taz.de
Berlin Protest Demands Accessibility at Cultural Events
Around 300 people protested in Berlin for better accessibility at cultural events, highlighting the exclusion of disabled people from concerts, festivals, and clubs due to inaccessible infrastructure and websites, urging policymakers to include concrete actions in the 500-billion-euro infrastructure package.
- What specific accessibility issues are preventing people with disabilities from fully participating in cultural events in Germany?
- Fight For Your Right To Party" blared from speakers at the Brandenburg Gate on Monday, as around 300 people protested for better accessibility. The protest, part of the European Protest Day on Disability Equality, highlighted the exclusion of disabled people in the event industry, citing inaccessible venues and websites.
- How are building codes and safety regulations being used to justify a lack of accessibility in German venues, and what impact does this have on the cultural participation of people with disabilities?
- Many venues use building codes or fire safety regulations as excuses to avoid investing in accessibility, hindering disabled people's access to cultural events. The initiative 'Barrierefrei Feiern' offers practical support to venues, analyzing the entire event experience from ticket purchase to departure, aiming for inclusivity.
- What concrete policy changes are needed to ensure that cultural venues in Germany become truly accessible to people with disabilities, and what role should disabled individuals play in shaping these changes?
- The lack of concrete measures for cultural inclusion in the new coalition agreement is concerning. The initiative suggests tying funding for cultural institutions to accessibility standards developed collaboratively with disabled people, emphasizing the importance of involving disabled individuals in decision-making processes.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the issue from the perspective of people with disabilities, highlighting their exclusion from cultural events. This is appropriate given the context of the protest, but it could be strengthened by including perspectives from event organizers and policymakers to present a more balanced view.
Language Bias
The language used is mostly neutral and objective. There is some emotional language, such as describing barriers as "stark eingeschränkt" (strongly restricted) and "deutliche Benachteiligung" (clear disadvantage), but this reflects the gravity of the situation and isn't overly inflammatory.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses on the lack of accessibility for people with disabilities in the cultural sector, but it could benefit from including data on the prevalence of disability in Germany and the overall economic impact of inaccessibility. It also doesn't mention any specific examples of artists with disabilities facing barriers, relying instead on the spokesperson's statement.
False Dichotomy
The article doesn't present a false dichotomy, but it could explore the potential trade-offs between preserving historical buildings and ensuring accessibility more deeply. The narrative implicitly suggests that accessibility and preservation are compatible, but this isn't always the case.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights the struggle for accessibility for people with disabilities in cultural events, advocating for their equal participation. The initiative "Barrierefrei Feiern" directly addresses this inequality by promoting accessible infrastructure and practices in the event industry. The protest and calls for government action aim to reduce this inequality through policy changes and infrastructure improvements.