Whats the point of Bold?

Questioning the value of visual emphasis in an inclusive web.

We use bold all the time in digital design.

Bold to draw attention.
Bold to mark importance.
Bold to say: “Look here.”

But here's the uncomfortable truth:

If bold is only visual, is it really doing its job?

Because when that “important” bold text can’t be heard by a screen reader, can’t be detected by assistive tech, and doesn’t register for non-visual users, then we have to ask:

What’s the point of using bold at all?

The Problem With Visual-Only Emphasis

font-weight: bold is just that, a style.

It changes how something looks, but says nothing about how it should be interpreted.

That’s fine for decoration.

But if you’re using bold to signal meaning — like urgency, emphasis, or hierarchy — and you don’t pair it with semantic HTML (, , headings, etc.) then that signal only reaches sighted users.

That’s not just an oversight. It’s a design failure.

Design That Works for Everyone

At the heart of inclusive UX is this principle:

If something matters, everyone should know.

If you want your message to stand out visually, that’s fine. But if it also needs to stand out functionally — to a screen reader, to someone navigating by keyboard, to a user reading with Braille — then you need to say so in the code.

Semantic tags do that:

 for importance
 for stress or nuance
Proper heading levels (<h1> to <h6>) for structure

These aren’t just accessibility features — they’re the actual language of digital meaning.

Why Does Bold Still Exist?

Because it’s easy. Because it’s what we were taught.
Because design tools and habits are still rooted in visual-first thinking.

But in a world where 1 in 5 people experience the web differently, using visual bold alone is no longer good enough.

What good is bold if:

It can’t be heard?
It doesn’t change tone?
It’s invisible to assistive tech?

A Better Way to Design

If you want your content to look bold, go ahead. But if it needs to mean bold, mark it up:

Instead of this:

Note: Your session will expire soon.

Use:

Note: Your session will expire soon.

Now, sighted users see the weight.
Screen reader users hear the emphasis.
Everyone gets the message.

Bold Isn't the Problem — Misusing It Is

This isn’t a call to ban bold. It’s a call to stop using it in isolation.

Visual styles are part of good design — but meaning must run deeper than what fonts can express. Bold can support meaning. It shouldn't be expected to carry it.

In the same way that we shouldn’t rely on colour alone to convey a message (e.g. “red = error”), we shouldn’t rely on visual bold alone to signal importance.

Digital Life Balance

In a world where digital interactions cant be avoided, people are looking at ways to disconnect from it and find balance.

Digital Life Balance isn’t just about managing screen time.

It’s about intentional design — building tech that respects people’s attention, cognition, and accessibility.

When we rely on superficial styling instead of semantic structure, we:

Favour appearance over clarity
Reward shortcuts over inclusion
Design for some, not everyone

Real digital balance is inclusive by design — not by fix.

Final Thought

So ask yourself next time you bold something:

Does this look important?
Or is it actually important?
And if it is — have I said so in a way that everyone can perceive it?

Because if bold is only visual, it’s not bold enough.