Legendary Public Enemy frontman, rap artist and activist Chuck D, once told me that the title of the group’s track “Fear of a Black Planet” was a metaphor that addressed whites’ fear of being associated with people of color, and all the cultural and economic issues that integration brings.
It might seem unrelated, but a little thing called App.net that has many buzzing in the tech world might be the latest manifestation of that fear.
People are taking sides on the intent and format of what promises to be a Twitter-like social media feed in which, as the product’s homepage states, “users and developers come first, not advertisers.” The greatest talking point in the debate over its launch is the fact App.net will require an annual $50 membership fee. This cost might create a space segregated by class and color on the web, prompting richer (usually white) people to flee social media outlets like Twitter, on which people of color overindex, for more exclusive environs.
It would not be the first time. White flight from MySpace as illustrated by Harvard fellow Danah Boyd was an instance of what many of us at the water cooler of color had sensed when Facebook launched. The more “upscale” social media site seemed to provide a haven for the wealthy through a decreased visibility of working class people of color in near proximity.
What happened next extended beyond Facebook. Indeed, everything from the recent U.S. Census stats to Nielsen mobile research shows that middle class whites are increasingly becoming the minority.
There have long been uncomfortable murmurs by many in the tech world about people of color over-indexing on Twitter ever since the Edison Research/Arbitron Internet study establishing this fact was released. Other research also demonstrates the over-consumption of social media by this group, such as a study by Georgetown University’s Center for Social Impact Communication.
Just as there are white housing enclaves created for these segments to avoid the encroachment of non-whites, App.net could be the perfect place online for integration-reluctant whites to go next as this trend surely continues.
Could the $50 fee for App.net be a way to more ensure that poor people and people of color are barred?
App.net is the spawn of Dalton Caldwell, a young, Caucasian male who gained attention through his open letter to Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, written after declining Zuckerberg’s overtures for collaboration. Caldwell allegedly ended up on the receiving end of Zuck’s wrath as a result, so with an “I’ll show ‘em” approach, Caldwell started a Kickstarter crowdfunding campaign to launch his own social media site.
He ended up obtaining darn near $800,000 to start App.net. Caldwell’s dreams are close to becoming reality with cash-in-hand, which is making some people very uncomfortable.
It’s not just jealously over a young white man having typically easier access to tech capital; it’s also the spirit in which Caldwell has spoken about his reasons for creating App.net that has people wondering. He has alluded, for instance, to the fact that he is not interested in seeing — horror, of horrors — Kmart ads in his timelines when he is active on social platforms.
Professor Andre Brock, who teaches at the University of Iowa’s School of Library and Information Science, writes about race, the Internet, and new media. He examined Caldwell’s attitude as it relates to how cultural ideologies effect Internet technology use and design.
From Brock’s perspective, “Dalton Caldwell’s brief mention of ‘K-Mart ads in my timeline,’ while a problematic reference to lower socio-economic commerce opportunities, is much more emblematic of the geek’s desire to retain the instrumental ‘purity’ of a social network ‘For Geeks By Geeks,’” he said in an interview with theGrio.
But Brock doesn’t let Caldwell off the hook for possible race and class-baiting. “Deploying racial and class-based ideology to attract attention to a fledgling enterprise (think ‘Manifest Destiny’ or Reagan’s ‘Welfare Queen’ rhetoric) is a long-standing tactic of American corporate and civic society,” the professor said. “It’s disappointing to see, but not surprising to find.”
In fact, the social media expert said this pattern of racism and classism is promoted by ‘geek’ culture under the guise of an empty rhetoric of universal acceptance.
“I’ve found in my last couple of research projects, such as research on the Resident Evil 5 video game, on a black-designed web browser, and most recently on Black Twitter, that there is definitely an undercurrent in online discourse that whites – particularly the male/geek/middle class strata – feel as if there is a ‘right’ way and a ‘wrong’ way to do ‘Internet.’ The ‘right’ way is invoked through beliefs in color-blind ideology (‘we shouldn’t recognize difference’), instrumental uses of tech (‘x product should be used THIS way’), and when prompted, the belief that non-whites and women don’t use tech ‘appropriately.’”
The confluence of such quotes and conditions has created speculation that App.net may be the harbinger of the rise of digital exclusivity based on socio-economic parameters, masked as a business model choice.
Are such accusations fair?
“If [it's] true that [people of color out-index on Twitter], it doesn’t surprise me to learn that white people might find [such platforms] ‘too black,’” Dr. Jessie Daniels, professor at City University of New York and author of Cyber Racism, told theGrio. “And, perhaps more to the point, white people in the U.S. have a long and consistent history of finding racially integrated spaces uncomfortable and then fleeing as a response. There are lots of examples of this, but racial integration in housing is maybe the most telling. Research indicates that when the percentage of blacks in a previously all-white neighborhood reaches about 7 percent, whites consistently begin to vote with moving vans and flee the neighborhood.”
It seems inevitable that the first-class versus coach approach of dividing the world would extend to the web through the socialization of mostly middle-class white male developers — and the desires of similar consumers — shaping social media. The issue, therefore, is much greater than the App.net platform and its business model. A race and class-divided App.net would simply be a microcosm of the socio-economic imbalances that are omnipresent.
App.net’s model — just like the lack of diversity policies at tech companies or minority representation on their boards — is the by-product of deeply rooted thought patterns in global society. Noted sociologist C. Wright Mills, author of The Power Elite, theorized in 1945 that class structure/exclusion is often reinforced via the schools and professional/social clubs to which one can gain admission. He called such vehicles “status elevators” enabling elite insiders to thrive based on their networks, and thus outshine the masses. So it should be no surprise that in 2012, the virtual equivalent to this social segmentation is being born online.
Can this be stopped? Daniels believes, “This is going to be a real dilemma… basically figuring out how to engineer around white people’s bias for all-white (or, mostly white) spaces. Part of what’s happening… is that the formerly predominantly white enclaves of neighborhoods, workplaces, mainstream media, and higher education are now much more porous.”
The larger question App.net raises is how to create greater balance in the real world, overall, so that we can then find equality in a digi-society. This is a question many of us are not yet ready to ponder, because it would require getting off of our social media apps and doing something.
In defense of App.net, however, one could say that a for-fee model is more indicative of the fact that we are moving away from quantity to quality in digital social interaction. Making people pay weeds people out who don’t want a quality experience. Yet, even if the motive is more sinister, do we have the right to dictate to another human being what to create and for whom, even if it blatantly excludes others?
Rather than debate this quandary, we might be better served to use the advent of this new social platform to decide how to create a future that is a little more fair for all — both on and off the computer screen.
Lauren DeLisa Coleman is part of the new technorati-to-watch. She is a mobile strategy specialist and analyst specializing in the convergence of Gen X, Y with hip tech platforms, and the author of the new e-book, Rise of the Smart Power Class. Follow her on Twitter at @mediaempress.
(This article has been updated to include links to studies regarding people of color over indexing on social media use.)
It might seem unrelated, but a little thing called App.net that has many buzzing in the tech world might be the latest manifestation of that fear.
People are taking sides on the intent and format of what promises to be a Twitter-like social media feed in which, as the product’s homepage states, “users and developers come first, not advertisers.” The greatest talking point in the debate over its launch is the fact App.net will require an annual $50 membership fee. This cost might create a space segregated by class and color on the web, prompting richer (usually white) people to flee social media outlets like Twitter, on which people of color overindex, for more exclusive environs.
It would not be the first time. White flight from MySpace as illustrated by Harvard fellow Danah Boyd was an instance of what many of us at the water cooler of color had sensed when Facebook launched. The more “upscale” social media site seemed to provide a haven for the wealthy through a decreased visibility of working class people of color in near proximity.
What happened next extended beyond Facebook. Indeed, everything from the recent U.S. Census stats to Nielsen mobile research shows that middle class whites are increasingly becoming the minority.
There have long been uncomfortable murmurs by many in the tech world about people of color over-indexing on Twitter ever since the Edison Research/Arbitron Internet study establishing this fact was released. Other research also demonstrates the over-consumption of social media by this group, such as a study by Georgetown University’s Center for Social Impact Communication.
Just as there are white housing enclaves created for these segments to avoid the encroachment of non-whites, App.net could be the perfect place online for integration-reluctant whites to go next as this trend surely continues.
Could the $50 fee for App.net be a way to more ensure that poor people and people of color are barred?
App.net is the spawn of Dalton Caldwell, a young, Caucasian male who gained attention through his open letter to Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, written after declining Zuckerberg’s overtures for collaboration. Caldwell allegedly ended up on the receiving end of Zuck’s wrath as a result, so with an “I’ll show ‘em” approach, Caldwell started a Kickstarter crowdfunding campaign to launch his own social media site.
He ended up obtaining darn near $800,000 to start App.net. Caldwell’s dreams are close to becoming reality with cash-in-hand, which is making some people very uncomfortable.
It’s not just jealously over a young white man having typically easier access to tech capital; it’s also the spirit in which Caldwell has spoken about his reasons for creating App.net that has people wondering. He has alluded, for instance, to the fact that he is not interested in seeing — horror, of horrors — Kmart ads in his timelines when he is active on social platforms.
Professor Andre Brock, who teaches at the University of Iowa’s School of Library and Information Science, writes about race, the Internet, and new media. He examined Caldwell’s attitude as it relates to how cultural ideologies effect Internet technology use and design.
From Brock’s perspective, “Dalton Caldwell’s brief mention of ‘K-Mart ads in my timeline,’ while a problematic reference to lower socio-economic commerce opportunities, is much more emblematic of the geek’s desire to retain the instrumental ‘purity’ of a social network ‘For Geeks By Geeks,’” he said in an interview with theGrio.
But Brock doesn’t let Caldwell off the hook for possible race and class-baiting. “Deploying racial and class-based ideology to attract attention to a fledgling enterprise (think ‘Manifest Destiny’ or Reagan’s ‘Welfare Queen’ rhetoric) is a long-standing tactic of American corporate and civic society,” the professor said. “It’s disappointing to see, but not surprising to find.”
In fact, the social media expert said this pattern of racism and classism is promoted by ‘geek’ culture under the guise of an empty rhetoric of universal acceptance.
“I’ve found in my last couple of research projects, such as research on the Resident Evil 5 video game, on a black-designed web browser, and most recently on Black Twitter, that there is definitely an undercurrent in online discourse that whites – particularly the male/geek/middle class strata – feel as if there is a ‘right’ way and a ‘wrong’ way to do ‘Internet.’ The ‘right’ way is invoked through beliefs in color-blind ideology (‘we shouldn’t recognize difference’), instrumental uses of tech (‘x product should be used THIS way’), and when prompted, the belief that non-whites and women don’t use tech ‘appropriately.’”
The confluence of such quotes and conditions has created speculation that App.net may be the harbinger of the rise of digital exclusivity based on socio-economic parameters, masked as a business model choice.
Are such accusations fair?
“If [it's] true that [people of color out-index on Twitter], it doesn’t surprise me to learn that white people might find [such platforms] ‘too black,’” Dr. Jessie Daniels, professor at City University of New York and author of Cyber Racism, told theGrio. “And, perhaps more to the point, white people in the U.S. have a long and consistent history of finding racially integrated spaces uncomfortable and then fleeing as a response. There are lots of examples of this, but racial integration in housing is maybe the most telling. Research indicates that when the percentage of blacks in a previously all-white neighborhood reaches about 7 percent, whites consistently begin to vote with moving vans and flee the neighborhood.”
It seems inevitable that the first-class versus coach approach of dividing the world would extend to the web through the socialization of mostly middle-class white male developers — and the desires of similar consumers — shaping social media. The issue, therefore, is much greater than the App.net platform and its business model. A race and class-divided App.net would simply be a microcosm of the socio-economic imbalances that are omnipresent.
App.net’s model — just like the lack of diversity policies at tech companies or minority representation on their boards — is the by-product of deeply rooted thought patterns in global society. Noted sociologist C. Wright Mills, author of The Power Elite, theorized in 1945 that class structure/exclusion is often reinforced via the schools and professional/social clubs to which one can gain admission. He called such vehicles “status elevators” enabling elite insiders to thrive based on their networks, and thus outshine the masses. So it should be no surprise that in 2012, the virtual equivalent to this social segmentation is being born online.
Can this be stopped? Daniels believes, “This is going to be a real dilemma… basically figuring out how to engineer around white people’s bias for all-white (or, mostly white) spaces. Part of what’s happening… is that the formerly predominantly white enclaves of neighborhoods, workplaces, mainstream media, and higher education are now much more porous.”
The larger question App.net raises is how to create greater balance in the real world, overall, so that we can then find equality in a digi-society. This is a question many of us are not yet ready to ponder, because it would require getting off of our social media apps and doing something.
In defense of App.net, however, one could say that a for-fee model is more indicative of the fact that we are moving away from quantity to quality in digital social interaction. Making people pay weeds people out who don’t want a quality experience. Yet, even if the motive is more sinister, do we have the right to dictate to another human being what to create and for whom, even if it blatantly excludes others?
Rather than debate this quandary, we might be better served to use the advent of this new social platform to decide how to create a future that is a little more fair for all — both on and off the computer screen.
Lauren DeLisa Coleman is part of the new technorati-to-watch. She is a mobile strategy specialist and analyst specializing in the convergence of Gen X, Y with hip tech platforms, and the author of the new e-book, Rise of the Smart Power Class. Follow her on Twitter at @mediaempress.
(This article has been updated to include links to studies regarding people of color over indexing on social media use.)
