����TV

Valentine’s Day swipes expose a bigger problem with mobile app accessibility

Valentine’s Day is built on gestures that are meant to be simple: a message sent, a match made, a date planned. For millions of people, dating apps have become the starting point for all three, with swipes, taps, and quick decisions made on a phone screen.

In the weeks leading up to Feb. 14, dating apps see a predictable surge in activity. Tinder that during peak season (Jan. 1 through Valentine’s Day), millions more messages are sent each day and hundreds of millions of additional likes are exchanged globally.

But for people with disabilities, that surge in activity can make existing barriers impossible to ignore. And those barriers aren’t just limited to a handful of platforms. According to a 2024 of its , a group of users with disabilities, every respondent said dating apps are not designed to be accessible. Seventy-five percent described them as outright inaccessible, and nearly eight in ten reported significant difficulty using them.

Dating apps are mobile-first, and that changes everything

Most conversations about digital accessibility still center on websites. Dating apps, however, are built almost entirely for mobile, and mobile accessibility presents a different set of challenges.

These apps depend on gestures like swiping, pinching, and dragging. Their interfaces are image-heavy, with photos driving nearly every interaction. Buttons are often icon-only. For users who rely on screen readers, keyboard navigation, voice input, or alternative gestures, those design choices can render an entire experience unusable.

That’s a significant issue, given the scale of the population affected. The World Health Organization that 1.3 billion people worldwide live with a disability, while the reports that roughly 1 in 4 adults in the United States has some form of disability. A Pew Research poll conducted in 2021 found that of people with disabilities have smartphones, and on mobile, can be even more limiting than on the web, because assistive technologies behave differently across devices, operating systems, and app updates.

Unlike websites, mobile apps don’t follow a single, predictable interaction model. Gesture behavior, focus order, and screen reader output can change from one update to the next. That’s why mobile accessibility requires ongoing testing with real users, not just automated scans or one-time audits.

Where apps break down for users with disabilities

In interviews conducted by AudioEye with members of its A11iance Community, participants described encountering accessibility barriers that are common across many mobile apps, not just dating platforms.

The most frequent issues appeared during onboarding, a critical phase for any app, which often includes account creation, form completion, and media uploads. Tasks like uploading and cropping images, confirming selections, or progressing through multistep flows were frequently inaccessible without sighted assistance. Cropping tools lacked clear labels, focus moved unpredictably, and users had no reliable way to confirm whether inputs met app requirements.

“I went through all of that, but the final step was not accessible,” said Ana Jacob, a member of AudioEye’s A11iance Community. “The photo aspect was frustrating, and I had no option for additional assistance. I couldn’t finish it and ended up clearing everything.”

Navigation challenges continued once users were inside the app. Many modern mobile apps rely on gesture-based interactions, such as swiping, dragging, or long presses, that assume visual feedback and precise motor control.

“Every single app that uses swiping, I end up turning off VoiceOver, swiping, then turning it back on to see if it worked,” said Lia, another community member.

Participants also noted that even apps marketed as “simpler” or more text-focused frequently failed basic accessibility expectations. Unlabeled elements, focus traps, and broken interaction flows prevented users from completing sign-ups, navigating content, or accessing key features, which are issues that extend well beyond dating apps.

These experiences reflect broader accessibility patterns across digital products. AudioEye’s 2025 , which analyzed more than 15,000 websites, found an average of 297 accessibility issues per page, with many of them tied to navigation, forms, and interactive elements that are also core components of mobile app experiences.

What accessible mobile apps could look like

Mobile app accessibility is often overlooked simply because it isn’t built into how apps are tested and updated. As a result, issues persist even as products evolve.

starts with practices designed specifically for how apps are actually used. Test mobile apps with real users and assistive technologies, not just automated tools. Ensure all buttons, icons, and images are clearly labeled. Provide alternatives to gesture-only interactions like swiping. Make photo uploads and editing tools usable without vision, and build accessibility checks into regular app updates, not just major releases.

Niche platforms are already demonstrating what’s possible. Apps like , built specifically for disabled and chronically ill users, have drawn attention for centering accessibility in their design from the ground up. But accessibility shouldn’t require a separate ecosystem. Mainstream platforms, the ones with the largest user bases and the most resources, should be leading on accessibility, not lagging behind.

Access, connection, and who gets left out

Valentine’s Day may put a spotlight on dating apps, but the underlying issue applies to any organization with a mobile product. Mobile apps are how customers sign up, make purchases, manage accounts, and stay connected.

Accessibility won’t solve every user experience challenge. But without it, a significant portion of users are excluded before they ever get the chance to engage. For companies that rely on mobile apps to reach customers, accessibility isn’t an add-on. It’s part of building a product that works for everyone.

was produced by and reviewed and distributed by ����TV.