Automated checkers find some problems and miss the ones that matter most. Listening to your own site read aloud reveals whether it is usable, and the software is already on your computer.

Why the automated check is not enough

Tools catch what is machine-detectable: missing alternative text, insufficient contrast, absent form labels. That is genuinely useful and it is a minority of what matters.

What they cannot assess is whether the experience makes sense. Alternative text reading image one two three passes the check and tells a listener nothing. A form with labels can still be navigated in an order that makes it incomprehensible.

Listening to the page is the only way to find those, and it takes twenty minutes.

What is already on your computer

Both major desktop platforms include a screen reader as standard, and there is a widely used free option for Windows as well.

On a Mac, VoiceOver is built in and switched on with a keyboard shortcut. On Windows, Narrator is built in, and NVDA is a free download that more people actually use.

On a phone, both platforms have one in the accessibility settings, and the phone version is worth trying too since that is where most of your visitors are.

Nothing needs buying, and the first step is finding the shortcut for your platform and being ready to press it again to stop.

What to expect the first time

Being honest so you do not conclude the software is broken.

It will be fast and difficult to follow. Screen reader users typically increase the speed considerably beyond the default, and even the default sounds rapid to somebody who has never used one.

You will not know the keyboard commands, and you do not need most of them. Four or five cover everything in this exercise.

And it will feel disorienting, which is itself informative. That disorientation is a fraction of what a badly built page produces for somebody relying on it.

The commands worth knowing

The heading and link commands are the two that matter, because they are how a screen reader user skims. Nobody listens to a page from top to bottom any more than a sighted visitor reads every word.

The three tests worth running

Listen to the headings alone

Jump heading to heading and see whether the structure makes sense. If it does, the page is navigable. If the headings are out of order, missing, or applied to things that are not headings, that is a structural problem.

List the links

Bring up the links list and read it out of context. Anything saying click here, read more, or the same text repeated for different destinations is a link nobody can use this way.

This single test finds more real problems than any automated scan.

Complete your own contact form

From the top of the page, using only the keyboard, listening. Whether every field is announced, whether the purpose is clear, whether an error is announced when it occurs, and whether you can reach and press the submit button.

If you cannot complete it, neither can a share of your visitors, and that is an enquiry not arriving.

What you will probably find

Consistent enough to predict.

Images announced by filename because the alternative text is missing. Links reading as read more. A menu that cannot be opened without a mouse. A form where the error appears visually and is never announced. And a phone number that reads as a string of digits with no indication it is a number.

Each of those is fixable, and none is difficult once you have heard it.

The one thing to hold onto

You are not simulating disability, and it would be wrong to claim you are.

An experienced screen reader user is considerably more capable with the software than you will be in twenty minutes, and they navigate pages you would find impossible. The exercise is not about empathy through difficulty.

It is about hearing what your page actually says when the visual layout is removed, which is information you cannot get any other way and which no checklist provides.

What to do afterwards

Fix the specific things you heard rather than commissioning a general review.

Alternative text on images that carry meaning. Link text that describes the destination. Headings applied properly. Form labels and announced errors. A menu operable by keyboard.

That list is most of what matters for a small business site, and it came from twenty minutes rather than an audit, which is the same argument for doing the accessible thing as ordinary build quality in why accessibility is a business issue.

Frequently asked questions

Why not just use an automated checker?

Tools catch what is machine-detectable and miss whether the experience makes sense. Alternative text reading image one two three passes the check and tells a listener nothing.

What software do I need?

None. Both major desktop platforms include a screen reader as standard, and there is a widely used free option for Windows. Phones have one in accessibility settings.

What should I expect the first time?

It will be fast and disorienting. Experienced users increase the speed well beyond the default, and you will only need four or five commands for this exercise.

What are the most useful tests?

Listen to the headings alone to check the structure, list the links and read them out of context, and complete your own contact form using only the keyboard.

Which test finds the most problems?

Listing the links. Anything reading as click here or read more, or the same text repeated for different destinations, is unusable that way.

Am I simulating what a blind user experiences?

No. An experienced user is far more capable with the software than you will be in twenty minutes. The exercise is about hearing what your page says without the visual layout.

West Coast Media Solutions Inc. provides web design, web development, hosting, digital marketing, and business consulting to organisations across Canada, drawing on more than twenty-five years in the field.

Never heard your own site read aloud?

We run the listening tests and fix what they surface, which is usually different from what an automated scan reports.

Start a Conversation