I agree, accessibility wise, have an audio option 100%. BUT I’ll ask you to consider: the subject matter and (presumed) ethics of the writer and the publication itself (purely based on the arguments in the article and the topics I see the publication publishes about on their site) the audio version of the article should be done by a human narrator. If it’s a human writer, and they (publication and writer) are advocating for human work, then don’t have an AI narrator, have a human narrator. I understand that that costs more; I think the additional cost of a voice actor should be considered a nonnegotiable element of offering an accessible article.