Accessibility
Effective date: July 15, 2026 Last updated: July 15, 2026
Money & World is published by Creative Corner Agency LLC, a Florida limited liability company based in Naples, Florida.
We want everyone to be able to read this publication, including people who use screen readers, keyboard navigation, screen magnification, voice control, or any other assistive technology.
This page tells you what we are aiming for, what we have actually done, what we know is not right yet, and how to tell us when we get it wrong.
1. Our target
We are working toward Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2 Level AA.
WCAG 2.2 is published by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). Level AA is the level most commonly referenced in law and in procurement, and it is the level a serious publication should meet.
2. Where we actually stand
Our conformance with WCAG 2.2 Level AA is partial. We do not claim full conformance.
We want to be direct about why we are saying it that way. Plenty of accessibility statements assert full compliance. Most of those assertions are not true, and a reader who relies on one and then hits a barrier has been misled twice: once by the barrier, and once by the page that promised there would not be one.
"Partial" means: we have built with accessibility in mind from the start, we have taken the specific measures listed below, and we have not completed a full independent audit against every WCAG 2.2 Level AA success criterion. Until that audit is done and the findings are fixed, claiming full conformance would be a guess dressed up as a fact.
Accessibility is not a milestone we pass. It is maintenance. Every article we publish is a new chance to get an image description wrong or to ship a chart nobody can read with a screen reader. So this statement describes work that is ongoing, and it always will.
3. What we have done
These are the specific measures we have taken. This list describes the site as designed and built, and it should be read together with Section 4, which lists what we know is not right yet.
Semantic HTML. The site is built from real HTML elements that mean what they say. Headings are heading elements, in order, not styled text pretending to be headings. Navigation is in a nav element, the article is in an article element, lists are lists, and buttons are buttons. This is the foundation. Assistive technology can only describe a page accurately if the page describes itself accurately first.
Heading structure. Each page has one main heading, and the headings below it nest in a logical order without skipping levels. Screen reader users navigate long articles by jumping between headings, so a broken heading order is not a cosmetic issue, it is a broken table of contents.
Keyboard navigation. Everything you can do with a mouse, you can do with a keyboard. You can reach every link, button, form field, and control using Tab and Shift+Tab, activate them with Enter or Space, and move through the page in an order that matches what you see on screen. There are no keyboard traps, which means you can always Tab your way back out of anything you Tab into.
Visible focus indicators. When you Tab to something, you can see where you are. We use focus-visible outlines with clear contrast against the background. We have not removed focus outlines for the sake of appearance. A focus outline that has been styled away is one of the most common accessibility failures on the web, and it makes keyboard navigation guesswork.
Skip link. A "Skip to main content" link is the first thing in the tab order. It lets keyboard and screen reader users jump past the navigation and go straight to the article, rather than tabbing through the same menu on every page.
Color contrast. Body text, headings, and interface text are checked against WCAG contrast requirements: at least 4.5 to 1 for normal text, and at least 3 to 1 for large text and meaningful interface elements. We check contrast when we design, not after a complaint.
Color is never the only signal. Where we use color to communicate something, and a finance publication uses color constantly, for gains and losses and for chart series, there is always a second signal: a label, a sign, a shape, a pattern, or text. Around one in twelve men has some form of color vision deficiency. A chart that only works in color does not work.
Responsive text sizing. Text is sized in relative units and reflows rather than breaking. You can zoom to 200 percent without losing content or function, and the layout adapts to 400 percent zoom as WCAG 2.2 requires. If you have set a larger default font size in your browser or your operating system, the site respects it. We do not override it, and we do not disable pinch zoom on mobile.
Alt text on images. Every image that carries meaning has a text alternative describing what matters about it. Images that are purely decorative are marked as decorative, so screen readers skip them rather than reading out a filename. Getting this right means writing a real description, not repeating the caption.
Charts and data. Where we publish a chart, our practice is to make the underlying point available in text or in a table, so the information does not live only in a picture. This matters more here than on most sites, because our charts often carry the actual finding of a story.
Link text that means something. Links say where they go. We avoid "click here" and "read more" as the whole of a link, because screen reader users often pull up a list of every link on a page, and a list of fourteen identical "read more" links is useless.
Forms with real labels. The newsletter signup and any other form field has a properly associated label, not a placeholder standing in for one. Errors are described in text, and they say what to do about it.
Motion and animation. We keep motion minimal. Where anything animates, we honor the prefers-reduced-motion setting, so if you have asked your system to reduce motion, we listen. Nothing on this site flashes more than three times a second.
Page language. Each page declares its language, so a screen reader pronounces it correctly.
Zoom and reflow. Content reflows to a single column on narrow screens without horizontal scrolling, which is the same behavior that helps a magnification user at high zoom.
4. What is not right yet
Being honest here is the point of this page.
We have not completed an independent accessibility audit. This statement is based on our own work and our own testing. A third-party audit against every WCAG 2.2 Level AA success criterion is the correct next step, and it has not happened yet. Until it does, treat Section 3 as our good-faith account of our practices, not as an audited result.
Our testing has not covered every assistive technology. The specific combinations of screen reader, browser, and operating system we have tested are listed as [TESTING MATRIX TBD] because that testing is not complete. We will name them here rather than implying we have tested everything.
Charts and data visualizations are the hardest part. We are a finance publication, so we publish a lot of them. Complex charts are genuinely difficult to make fully accessible, and our approach of providing the underlying data in text or in a table is a floor, not a ceiling.
Third-party content is a real gap. Where content comes from someone else, an embedded video, a document, a tool, or a chart we did not build, we do not control its accessibility. We will not pretend we can fix code we do not own. What we can do is choose accessible components where we have a choice, describe the content in text alongside the embed, and drop a component that cannot be made usable.
Older articles may lag. As we improve our standards, we improve them going forward first. If you hit an older piece with a missing image description or a chart with no text alternative, please tell us. We will fix that article, not just the template.
PDFs and documents. If we ever publish a source document, a filing, or a report as a PDF, it may not be tagged for accessibility, particularly if it came from a government agency or a company and we are publishing it as we received it. Where a document is central to a story, our practice is to describe its substance in the article itself, so the reporting does not live only inside an inaccessible file.
5. Tell us when we get it wrong
This is the most useful section on this page.
If you hit a barrier on Money & World, please tell us. We would rather hear it than not know.
Write to: contact@moneyandworld.com
Please put "Accessibility" in the subject line so it reaches the right person quickly.
What helps us fix it faster, though please do not let any of this stop you from writing:
- The page you were on, a URL if you have one.
- What you were trying to do.
- What happened instead.
- What you were using, for example a browser and a screen reader, if you know.
You do not need to know the technical details, and you do not need to cite a WCAG success criterion. "The chart in this article makes no sense to me and I cannot find the numbers anywhere else" is a complete and useful bug report. Diagnosing it is our job, not yours.
6. What we will do when you write
We will reply within 5 business days. That reply will be a real answer from a person, not an automated acknowledgment.
Our reply will tell you one of these things:
- We fixed it, and here is where.
- We can fix it, and here is roughly when.
- We cannot fix it, and here is the honest reason, plus any way we can get you the content in the meantime.
If it is a content problem, a missing image description, a chart with no text alternative, a broken heading, we aim to fix it within 10 business days.
If it is a structural problem, something in the site's code or design, it may take longer. We will tell you what the timeline is, and we will not leave you wondering.
If we cannot fix something, we will say so directly rather than going quiet. Going quiet is the worst response to an accessibility report, and it is the most common one.
If the content you need is stuck behind a barrier we have not fixed yet, ask us for it another way. We will send you an article as plain text, describe a chart, or read a document to you over email. That is not a substitute for fixing the site, and we are not offering it as one. It is what we can do for you today while we fix the underlying problem.
7. How we assess this site
Self-evaluation. This statement is based on our own review of the site against WCAG 2.2 Level AA.
Testing approach. Our practice is to combine automated testing, which reliably catches contrast failures, missing alt attributes, and structural errors, with manual keyboard testing, which catches everything automated tools cannot. Automated tools find something like a third of accessibility problems. Anyone claiming a green automated score means an accessible site is either mistaken or selling something. The rest requires a person navigating the site by keyboard and listening to it with a screen reader.
Assistive technology testing. [TESTING MATRIX TBD]. We will name the exact screen reader, browser, and operating system combinations we test on once that testing is established.
Independent audit. Not yet done. See Section 4.
Ongoing checks. Accessibility is part of how we build and how we publish, not a review at the end. Every new article, feature, and template is checked as it goes out.
8. Technical information
Standard targeted: WCAG 2.2 Level AA. Conformance status: Partial. See Section 2. Statement prepared: July 15, 2026, by self-evaluation. Last reviewed: July 15, 2026.
Compatibility. The site is built to work with current versions of the major browsers on desktop and mobile, and with the assistive technologies that run on them. It relies on standards-compliant HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. Very old browsers may not present it correctly.
Content still works without JavaScript. Articles are readable with JavaScript disabled or unavailable. Some interactive features may not be.
Note on this statement's scope. This page describes moneyandworld.com. It does not cover sites we link to. See Section 4 on third-party content.
9. Legal note
We are aware that Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act for federal contexts, and comparable law in other countries all bear on web accessibility.
We are not doing this because a law requires it. We are doing it because a publication that cannot be read by some of its readers has failed at the only thing it exists to do. The legal analysis is a question for our lawyers. The obligation is a question for us, and we do not need a statute to answer it.
10. Changes to this statement
We will update this page as the site changes, as our testing broadens, and as we fix what Section 4 lists. When we do, we will update the "Last updated" date at the top.
If we complete an independent audit, we will say so here, and we will say what it found. Including the parts that are unflattering.
11. Contact
Accessibility feedback: contact@moneyandworld.com (subject line: Accessibility)
| What you need | Where to write |
|---|---|
| Editorial, news tips, letters | editor@moneyandworld.com |
| Corrections | corrections@moneyandworld.com |
| Reprints, licensing, permissions | rights@moneyandworld.com |
| Advertising | advertising@moneyandworld.com |
| Privacy | privacy@moneyandworld.com |
| Legal notices | legal@moneyandworld.com |
| Anything else, including accessibility | contact@moneyandworld.com |
Money & World Creative Corner Agency LLC Naples, Florida, United States
Email is the only way to reach us. We do not publish a phone number or a mailing address.
We recognize that email being the only channel is itself an accessibility consideration. For some people it is the easiest way to reach us. For others it is not. If email is a barrier for you, we do not currently have another channel to offer, and we would rather tell you that plainly than leave you searching the site for a phone number that does not exist.