# Impact of the European Accessibility Act on TV and Media Interaction in the Living Room: Thoughts from Industry

Regina Bernhaupt, Guillaume Pottier

► To cite this version:

Regina Bernhaupt, Guillaume Pottier. Impact of the European Accessibility Act on TV and Media Interaction in the Living Room: Thoughts from Industry. Interact, Sep 2025, Belo Horizonte, France. pp.77-81, 10.1007/978-3-032-05008-3_16. hal-05527541

HAL Id: hal-05527541

https://hal.science/hal-05527541v1

Submitted on 25 Feb 2026

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 - Attribution - International License
Impact of the European Accessibility Act on TV
and Media Interaction in the Living Room:
Thoughts from Industry

Regina Bernhaupt¹²[0000-0003-3522-5990] and Guillaume
Pottier¹[0009-0000-3361-4242]

¹ ruwido austria gmbh, Köstendorferstr. 8, 5202 Neumarkt a. W., Austria

² Eindhoven University of Technology, Groene Loeper, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
{regina.bernhaupt, guillaume.pottier}@ruwido.com
http://www.ruwido.com

³ www.tue.nl

r.bernhaupt@tue.nl

**Abstract.** The European Accessibility Act sets accessibility require-
ments for a range of products and services, including TV control and
entertainment products. To support accessibility requirements for remote
controls produced for the European market, we conducted a mix of lit-
erature review, user studies, and expert design sessions, to understand
how to address these recent legal requirements when it comes to remote
control design, interaction design and production.

**Keywords:** Accessibility · remote control · TV.

# 1 Introduction

The **European Accessibility Act (Directive (EU) 2019/882)** marks a sig-
nificant legislative milestone in the European Union's commitment to inclusivity
and equal access. Coming into force in June 2025, the directive establishes har-
monized accessibility requirements for a wide range of products and services,
including consumer electronics such as Smart TVs and remote controls [1]. Its
primary objective is to ensure that people with disabilities—whether visual, au-
ditory, motor, or cognitive—can interact with digital systems.

Remote controls, as the primary interface for navigating content, often present
barriers due to small buttons, complex layouts, or lack of tactile and auditory
feedback. These issues disproportionately affect elderly users and individuals
with impairments, a demographic that is steadily growing across Europe [2].

The EAA mandates that such devices be perceivable, operable, understand-
able, and robust, aligning with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG)
2.2 [6]. This has prompted a wave of innovation in interaction design, where
manufacturers are rethinking the very architecture of remote controls. New ap-
proaches include dedicated accessibility buttons, haptic feedback systems, and
voice-enabled interfaces, all aimed at creating more inclusive and intuitive user
experiences.
This article explores how these legislative changes are driving the develop-
ment of next-generation remote controls, with a focus on the case of ruwido, a
company at the forefront of accessible and sustainable design.

## 2 Accessibility and User Diversity

According to ISO 9241-11:2018, **accessibility** refers to the extent to which products, systems, and environments can be used by people with a wide range of needs and capabilities to achieve specific goals in defined contexts of use. This concept is central to inclusive design, particularly in the context of consumer electronics like remote controls.

The World Health Organization (2001) defines **disability** as an umbrella term encompassing impairments, activity limitations, and participation restrictions. Impairments may be physical, sensory, or cognitive, and often increase with age.

### 2.1 Types of Impairments Relevant to Remote Control Use

- Visual impairments affect the ability to perceive visual information, such as identifying buttons or reading on-screen menus.

- Motor impairments limit physical interaction, such as pressing small buttons or holding a device steadily.

- Hearing impairments may not directly affect remote control use but can impact interaction with audiovisual content.

- Cognitive impairments influence memory, attention, and decision-making, affecting the ability to navigate complex interfaces.

### 2.2 Demographic Context

Disability prevalence is significant and age-dependent: globally, about **16% of the population** lives with a significant disability (2021) [3]. In France (2021), **14% of people over 15** reported disabilities, with **6% experiencing severe limitations** [4]. In Austria (2022), **8.3%** of the population reported disabilities [5]. Among older adults (60+), the prevalence rises to **34.4%**, compared to **5.8%** in children under 15. [3]. These statistics underscore the importance of designing remote controls that are accessible to a broad and aging user base.

## 3 Accessibility in Remote Control Design: The Case of Ruwido

In response to the European Accessibility Act (Directive (EU) 2019/882), ruwido has undertaken a comprehensive redesign of its remote control concepts and architecture, focusing on a tactile element as key strategy (see Figure 1).

Our inclusive design strategies included:
- A single-piece haptic layer that enables tactile feedback and on-screen audio cues, supporting users with visual impairments [7].

- Laser-etched surfaces instead of printed labels, enhancing durability and tactile clarity.

- a (set of) dedicated buttons that lead users directly to accessibility features that are available in the user interface[7].

- **Minimalist Interface:** By reducing the number of buttons and focusing on core functionality, the remote minimizes cognitive load and enhances usability for elderly users or those with cognitive disabilities.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 1.** touch-sensitive remote control and the feedback displayed on the television screen upon interaction. The overlay is visible only when the user is touching and pressing the remote control buttons.</figcaption></figure>

In a series of developments and user studies performed between 2021 and 2025 we explored different aspects of interaction to align with the upcoming accessibility legislation.

First, the concepts improving tactile feedback and on-screen audio cues combined with a minimalist user interface were evaluated with 18 users, age 25 to 60, 7 identified as female, 11 as male, among them 11 had corrected vision (glasses or lenses). They were tasked to achieve mundane television tasks such as starting the system, adjusting the volume, reaching menus and channels via navigation and numbers. A traditional remote control was compared alongside the novel remote control. The participants had to achieve tasks in two conditions, a blind condition in which they could not look at the remote control, and a control condition without restriction. We identified that the novel way of interaction was acceptable, providing a high degree of usability (SUS median 80). In terms of UX the rating based on the AttrakDiff was rated globally high on pragmatic and hedonic qualities. We found that the overlay works well, supporting users visually when unsure where their fingers were on the remote control. The overlay can even help people to navigate if they operate the remote control blindly (without the ability to look at the remote control). In the normal conditions, the traditional remote control and the novel remote control perform as well, while in the blind condition, the novel remote control outperformed the traditional one.
The mixing of the condition reveals a learning effect during the experiment but confirms that the overlay and the novel concept reach a good usability score, on par with the traditional condition.

In a follow up study we investigated people that had sight correction, with 12 participants over 45 year old and wearing sight correction, glasses or lenses. Among the participants, 8 had at least one sight issue identified, while the other 4 had two sight issues combined, among myopia, hyperopia, presbyopia, and astigmatism. The same two remotes were compared, the traditional and the novel concept, and similar tasks were reproduced.

The participants reported the remote controls were comparable in terms of comfort, ease of use and efficiency of use. Some participants stated the remote control was unusual but would be better after getting used to it. Participants with presbyopia and hyperopia liked the possibility to not have to wear their glasses to look at the remote control in the overlay condition.

To further evaluate the concept we conducted a study with 14 participants from a company that offers work for people with different abilities. Participants reported low range of vision, cognitive limitations and haptic limitations. Each participant was unique and findings were more of a qualitative nature, showing the broad range how ruwido can support varying abilities. Based on this sample, we could show how the redesign aligns with the EAA's requirements for perceivability, operability, and robustness, ensuring that remote controls are usable by people with a wide range of abilities.

We found that the novel touch interaction with the overlay allows people to perform all the tasks they would typically need for enjoying TV (channel change, volume control and on/off). Participants in the study reported that the overlay can help them simplify the interaction and that they see potential to support them even further, for example by allowing them to directly access their favorite channel. Participant with haptic difficulties reported that they do not feel a difference in the touch interaction concept compared to traditional remote controls. Even two-handed usage was possible for them.

## 4 Lessons Learned and Conclusion

Our series of user studies clearly demonstrated that focusing on an inclusive design supports typically a broad range of users. Novel types of interaction beyond standard buttons are typically perceived as difficult to learn, and thus industry does not judge them as viable alternatives. This series of studies showed, that novel interaction can be viable goal and at the same time enhance accessibility.

The studies were part of a larger re-design refocusing on the architecture to look towards reinventing remote controls. The product used in this study also support sustainability, due to the way the product is constructed, can be disassembled and part of a circular economy.
## References

1. European Accessibility Act (Directive (EU) 2019/882). Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/882/oj/eng

2. World Health Organization. (2001). International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Retrieved from https://www.who.int/standards/classifications/international-classification-of-functioning-disability-and-health

3. World Health Organization (2022). Global report on health equity for persons with disabilities. ISBN: 978-92-4-006360-0. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240063600

4. Direction de la recherche, des études, de l'évaluation et des statistiques (2023). Le handicap en chiffres. Retrieved from https://drees.solidarites-sante.gouv.fr/publications-communique-de-presse-documents-de-reference/panoramas-de-la-drees/241128_Panorama_Handicap2024

5. Statistics Austria (2024). Around 760 000 people with a “registered disability” in Austria. Press release: 13 419-185/24. Retrieved from https://www.statistik.at/fileadmin/announcement/2024/09/20240910Betestat2EN.pdf

6. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. Retrieved from https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/quickref/

7. Ruwido. (2025). Better World Architecture Initiative. Retrieved from https://www.ruwido.com/better-world-architecture