The EdTech Daily

EdTech and Distance Learning - Reflections of a Lifelong Learner

&
 

Jul 03 2009

Social Divide Reproduced Online

Published by elisagopin at 10:22 am under Uncategorized Edit This

Net researcher Danah Boyd reported recently at the Personal Democracy Forum in New York that rather than becoming a digital melting pot the Internet is mirroring social divides found offline. She explained that “Social media don’t eradicate social divisions” but rather are “making the old social divisions obvious in totally new ways.”

Everyone knows that Facebook is the new MySpace, and that users have stopped creating MySpace accounts in favor of Facebook accounts. However, the numbers don’t really bear this out. The two social sites have about the same number of unique users - currently about 70 million each, according to data recently released by ComScore .

Apparently, teens are choosing Facebook or MySpace based on where they perceive it will be easier to find other kids like themselves. Boyd interviewed many teens from across the US and found that, as usual in high school, reputation is everything. Facebook was perceived as being more “high brow,” more cultured, than MySpace. MySpace users tend to consider Facebook users as more “stuck up”, or more “goody two shoes.” In return, Facebook users consider MySpace users to be less educated and even obnoxious. Snobs offline naturally transform into snobs online.

Boyd concluded that the online social divide she found is the new “white flight” - akin to the flight of the well-to-do from crowded cities to more spacious, quiet suburbs where people tended to move to communities made up of, you guessed it, people like them. Boyd found that

“Whites were more likely to leave or choose Facebook. The educated were more likely to leave or choose Facebook. Those from wealthier backgrounds were more likely to leave or choose Facebook. Those from the suburbs were more likely to leave or choose Facebook. …Those who deserted MySpace did so by choice but their decision to do so was wrapped up in their connections to others, in their belief that a more peaceful, quiet, less-public space would be more idyllic.”

Boyd ends off by warning that “…If we don’t address this head on, inequality will develop deeper roots that will further cement the divisions in our lives.”

What can be done about this cultural divide? Is there a way to use Internet communities to bring people together, instead of further driving them apart? Much like the famed American melting pot around the turn of the 20th century which in reality turned into immigrants living with other immigrants from similar backgrounds, it’s very possible that the Internet will not be a new landscape where differences disappear and we all blend into one homogeneous group. Perhaps it only can ever be a reflection of our offlines lives and extension of the way we currently communicate.

Yes, the Internet breaks down geographical barriers. Yes, it increases communication speed. But since it is a tool used by humans, won’t we still fall back to our natural instincts of enjoying the company of similar individuals, people who understand us, share our background and interests, and communicate on similar topics?

Without belittling the power of technology to break down barriers and open new worlds to its users, does that really have the power to change human nature? Perhaps it’s more important to focus on how we can get different groups to understand and respect each other, rather than forcing them to hang out after school and pretend their differences don’t exist at all.

This post is based on a report of Boyd’s presentation found at http://causeglobal.blogspot.com/2009/07/white-flight-online.html .

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
Possibly-related Articles:                                        (auto-generated)

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.
Not A Member? Register for Free!

Some Today.com contributors may have received a fee or a promotional product or service from a manufacturer for promotional consideration, while others receive no consideration at all. Each contributor is responsible for disclosing any such promotional consideration.