Author
Nadia Okoro
Digital quality, accessibility governance, and the gap between what organisations measure and what is happening.
Publishes methodology and limitations alongside every finding, and treats a finding without a stated limitation as incomplete.
Editorial profile
Nadia examines the distance between a reassuring dashboard and the experience of the people using a digital service. Her coverage connects accessibility, usability, content quality, governance, and procurement rather than treating them as separate reporting problems.
Reporting approachInvestigations name the question, method, evidence, limitations, and counter-explanations. Vendor claims are treated as claims to test. Numbers are traced to their original source, and an inconclusive result stays inconclusive.
Evidence standardClaims link to meaningful sources in context. Primary material is preferred, uncertainty is named, and corrections are made plainly.
Coverage
- Digital-quality measurement
- Accessibility testing and governance
- Vendor and procurement claims
- Experimental methods and limitations
Articles
- The false-positive budget inside automated accessibility scansSeptember 17, 2026
- The honest answer to "is my site accessible?"September 11, 2026
- What "comprehensive" actually means in UX and QA monitoring toolsSeptember 11, 2026
- What an AI meeting summary can and cannot do for accessibilitySeptember 10, 2026
- The software that actually catches common UX issues, and what it missesSeptember 10, 2026
- WCAG violation: ask for proofAugust 26, 2026
- What AI Accessibility Scanners Actually CatchAugust 21, 2026
- The Cost of Accessibility DebtAugust 14, 2026
Nadia Okoro is the byline under which TruthBytes publishes. Every factual claim in these articles is sourced and linked to primary material; where the evidence is thin or contested, the article says so.