Equity in Digital Access? It's Less Likely than You Think [Aguilar Rosenthal 2019]

This week’s readings were primarily concerned with issues of accessibility and the multi-layered
concern of technologically generated opportunity, achievement, and socialization gaps – particularly as
these relate to youths of low socio-economic strata as compared to their more privileged peers. One of
this week’s readings, “Bridging a Digital Divide that Leaves Schoolchildren Behind”, interrogates the
very tangible concerns of the politics of possession (who can possess smartphone and internet
technology versus who can’t), but is lacking in a more wholistic overview of the gaps presented by
these technologies. Meaning, in addition to simple possession, there need also be a conversation
surrounding the innately discriminatory nature of the language of smartphone technologies and who is
allowed to be a part of its conversations.

Though much analysis in these articles was dedicated to the physical, economic, and educational
implications of those who posses smartphones versus those who don’t, there is also a very interesting
tension even amongst those who do have smartphones that is exemplified in the Android/iPhone
divide. More specifically, I’m interested in the establishment of the iPhone as the ultimate, and
defining, cultural authority. For example, Gretchen McCulloch’s article “Emoji and Other Internet
Gestures”, analyzes the emergent language of emoji in modern American society through digital
conversations. In her analysis, McCulloch explores the ways in which certain emoji (emblems)
demand to be seen with very specific visual criteria, else their fundamental usefulness and meanings
become undermined. To use a “wrong” emoji is to commit a social faux pas that leads consumers to
“[feel] as foolish sending the wrong [looking] emoji as [they] would giving the middle finger
backwards or crossing the wrong two fingers.” (McCulloch 163) 

However, something to note is that determinations of these “correct” looking emoji are interestingly
not derived from their various independent origins, but rather from the Apple released versions of
them. Apple did not invent emoji, nor does it have a monopoly over their invention or release, but the
advent of Apple products did insert emoji (with these codings and visual cues) into a hegemonic
mainstream that has made these versions the alleged “purest” form in the American cultural
conscience. The strength of the convictions surrounding something as seemingly innocuous as emoji
imagery demonstrates the extent to which inequities persist even amongst those with the privilege of
smartphone accessibility at all. If it is such a significant social error to send the “wrong” emoji form - a
programming issue of which consumers themselves have little control - what does that say about who
is allowed to fully participate in these emergent language forms? This engrained societal awe of
Apple, Apple products, and the languages they produce seem to very directly contribute to the
foundations of a sociocultural hierarchy in which Apple users are positioned at the very top. This
effectively leaves Android users (oftentimes the more accessible device) exiled from the realm of
cultural contribution.

 In short, this creates stringent social stratifications between Android/iPhone users and complicates the
(false) understanding that sheer access constitutes equity.

Citations: 
Kang, Cecilia. “Bridging a Digital Divide that Leaves School Children Behind.” The New York Times February 22, 2016. 

McCulloch, Gretchen. “Emoji and Other Internet Gestures.” BecauseInternet. New York City: Riverhead Books, 2019. p. 155-196.


Comments

Maggie said…
I think you provide a very interesting nuance to the article that both New York Times articles did not consider. I completely agree that there seems to be a hierarchy not only in possessing a smartphone (as opposed to a non-smartphone or not owning a phone at all) and in the types of smartphones we own. We frequently hear about the inferiority of Android cameras in comparison to iPhone cameras, or how texting a friend with an Android is much less appealing because you can't use many iPhone-specific functions. Or simply the fact that the texts show up green instead of blue bothers some people. I think we could extend this discussion to talk about consumerist culture as a whole, and whether or not we are being primed as consumers to value one smartphone over the other simply because of common rhetoric. This post also made me think about the Chinese telephone company Huawei, which has become increasingly popular in China and in the US (I think they actually sell more models than iPhones - whether that's due to its popularity in China and the country's gigantic population or other reasons, I can't be sure). Even though they have greater success in sales than Apple does with iPhones, we still see iPhones at the epitome of the smartphone hierarchy. Why is that? Further, Trump banned the manufacturing of all Huawei products earlier this year, and I think that further begs the question of whether or not there's a political lens at which to look at this issue.
September 16, 2019 at 3:00 PM
Elaine said…
You make a very interesting point that I also think a lot about in my day to day life, especially as a student at WashU. From Airdrop to iMessage, Apple has a “hegemonic” authority over digital communication amongst students at this school. To not have a Mac, an iPhone, and now, Airpods is to be in the digital minority. With every new product launch come a slew of memes and other pop culture references that those who cannot afford the luxury of Apple products are excluded from. However, what I find most confusing is that even though more and more people are becoming Apple users every day, the prices of Apple products are not changing. The latest versions of the Mac and iPhone are more expensive than the last. People are not getting richer, but how is it that Apple is still growing in popularity? Does Apple have a monopoly on digital culture? Are we perpetuating digital inequality by buying Apple products? How does WashU’s Apple-centric digital community contribute to this digital divide?
September 17, 2019 at 7:01 AM
Elaine said…
(cont'd) To comment on Maggie's point about Huawei, there is a greater "east vs west" conflict emerging as Huawei becomes more popular in both China and the US. The conflict of "east vs west" conflict has existed since Westerners first arrived in East Asia. It has become more prevalent in recent years as China has grown as an economic power, posing a threat to US international power. With Huawei, there is this question of "are people more adverse to Huawei products because it is Chinese?". It will not matter if Huawei's products are better than Apple's, because they are made by a Chinese company, they will always be "inferior". Trump's ban on the manufacturing of all Huawei products can be viewed through the lens of the "Yellow Peril".
September 17, 2019 at 7:11 AM
Sydney Otis said…
While I think of the dichotomy between Apple and Android products, I hadn't considered it in relation to the readings. It's interesting to think about the divides that exist within the initial possession or lack thereof of whatever technological devices. I am particularly interested in how these divisions came about. You mentioned that Apple did not invent the emoji, yet when one has the ability to use Apple's emojis and any Apple specific features, they are considered technologically superior in a sense. Despite many arguments that show that Androids have better operating systems or processes than iPhones, countless amounts of people are still drawn to Apple products, so much so that a whole ecosystem has been created. At this point in society, products that do not fit into the Apple ecosystem are deemed insignificant and seen as a hassle. I wonder what factors led towards the divisions that exist within the larger divide created by digital inequalities and wonder what divisions are present when analyzing the angle of "lack of" technology.
September 17, 2019 at 1:21 PM
Eileen said…
I think your post sheds light on the nuances of the levels within the "privileged" end of the digital divide. As an art student strongly encouraged to specifically purchase a 15-inch Macbook Pro by my school, I also asked Elaine's question on how WashU's increasing dependence on Apple products impact the divides, even amongst those who can afford to go to college and access technology. The digital divide is often thought about in tandem with primary and secondary education. University is often considered privilege in itself and often excluded from the conversation. Therefore, I could not help but wonder what more could be added if this discussion extended to how this reliance on Apple and lack of financial aid amongst top private universities could influence students' aspirations--especially since these colleges are supposed to provide safe environments with level playing fields.
September 23, 2019 at 11:15 AM
Post a Comment