Hegemons prefer Facebook

Where exactly did Boyd get her statistics? I don't think there's any accuracy in her "report." She is demeaning, racist, and homophobic. MySpace has been a success, and continues to be, because it is a diverse social networking site, not a site that promotes segregation, as Boyd seems to suggest.

Here's Boyd's explanation of her methodology (from the end of the essay I link to above):

"I have been engaged in ethnolographic research on social network sites since February 2003 when I began studying the practices that emerged on Friendster. I followed the launch and early adoption of numerous social network sites, including Tribe.net, LinkedIn, Flickr, MySpace, Facebook, Twitter, Dodgeball, and Orkut. In late 2004, I decided to move away from studying social network sites to studying youth culture just in time for youth to flock to MySpace.

"The practice of 'ethnography' is hard to describe in a bounded form, but ethnography is basically about living and breathing a particular culture, its practices, and its individuals. There are some countables. For example, I have analyzed over 10,000 MySpace profiles, clocked over 2000 hours surfing and observing what happens on MySpace, and formally interviewed 90 teens in 7 states with a variety of different backgrounds and demographics. But that's only the tip of the iceberg. I ride buses to observe teens; I hang out at fast food joints and malls. I talk to parents, teachers, marketers, politicians, pastors, and technology creators. I read, I observe, I document...."

Hmmm. Maybe the reason facebook attracts more college bound students is because it started as a COLLEGE STUDENTS ONLY networking site. It was only opened to everyone a few months ago. Facebook tries to become Myspace every day with their new additions and changes.

I agree with Elijah on his opinion of Boyd and the report.

We should keep in mind that Facebook used to be accessible only by students, so there is probably some sort of correlation there. MySpace has been available, since the beginning, to all kinds of users. Facebook only recently opened up to non-students.

And what purpose, exactly, does Boyd's analysis serve? I think erroneous studies such as this one help to perpetuate discrimination in our society, especially among teens. How are these statistics useful from an economical standpoint?

The danger of offering information without proving its significance is that it could cause further disparities between particular groups -- an "us" versus "them" mentality that's very harmful not only to Facebook and MySpace, but to the real world that young people already live in.

Finally, I also find it rather convenient that Boyd's report appears during this "Facebook vs. MySpace" battle that has recently erupted.

Ok, I started off writing a really long rant that I had to stop and reread it before I got it. The essay, if you can call it that, is purely anecdotal, and personal. I was really taken aback at first but her lack of quantitative detail to support her premise. It's clear to me now its really more of an opinion of what she has seen without all of the necessary statistics to back it up.

Ok so Justin, do you know of anyone working on academic papers considering the idea of socio-economic factors impacting the usage and adoption of social-networking sites? I can think of a couple of interesting concerns that would arise, say, who is graduating to LinkedIn - the importance being, continuing to build and develop connections into a professional experience, and become part of the larger business community.

Just a thought, curious if you see anything interesting out there to read. This one...is ok at best...

I don't know of anyone doing this kind of work other than Danah Boyd, and I agree that her stuff can be kinda impressionistic. So if anybody finds anything better, let me (and YMM) know.

When I read this story on another site, I immediately wanted to yell out that Facebook started as a website for COLLEGE students. Only a few months ago did it start allowing in the teens. Of course people who go to college tend to value certain cultural elements over others. If we were all freaks as the writer suggests MySpace users are, then we probably wouldn't have made it to college in the first place.

This article is very insulting on many levels. First of all it labels Facebook users as "teens", whereas most college students are not teenagers. Then it refers to people who use Facebook as "hegemonic". Are we trying to dominate people now? Jeez!

According to this writer, the world is simply made up of homogeneous successful people and a diverse array of freaks. You cannot simplify a population of people like that! It serves no purpose, is inaccurate, and divides people.

How undermining of others. What kind of ignorant fool would generalize on such a matter? Ill tell you who, one who is spiteful on the inside and believes they know all. I was in football and NJROTC and I have a myspace. Im going to college too. So I guess basically what I am trying to say is, go to hell racist. Thank you.

Danah Boyd = Pseudo Intellectual.

She is making stuff up to get attention. She really doesn't know too much about anything. She is another college student who is going to use the fact that she has a degree as a sign of intellectual superiority over others. She probably will end up writing a few books and will be on Oprah and other news shows to explain her "research" to drones who like useless information. Anyone, including me, can state an opinion and throw in some random generalities and present it as fact. This chick should just run for office already. Her lies and trickery would suit her well in Washington D.C.

As a Latino/Hispanic individual I find this article to grossly misrepresent the tendencies of ethnic groups. It has already been stated in previous comments that most students using facebook are college students due to the fact it was previously open only to those attending college. I may not have taken a large sample as the author did, but in my experience every hispanic I know joined facebook upon entering college. Looking at the pages of facebook members it is probably more appropriate to label the members as being "hegemons" by virtue of their attendance in a higher learning institute rather than their social status.

I like how people reflexively jump all over this woman's assertions on class divisions in this country. They are her personal opinions on a very touchy topic (and boy, some people do really have their class/socio-economic panties in a bunch if one were to go on the comments on this thread). She made it crystal clear in the beginning of her article that what she was doing was sloppy and impressionistic, that it was simply anecdotal. She never said that this was definitive and backed by hard stats; her constant apologies over the inexactitude of her essay actually got rather bothersome. That being said, she brings to light some good points. Firstly, of course Facebook is college based. The question here is not to dispute that very obvious fact but to underline an interesting dynamic: WHY was a college-based internet network set up in the first place? The whole modus operandi of Facebook, from its very inception at Harvard, was to be elitist, to be the anti-MySpace. Only until recently has that not been the case. So it would only stand that those people who seek to differentiate themselves by class would be attracted to a network like Facebook. And differentiation by class need not be a consciously malicious action either, which some people here implied. You can be a poor Hispanic military guy and still go on to Facebook because a) your college friends are there and b) it's such a tiny action that it really doesn't register in your head. Yet that's what's so interesting, and sometimes so insidious, about class-based decisions. They're so hum-drum and blase that they really don't register. Only upon making a cumulative number of decisions (or those decisions being made for you) do you end up in whichever "class" you presently find yourself. And in this society, those decisions are very much predicated on the income you make, on the wealth you have. Since Facebook and MySpace are just so much of the cultural flotsam that surrounds us every day, we never really think about the class-inspired factors upon which their existence is based. It is in highlighting that reality that Danah did a good job, and so good in fact that plenty of you reacted like she had killed a baby seal or something. Oh, and I am a Hispanic lesbian female, if any of you wondered about my "allegiances".

Facebook should go back to being for college students only. Those "lower class" members scare me.

It's unbelievable how quickly this posting spread to other media outlets such Guardian Unlimited UK and BBC News. All this buzz around an amateur paper written by an amateur "academic." Folks, this could've easily been a homework assignment turned in by an uninformed high school student.

"It's unbelievable how quickly this posting spread to other media outlets..."

No it isn't. Today's style of journalism thrives on speculation, sensationalism, and gossip. Thoroughly researched and well articulated articles are a thing of the past. There is a glut of information out there. It is not a news agency's job to do in-depth research and analysis. They have to grab the audience's attention from the other news agency down the street. Speed and hype are all that is necessary to make a story news today.

Everyone who was insulted by Boyd's paper, please post comments on her blog at: http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2007/06/25/woah_omg_reflec.html

I think she owes Latinos, queers, outcasts, and other people an apology. She is clearly misinformed. If there is any "divide" going on, it has been caused by her uneducated essay.

This article has no facts to back it up.
I am a teen that are none of those things. I am not popular or an outcast and I have both Facebook and MySpace. They are two things just to have fun with online and to meet new people. That's it. End of story. If we want to talk about emo kids on Livejournal then that's a story. But generalizing Facebook and MySpace like that is completely derogatory. I think this article should be retracted.

I agree. Boyd should retract her essay and submit an apology to the media, who, for some inexplicable reason, has treated her essay as some "definitive" academic report. And Justin Fox, I think you should at least explain why you found Boyd's paper so "fascinating." Because I don't think it's fascinating at all, and it seems like many of the people who commented on your blog would agree. Boyd's essay is unintelligent and insulting.

Myspace, the largest social networking website, currently has 160-170 million active users, while Facebook has a much smaller number at approximately 1/5 the size.

As I don't have unlimited time to invest into "social networking" throughout the day, I gravitate towards the service that has the largest user base available -- which happens to be Myspace. Sure, I could spend as much time on Facebook, Friendster, Xanga, Orkut, LinkedIn (the list could continue), but as I value my time, Myspace simply has a much larger user base for networking and finding old friends.

I value my time, and the service which provides the "best" use of that time is that which I will choose to use.

The suppositions contained within this report seem to be baseless conjecture, but apparently a major news outlet felt compelled to pick up on it -- so bravo to its original author.

It is apparent that some of Justin's readers have not read Ms Boyd's article but prefer to speak to what they think she has said. Note that Justin has a link to the entire essay in his first sentence.

If one reads the entire essay he might want to temper his remarks. But perhaps not. Some readers may still find all sorts of politically ioncorrect things to make them upset.

This farm boy from Wisconsin with working class parents doesn't see the problem with presenting any hypothesis in an essay. There is either eonough material to back up the hypothesis or there is not enough.

As I said in my earlier post, I had to reread it a few times to be clear that it was really an opinion essay rather than a substantiated and corroborated thesis.

I will say I think the premise is interesting. Keep in mind that all socio-economic and cultural groups and sub-groups have outlets, where they can congregate, meet others, and interact as a group with shared interests. So over time it will be interesting to see how social-networking sites can impact how individuals reach out and connect with others, perhaps moving outside of the boundaries of there preferred social group.

It is happening already, there are articles discussing the impact such sites have, such as this one from the New York magazine:

http://nymag.com/news/features/27341/

But going from that type of piece, I would be interested in reading a formal ethnographic study that looks at the statistics of users along with the motives for how different user groups use these sites. Again, Boyd's essay is not an 'academic' piece, and looking at what the Guardian Unlimited posted, well I just have to say who's the editor who approved it? Is it any wonder the blogosphere is so disgusted with the MSM.

http://technology.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,2111488,00.html

Lisa: I assume you're the same Lisa who's been leaving hateful comments on danah's blog, and since no one's been responding directly to your flames, I wanted to do so. You don't seem to know anything about danah's work or her person, and if you did, you'd know that she's anything but racist, she's a genuinely reflexive academic, and she's incredibly intelligent. She clearly labeled her essay as a work-in-progress, she clearly admitted its faults and anecdotal nature, and she never intended it to get out into the media in the way that it has.

"Boyd should retract her essay and submit an apology to the media, who, for some inexplicable reason, has treated her essay as some "definitive" academic report." WRONG. The *media* should apologize to *danah* for "treating her essay as some 'definitive' academic report." Danah made VERY clear that it's not, and the media who have presented it as if it IS a full-on academic report should be ashamed of themselves. As should you, for spreading such hateful, negative sentiments to an author just trying to understand some (rather troubling) societal patterns that everyone is usually too f'ing scared to talk about. I don't know anything about you, but you're attempting to publicly humiliate someone who's attempting to understand and combat inequality: you're the insulting one.

Flame. Over.

that's a lie. myspace is just everyone, and facebook is just everyone sweet, or in college.

Great site!312194efa9b1fca80fac2ebea831fd82