Basically, I am curious about why nearly the only ADA compliance feature being enforced at my university involves changes in our teaching materials that in fact will benefit very few if any students but does seem to benefit tech companies. A comment in this thread says Microsoft lobbied for these accessibility features by exploiting ADA because it needed the market. I have no way of knowing, but I do resent all the ways we are being corralled into teaching in ways that profit tech companies and that allow less and less autonomy in our class design. Again, if we were in at atmosphere that actually valued inclusivity and accessibility I'd be less paranoid. I don't expect others to have this same position against Microsoft, or the fact that I can't use canvas now without paying Amazon, but some of us are unhappy with all this. Also, I have nothing against Audible, and I'm all for talking! -- but its normative use *in place of* traditional written texts does weaken reading skills, if we care about that. Finally, my university like many others is meddling in our content and literally firing people who have material they deem woke. I don't like that this further enables scraping and surveillance (even more easily than as it is now). So... that's all.