Clothing retailers want to adopt QR codes in replacing physical tags.
At the end of last month, Jennifer A. Kingson reported for Axios on the clothing industry’s push to switch from printed labels to QR codes. The idea behind moving to an ostensibly more “modern” tag would be twofold: it would reduce bulk and the QR code could give buyers important information such as washing instructions and other details.
“Digital product labels—which brands like Ralph Lauren are already starting to use—could provide a lot more information to consumers, who could scan them for a library of details about the garment they’re wearing (or might buy),” Kingson wrote of QR tags’ purported benefits.
Kingson added garment manufacturers have been busy lately lobbying Congress and the Federal Trade Commission in efforts to persuade lawmakers on adopting digital tags. Companies argue consumers can get legally-required information (size, care, country of origin, etc) simply by scanning a QR code. Additionally, moving to a more digital-first approach means knowledge can be added to the landing page as it becomes available. “Sometimes we produce garments knowing ‘this much’ about the material when we launch it, but three years down the road, something that was not recyclable is recyclable,” Patagonia’s global packaging and branding director, Jennifer Patrick, told Axios.
While the industry is pushing for physical labels to be replaced for modernity and practicality’s sake—people often bemoan tags being annoyingly itchy—there is another obvious benefit: accessibility. Clothing labels are notoriously hard to read even for someone with eagle-eyed vision, and the sensory issues around itching can very much be a problem for those who cope with certain sensory motor conditions. Moreover, while it is possible to use the Magnifier app on the iPhone, for example, to read a physical tag, finding the tag can be troublesome in terms of cognition and, crucially, fine-motor skills. Physical tags also can be hard to find, as well as hold steady enough to read. Not to mention not everyone has a smartphone; shifting to digital labels may signal a status symbol not all people have the means (or desire) to attain.
From a disability point of view, the switch to QR codes is a net positive overall. The shift is reminiscent of the push by restaurants and other eateries to provide their menu via QR code at the pandemic’s zenith (or nadir, if you prefer). The move was ostensibly done for health and safety reasons, but the truth is it had enormous accessibility gains as well. Like with articles of clothing, it’s very possible to use the iPhone’s Magnifier app to zoom in on physical menus—I do this all the time—it’s much more accessible (and expedient) to scan a QR code and peruse it virtually.
Broadly, what both scenarios show is that people have a penchant for conflating convenience with accessibility. It’s undoubtedly more convenient to go all-in on digital clothes tags because real ones are itchy. There is validity to that sentiment, but what is convenient to one person is accessibility to another—both close cousins, but both entirely distinct concepts. It’s also more accessible for legions of disabled people to use QR codes because of access and usability. That viewpoint matters.
It’s a nuanced point, but a salient one. The Ralph Laurens of the world may be pitching digital tags for convenience, but it shouldn’t be lost that the shift has meaningful ramifications for the disability community too.
