the process, it's seeming like it will be extensive. devpost-public.s3.amazonaws.com/ELC%20Hackatho…
I'm now over on the Slack page for this hackathon imploring participants to use their submissions to implore Estée Lauder to stop taking advantage of disabled people in this way. I'm so depressed.
Disabled people are not learning opportunities. Disabled people should not be used to hone your design skills. Don’t extract from disabled people to enhance your portfolio or signal your virtue.
The prize logic is really strange. Why is the 'idea' prize so much less than the 'technical prize' and shouldn't they both be trying to achieve what the 'Bonus Prize' gets the least amount of money for?
The only thing I can actually find about disability on this hackathon page are these three links under 'Inspiration'.
There's no judging criteria for demonstrating any sort of understanding or comprehension about disability. Only for identifying a problem (based on what knowledge? who cares) and then solving it (gotta be innovative).
In the Hackathon Slack channel, I asked participants how much of their prize money they would commit to the disabled people who informed their submission. So far I have received only one response. Laughter.
In this exchange, auden explains how the Hackathon organizers (Estée Lauder and Devpost) squished two braille characters together, communicating "Hack 4 A For Y" instead of "Hack for a11y"
I received an email from Devpost this morning. They did not engage in any way with the issues I have raised. They closed the email saying "if you have any other educational content we can share there we'll gladly look into them with the Estee Lauder team for consideration." 🙄
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A few people sent this to me, so I'm going to do a basic analysis. To start: I am already rattling off people in my head who I can imagine wanting one. And also there is no alt text on the posts. It may claim to be an accessible product, but the announcement is not.
[ID: Three images. Product is a black handled instrument with a jar (is it tube of lipstick attached). Next image shows a white woman smiling ash she holds the object to her face. The next image shows a black woman applying the lipstick.]
The casting feels complicated to me. The women are both disabled and typically beautiful. The announcement images are posted in a way that they erase their visible disabilities. So much more to say here, I honestly would love @carlyfindlay's take.
Can someone explain to me how a person can be a "world's first" user of a launched product? Were there no testers? Some perplexing internal erasure going on here, simply so they can use marketable firsting language.
Also, the cry face emoji in the YouTube video title makes me think they are trying to tap into the emotionality of cochlear implant "hearing for the first time" videos.
XRAI's response is worrisome, as is their lack of response to my request for clarification. @RNID & @DeafKidzIntl, you are both listed on their website as partners. Did you provide any testers for these glasses?
How about I describe my experience in the @TED Residency, when its billionaire funder, @ruthannharnisch of the @harnischfound told me I was "a destructive force in a world you hoped to improve" And I should "Disable [my] socials until you get the help you need."
An hour later, my ex, @MegRhi texted me, asking me to have Ruth Ann stop texting her employer's board members, as though I could stop a billionaire on a rampage
It's ok that none of this means anything. But it nearly killed me. And I will hold onto the terror and pain I felt forever. @CyndiStivers is complicit.
Let's start with what @may_gun wrote about the abled POV. This 'Partner Content' features 3 students, all identified as recent graduates of CCS, their research rhetorically professionalized. How, then is the disabled person described?
Researchers are not taught about the pressure research subjects feel to create a tangible problem where none may exist. I am inclined to believe this anecdote was a response to the research subject wanting to be useful to a naive researcher.
This is strange. Usually when parents are mentioned, it means parents of disabled children. But that’s not the case here. Disabled people were clearly testers. No mention of disabled folks having agency or decision making power. Segmenting us with children is infantilizing.