A Return to Community: Flintstones or Jetsons?
Vivienne Conway · 2020 · Proceedings of the 17th International Web for All Conference (W4A) · doi:10.1145/3371300.3389789
Summary
This keynote-style paper uses the cultural lens of two iconic 1960s cartoons — The Flintstones and The Jetsons — to reflect on how automation and technology are shaping the lives of people with disabilities. Dr. Conway, writing from Western Australia during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, draws parallels between the two shows: both depicted families navigating daily life with the help of technology (prehistoric or futuristic), yet neither ever included a character with a disability. This observation frames the paper's central argument: that while technological progress has brought remarkable assistive technology innovations — obstacle-detecting glasses, eye gaze software, stair-climbing wheelchairs, screen reader-compatible chart interpretation, and text-scanning pens for students with dyslexia — the broader question of whether technology truly serves people with disabilities remains open. Conway draws heavily on John Naisbitt's "High Tech/High Touch" framework from 1999, which argues that technological advancement must be balanced with human connection, community, and meaning. The paper was delivered at the first fully virtual W4A conference, itself an example of how automation and remote technology can simultaneously increase accessibility (allowing remote participation from anywhere in the world) while potentially reducing the human connection that in-person conferences provide.
Key findings
Conway identifies several concrete concerns about automation's impact on people with disabilities. Autonomous vehicles, while potentially transformative for independence, raise questions about the transition period between human-driven and self-driving systems, affordability for people with disabilities who statistically earn less, and liability for accidents. Machine learning algorithms used in employment screening, health insurance, and life insurance are flagged as potentially biased against people with disabilities and older adults — the Australian Human Rights Commission had released discussion papers urging caution. Virtual and augmented reality experiences, while offering new possibilities for people with physical disabilities (such as virtually visiting the Egyptian pyramids), remain inaccessible to people with sensory disabilities who cannot fully engage with visual or auditory VR content. Home automation (smart lighting, temperature control, door locks, voice assistants) is highlighted as particularly impactful — while convenient for people without disabilities, these technologies can be essential for independent living for people with disabilities. Conway notes that the COVID-19 shift to remote conferencing demonstrated both the potential and limitations of technology for inclusion.
Relevance
This paper offers a valuable practitioner and advocate perspective that complements the more technical research typically presented at W4A. Conway's central tension — between embracing technological innovation and maintaining human community — is directly relevant to accessibility professionals who must balance automation with genuine inclusion. The observation that neither The Flintstones nor The Jetsons included disabled characters speaks to a broader cultural erasure that persists in technology design when disability is not considered from the outset. The concerns about algorithmic bias in employment and insurance are increasingly urgent as automated decision-making systems become more prevalent, and accessibility practitioners should be aware of how these systems can discriminate. The paper's call for a "new cartoon" — an aspirational vision of the future that includes characters with a broad range of abilities — captures the need for disability representation not just in media but in the design imagination of technologists building the future.
Tags: digital accessibility · automation · assistive technology · disability representation · home automation · algorithmic bias · community · Internet of Things