A blind man helped me see AI more clearly – Tech Insider
NZ Herald
Overall Assessment
The article blends personal narrative with expert insight to explore AI’s dual role as both a transformative accessibility tool and a source of online toxicity. It foregrounds the perspective of a blind technologist to challenge dominant negative narratives about AI. The tone is reflective and advocacy-leaning, but grounded in specific, attributed experiences and balanced with a commercial success story.
"The conversation has grown so hostile that good people have gone quiet"
Narrative Framing
Headline & Lead 75/100
The headline uses figurative language to draw readers in, but remains relevant to the article’s theme of perspective and insight. It avoids outright sensationalism and aligns with the personal, reflective tone of the piece.
✕ Loaded Labels: The headline uses a personal, metaphorical framing ('helped me see') that is not literal but serves as a hook. While slightly playful, it accurately reflects the article's reflective, first-person tone and central theme of insight gained through a blind person's perspective on AI.
"A blind man helped me see AI more clearly"
Language & Tone 70/100
The tone is uneven—starting with strong personal opinion—but matures into a more objective, reflective mode when presenting expert testimony. Some subjectivity remains, but it serves the narrative rather than distorts it.
✕ Loaded Language: The author uses emotionally charged language ('slop clogging my socials', 'hate goes overboard') to express personal frustration with AI’s current implementation, which undermines strict objectivity.
"I strongly dislike the slop clogging my socials, no longer being able to know if any given photo or video is real"
✕ Editorializing: However, the tone shifts to measured and respectful when presenting Mosen’s views, using neutral paraphrasing and direct quotes to convey complex perspectives without editorialising.
"Mosen is frank about the drawbacks of artificial intelligence but also essays a lot of points about AI that many won’t have considered"
Balance 88/100
Strong sourcing with a primary expert voice (Mosen) and a secondary entrepreneur (Hardy-Jones), both clearly attributed and given space to express nuanced views. The author’s voice is transparently positioned.
✓ Proper Attribution: The article centers on Alan Mosen, a credible expert in accessibility and AI, with detailed attribution of his background and role. His views are presented with depth and specificity.
"Mosen powered through various private sector and non-profit roles and was made a Member of the New Zealand Order of Merit in 2019..."
✓ Viewpoint Diversity: The author includes their own perspective but clearly distinguishes it from Mosen’s, and includes a second source (Hannah Hardy-Jones) for balance on AI’s positive business applications.
"I had quick Q&A with Hardy-Jones ahead of the event"
Story Angle 82/100
The story is framed around personal insight and moral urgency rather than conflict or technological spectacle. It emphasizes empowerment and inclusion, offering a counter-narrative to AI doomism.
✕ Narrative Framing: The article frames AI not as a technical or economic story, but as a human one—centered on lived experience, dignity, and inclusion. This avoids conflict or horse-race framing and instead emphasizes personal and social impact.
"The conversation has grown so hostile that good people have gone quiet"
✕ Framing by Emphasis: It resists episodic or sensational framing by connecting AI to long-term accessibility progress and systemic change in user agency.
"We’re moving ourselves to the front of the line through our own effort, rather than waiting for a turn that seldom comes."
Completeness 85/100
The article offers substantial context on AI’s accessibility benefits, personal impact, and commercial applications, going beyond surface-level critique to include technical, social, and economic dimensions.
✓ Contextualisation: The article provides rich context on how AI impacts accessibility for blind and hearing-impaired users, including specific technologies (smart glasses, hearing aids, iOS features), historical tech use (1980s internet), and personal impact. It contextualises AI beyond mainstream discourse.
"Now the camera can be on my face. Ordinary-looking smart glasses – the mainstream kind a sighted person might buy to take photos – happen to carry a camera, "
✓ Contextualisation: It includes a recent business development (Contented's funding and growth), adding economic and entrepreneurial context to AI’s real-world applications.
"Christchurch start-up Contented, founded by Lucy Pink and Hannah Hardy-Jones, raised $4.1 million at a $25m valuation..."
Disabled people portrayed as gaining inclusion and self-determination through AI
The narrative emphasizes empowerment, agency, and community-led innovation among blind users, positioning AI as a tool for inclusion and liberation from historical dependence on others.
"We’re moving ourselves to the front of the line through our own effort, rather than waiting for a turn that seldom comes. To me, that’s self-determination."
AI portrayed as profoundly beneficial for accessibility and inclusion
The article foregrounds AI’s transformative impact on blind and hearing-impaired users through specific, positive examples (smart glasses, hearing aids, iOS features), using Mosen’s expert testimony to elevate these benefits as life-changing.
"For the first time, I can describe a graphic, a logo or an illustration, have it made and then ask for a description to check the result against what I intended."
AI-driven startups framed as effective and socially responsible innovators
The article highlights Contented’s success and pro bono UN partnership as evidence of AI’s positive economic and ethical potential, using specific metrics and institutional validation to reinforce credibility.
"Contented recently signed as a pro bono partner of the United Nations UNiting Business Conference in Sydney."
AI critics and online mobs framed as hostile to progress and inclusion
The article frames opposition to AI-assisted tools as irrational and bullying, particularly when directed at disabled developers, using moral condemnation and appeals to accountability.
"Unfortunately, I’ve also seen capable, good-hearted, dedicated, decent people set upon by an online mob who feel they have the right to mercilessly and irrationally attack someone, just because the software that is having a positive impact on the lives of blind people was developed even in part with the help of AI."
Tech companies implied as untrustworthy due to prioritizing speed over safety
The author criticizes AI makers for paying 'lip service' to guardrails while rushing features to market, contributing to misinformation and mental health harms, using loaded language to question their integrity.
"the effect on mental health and democracy from AI makers who pay lip service to “guard rails” but mainly care about being first out the door with any new feature."
The article blends personal narrative with expert insight to explore AI’s dual role as both a transformative accessibility tool and a source of online toxicity. It foregrounds the perspective of a blind technologist to challenge dominant negative narratives about AI. The tone is reflective and advocacy-leaning, but grounded in specific, attributed experiences and balanced with a commercial success story.
A New Zealand-born accessibility advocate shares how AI tools have transformed daily life for blind and hearing-impaired users, while expressing concern over toxic online discourse. Separately, a Christchurch AI startup reports strong growth using conversation-to-document technology.
NZ Herald — Business - Tech
Based on the last 60 days of articles
NZ Herald
No related content