Accessibility statement

How accessible are our websites?

Some content on our websites is not fully accessible because: 

• Some images do not have image descriptions.
• Some audio content, particularly podcasts do not have transcriptions.
• Most older PDF and Microsoft Office documents on the website are not fully accessible to screen reader software. 
• Live video streams do not have captions.
• 3D objects using the third-party plugin Sketchfab are not fully accessible to screen reader software.
• Some catering facilities, e.g. the Great Court Restaurant uses a third-party booking form which isn't fully accessible to screen reader software. 
• Content is hosted on one of the British Museum microsites which, due to their age and the different technologies available when each one was set up, means that there is no single solution available to make them accessible. We are working hard to address this problem as we explain in the Disproportionate Burden section below.

Feedback and contact information

If you have any feedback regarding the accessibility of our websites or need information from our websites in a different format such as accessible PDFs, large print, easy read, audio recording or braille we'll do our best to support you. Please email us at access@britishmuseum.org, or fill out our online enquiries form.

Please provide us with:

• The web address (URL) of the content you need
• The format you need it in
• Your name and email address

We welcome your feedback. We will aim to get back to you in 21 days. 

Reporting accessibility problems with this website

We're always looking to improve the accessibility of the British Museum websites, and we have tried to provide an accurate summary of how our websites currently meet the accessibility requirements.

However, due to the age and complexity of the British Museum websites, there may be issues of which we are unaware. If you find any problems not listed on this page, or you think we're not meeting accessibility requirements in any way, please email us at access@britishmuseum.org, or fill out our online enquiries form.

Enforcement procedure

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is responsible for enforcing the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018 (the 'Accessibility Regulations'). If you have raised any accessibility issues with us and you're not happy with our response, please contact the Equality Advisory and Support Service (EASS).

Contacting us to visit in person

If you need any assistance or information to help you plan a visit to the Museum, please contact us: 

• Email: access@britishmuseum.org 
• Phone: +44 (0)20 7323 8971 

You can also read our Accessibility at the Museum page for more information.  

Technical information about our website's accessibility

The British Museum is committed to making its websites accessible, in accordance with the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018. 

Compliance status

The British Museum websites are partially compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.1 AA standard, due to the non-compliances and exemptions listed below.

Non-accessible content

The following list provides details of the content on the www.britishmuseum.org website which is currently non-accessible. Some of the issues may also be applicable to our other websites. We are currently reviewing all of our websites and this list will be updated as more information becomes available. In the meantime, we are working to address all of the issues listed below and will update this statement as necessary.

Non-compliance with the Accessibility Regulations

• The cookie banner does not trap focus. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.1.1 (Keyboard).
• Slide controls on the carousel do not meet minimum non-text contrast requirements. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.11 (Non-text content)
• In the Exhibitions and events section, featured image alternative text is contained within the link description. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 (Non-text content).
• In the Exhibitions and events section, screen reader users will find that calendar headings are duplicated due to incorrect markup. This fails WCAG success criterion 4.1.2 (Name, role, value).
• Acronyms are used in the Exhibitions and events section. This fails WCAG success criterion 3.1.4 (Abbreviations).
• The skip to main content link does not meet minimum contrast requirements on some pages. This fails WCAG 2.1. success criteria 1.4.3 (Contrast minimum) and 1.4.6 (Contrast enhanced).
• Arrows indicating sub menus are not persistently available. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 3.2.3 (Consistent navigation).
• On site search, the result type and title lead into one another, which may be confusing to some screen reader users. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria 1.3.1 (Info and relationships) and 4.1.2 (Name, role, value).
• HTML markup presents a confusing experience for some screen reader users. This fails WCAG 2.1. success criterion 4.1.2 (Name, role, value).
• The Donate page lacks heading and contains verbose button labels. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria 3.3.2 (Labels or Instructions) and 2.4.6 (Headings and Labels).
• The Donate page contains non-focusable text and error messages, incorrectly suggesting there are options to interact. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria 2.4.3 (Focus order) and 2.4.7 (Focus visible).
• The Donate page error messaging appears at the top of the page, which may present barriers for users with low vision, users of screen magnification software and some neurodivergent users, including people with short term memory. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 3.3.1 (Error identification).
• The Membership pages contains language which may be confusing for users with cognitive, language and learning disabilities. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 3.3.2 (Labels or instructions).
• Some images used on the site are decorative but are described. This can cause confusion for assistive technology users. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 (Non-text content).
• Some of our audio content lacks transcriptions, particularly our podcast content. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 (non-text content).
• Images in the collection search do not have a text alternative, so people using a screen reader cannot access the information. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 (Non-text content).
• In the collection search, sometimes screen reader and keyboard focus does not move to new modal dialog, so users have to navigate to the modal dialog. These fail WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.1.1 (Keyboard).
• Some of the links in the collection search are long or confusing, so people using a screen reader could be confused by what they navigate to. These fail WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.4 (Link purpose).
• The navigation arrow animation in the collection search may be confusing for some users due to the animations invoked when tabbing to the controls. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 3.3.2 (Labels or instructions).
• In the collection search, some filter control labels are not explicit. Labels may be unclear for some screen reader users who may not have the surrounding context. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 3.3.2 (Labels or instructions).
• There are some parsing errors on the website and in the collection search, which may mean that they are not interpreted correctly by assistive technologies. These fail WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.1 (Parsing).
• Sometimes, in the collection search, resizing or viewing content in landscape orientation causes content to overlap or become unavailable, so users with low vision might not be able to access. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criteria 1.3.4 (Orientation) and 1.4.10 (Reflow).
• Some aria-labelledby and aria-describedby attributes point to the IDs of elements in other documents. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 (Info and relationships).
• Some links do not contain discernible text or an image with alternative text. This makes it unclear where links will take user. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.4 (Link purpose [in context]).
• Some PDFs are not tagged in to indicate the types of content included within the documents and how users can interact with them. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 (Info and relationships).
• Some elements marked as aria-hidden contain focusable elements which are not voiced by a screen reader. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 (Name, role, value).
• Some PDFs do not contain XMP metadata, which contains information needed by screen readers such as document title. This fails WCAG 2.1. success criterion 1.3.1 (Info and relationships).
• Some non-semantic HTML elements have been assigned an aria-label or aria-labelledby attribute without being assigned a role. This fails WCAG 2.1. success criterion 4.1.2 (Name, role, value).
• Some PDFs do not declare the language, which can result in screen readers pronouncing words incorrectly. This fails WCAG 2.1. success criterion 3.1.1 (Language of page).
• Some PDFs do not have titles, which can present accessibility issues for users of assistive technologies. This fails WCAG 2.1. success criterion 2.4.2 (Page titled).
• Some pages include empty headings in the HTML markup, which can result in confusing behaviour when using assistive technologies. This fails WCAG 2.1. success criterion 1.3.1 (Info and relationships).
• Some image copyright notices present names in foreign languages while the rest of the page is declared as being in English, which can result in screen readers pronouncing words incorrectly. This fails WCAG 2.1. success criterion 3.1.2 (Language of parts).
• On some pages, the same ID is used on more than one element, which can present issues for assistive technology users when targeting specific page elements. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.1 (Parsing).
• On some pages, several links share the same link text but go to different destinations, which is a confusing experience for screen reader users. This fails WCAG 2.1. success criteria 2.4.4 (Link purpose [In context]) and 2.4.9 (Link purpose [Link only]).
• Some PDFs do not have an attestation to declare accessibility.
• Within collections search, there are sometimes multiple links with the same link text which directs users to different URLs. This can be a confusing experience as there is nothing to distinguish links from one other.

Disproportionate burden

Microsites

We have a large number of historic microsites that are non-compliant with many of the WCAG 2.1 AAs success criterion. We are currently in the process of closing many of these sites, and we consider that auditing and fixing the accessibility issues for the sites which will be decommissioned, would be a disproportionate burden. We have identified the microsites we wish to retain and these will be audited to allow us to identify the work that needs to be carried out to make them accessible. Further details on each of our microsites, including the names of those which we are intending to close, can be found within our Disproportionate Burden Assessment, which is available upon request.

360 tour of Arctic: culture and climate

Our 360 tour of the exhibition Arctic: culture and climate does not meet accessibility standards, due to the limitations of the panorama software. However, the tour can be experienced by some screen readers. We have tried to mitigate the issue by including keyboard navigation options, captioning and description on audio/video content where possible.

A curator's tour of the Arctic exhibition is available in an alternative format and there's a lot of accessible information about the exhibition on our website. We've assessed the work which would be required to make the tour fully accessible and we believe that doing so now would be a disproportionate burden, within the meaning of the Accessibility Regulations.

Collection online

The online collection database is an automated copy of a pre-existing internal database, so it includes data that is not formatted to current accessibility standards, such as data which changes language without flags. Due to the size of the database and the complexity of the task, we believe that it would be a disproportionate burden to resolve all the accessibility issues. If any users experience accessibility problems, please contact us and we'll endeavour to provide the data required in a more suitable format for your needs.

Content that's not within the scope of the Accessibility Regulations

PDFs and other documents  

Many of our older PDFs and Microsoft Office documents that you can view from our websites do not meet accessibility standards. For example, they may not be structured in a way that makes them accessible to a screen reader. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 (Info and relationships). The Accessibility Regulations do not require us to fix PDFs or other documents published before 23 September 2018. Any new PDFs we publish will meet accessibility standards.  

Pre-recorded media 

Some older videos do not have captions or an Audio Described alternative. Where the video is not providing similar information in a different form, this fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.2.2 (Captions) and/or WCAG 1.2.3 Audio Description or Media Alternative (Pre-recorded). The Accessibility Regulations do not require us to fix pre-recorded time-based media published before 23 September 2020. Any new video content will meet accessibility standards.  

Live audio and video 

We do not plan to add captions to live video streams because live video is exempt from meeting the Accessibility Regulations. 

Objects within our collection, archives and libraries

These are exempt under the Accessibility Regulations and there are no plans to update all historic content. However, where possible, and on request, we may be able to provide information in alternative formats. 

Third party content 

We use a number of third-party services on www.britishmuseum.org. The design and implementation of these are not under our control, and therefore they are exempt from the Accessibility Regulations. However, we make them accessible where we can and raise any other issues with the supplier. These include: 

• Soundcloud (audio content) 
• Google Maps (interactive maps) 
• YouTube (video content) 
• Hotjar (survey pop-ups) 
• Sketchfab (3D content) 
  • There's 3D content that some screen readers cannot translate or provide alternative audio content for. This feature also requires users to drag and rotate the 3D models which may be inaccessible to some people. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 (Non-text content). There are no plans yet to update this plugin.   
  • There's 3D content that when using the VoiceOver is incorrectly labelled for screen readers. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.3 (Focus order). There are no plans yet to update this plugin.
  • There's some 3D content where the buttons need to be better labelled for screen readers. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.5.1 (Pointer gestures). There are no plans yet to update this plugin. 
• Designmynight (Great Court Restaurant booking form) 
  • There's a table booking form and confirmation pop-up window for the Great Court restaurant which people who use keyboard commands only may not be able to interact with. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.1.2 (No keyboard trap). There are no plans yet to update this plugin, however there are contact details on the page to make enquiries by phone or email. 
• Cookiebot (cookie management platform)
  • There are description lists which are not semantically declared. This may make content seem unstructured or disorganised for assistive technology users. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 (Information and Relationships). The way Cookiebot works means we are unable to fix this.
  • The cookie banner on the British Museum website does not trap keyboard focus. This means that it’s possible to navigate throughout the website without agreeing to cookies. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.1.1 (Keyboard).

What we're doing to improve accessibility

As noted above, the British Museum runs many websites, including a large number of microsites that were developed at different times using different technologies. We are committed to providing websites that are accessible to all and we are working hard to achieve that, but the scale and complexity of the task provides a number of challenges. 

We are also:

• Ensuring that all new components are built to the highest WCAG standards possible.
• Continuing to test our new designs and products with a broad and diverse range of audiences.
• Rolling out accessibility training to staff who create content and new products.
• Raising general accessibility awareness across the Museum.

Preparation of this accessibility statement

This statement was prepared on 12 November 2019. It was last reviewed on 1 August 2023. 

This website was last tested in March 2023. The test was carried out by Accessible by Design. We tested all components and modules that we use to build our page templates. We then tested a sample of our page templates, which included all components.  

If you would like to view the full accessibility report, which includes details of what was tested, please email access@britishmuseum.org