Pages

Mar 26, 2011

The digital divide, not what is used to be

In her talk "The Not-So-Hidden Politics of Class Online," Danah Boyd discusses how conquering the digital divide of access to technology is not necessarily a sure-fire way to revitalize democracy. She suggests, in fact, that and individual's choice "leads to a digital reproduction of social divisions." Using teenagers on MySpace and Facebook as an example, Boyd shows that people have different reasons for choosing a social network, such as "features or functionality... design and usability... perceptions of different sites," but in many cases choice boils down to "social categories in which we live." She quotes a 17-year-old high school student who describes the class division of MySpace users and Facebook users at her school:
My school is divided into the 'honors kids,' (I think that is self-explanatory), the 'good not-so-honors kids,' 'wangstas,' (they pretend to be tough and black but when you live in a suburb in Westchester you can't claim much hood), the 'latinos/hispanics,' (they tend to band together even though they could fit into any other groups) and the 'emo kids' ... We were all in MySpace with our own little social networks but when Facebook opened its doors to high schoolers, guess who moved and guess who stayed behind… The first two groups were the first to go and then the 'wangstas' split with half of them on Facebook and the rest on MySpace... I shifted with the rest of my school to Facebook and it became the place where the 'honors kids' got together and discussed how they were procrastinating over their next AP English essay.
Other students Boyd met with described Facebook as "more cultured, and less cheesy... of a cooler caliber," and as having "more adultness." She laments that her data reveals Facebook users as "far more likely to be condescending towards those who use MySpace than vice versa." Boyd points to the origins of MySpace and Facebook – the former arrived first attracting urban folks in their 20s, the latter began at Harvard and initially spread to Ivy League schools – as part of the explanation for these social divisions. She gives a telling analogy of this digital migration as a modern day white flight. Those who are white, educated, wealthy, or live in suburbs were more likely to leave or choose Facebook. Much like the white flight of people from cities to suburbs, Boyd explains how people who left MySpace were in search of "a more peaceful, quiet, less-public space would be more idyllic." She claims the media, which "stems from privilege and tends to reflect the lives of a more privileged class of people," also encouraged the perception of MySpace as "ghetto." Boyd stresses that fear of the "other" runs through these divisions and that adults tend to practice homophily even more than teens, which is why she believes it is important for people check their online use.

Boyd ends her talk with key points about the social media situation. She exposes how the pervasive nature of social stratification carries over from offline to online activities. Boyd debunks the myth that online discourse occurs in a universal public space, and that social networks "highlight and reinforce structural divisions." She underscores how "where you go online matters," that use of certain social networks implies access to certain audiences, and urges people to acknowledge biases to counteract them. Finally, Boyd reiterates that while the Internet has worked to include more voices in political discussion, not everyone has equal say in civic discourse. She hopes that people will "[look] at social media with a critical eye

I like how Boyd exposes the ethical issues of social networking as more than simply a problem of access. I feel unsure about how to approach the inequality we see in social media. Aside from being aware of class divisions as they are manifested online, how can we actually increase cross-talk between different people? I doubt people will force themselves to join MySpace when they are already on Facebook. And even if they did, wouldn't it seem contrived? Is voluntary participation in multiple networks the only way to get closer to revitalizing democracy, or is there something else?

3 comments:

  1. It seems that voluntary participation in multiple networks is the only real solution to the problem. But it would certainly help if children are encouraged at a young age to interact with people of different ethnic and economic backgrounds. I think if classrooms use digital media to encourage this sort of activity, then future generations will be less likely to self-segregate into homogeneous communities.

    Then again, such an initiative is only possible if there are enough people in the education system who believe that the problem exists, and there may not be. This present a catch-22: society needs to be aware of and want to fix this problem before it can change the activity, but the activity itself prevents many people from becoming aware of the problem.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think if there were a way to interlink sites like MySpace and Facebook then we may be able to bridge the gap between social groups online. The challenge to this would be getting these sites to agree to this change. At the end of the day they are a business, and they would be asking the question: "Will this make me money?"
    A question that I'm not sure how to answer.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I thought it was amusing that Boyd suggests people should join Myspace. People on these online communities will, most likely, not add strangers. It's also a bit condescending to think that we can improve racial tension by joining Myspace. I think there would be a better way.

    ReplyDelete