History repeating?

I find myself conflicted about the content of danah boyd’s White Flight in Networked Publics? How Race and Class Shaped American Teen Engagement with MySpace and Facebook. boyd explains a number of aspects about social media sites that seem apt and accurate—mainly that the adoption of sites such as Facebook and MySpace among American teens reflects prevalent narratives of race and class in American life (p. 5). Moreover, boyd argues that we can conceptualize the move from MySpace to Facebook through the lens of white flight. This refers to the notion that the digital exodus from MySpace to Facebook by white users mirrors the physical migration of white people from cities to the suburbs due to “institutional incentives and restrictions, fear and anxiety, social networks, and racism” (p. 4).

boyd outlines these parallels in a mostly reasonable way, but elements of this casuistic stretch seem insufficient. In particular, boyd’s narrative begins to fail when she explicates what the digital ghetto of MySpace entails, complete with equating spammers to street gangs. Additionally, a critical problem with this equivalency is that it heavily trivializes both the investment and consequences for those who physically reside in these subsequently ghettoized urban spaces. Simply put, there are tangible impacts to living in these defunct urban landscapes that include the destruction of communities, local economies, and property values. The idea that this fallout and entrapment for minority groups who become stuck or chose to stay in these physical spaces is anywhere near the “difficult” decision to leave MySpace for Facebook is, quite honestly, absurd.

I understand that these equations are, by nature, a stretch. To be fair, boyd does note that her goal is not to dismiss or devalue the history of these social divisions that occurred entirely in the physical world. Nevertheless, the entire metaphor implores us to consider whether digital technologies and spaces must always mirror prior historical events. For example, if one was to write about the decision by websites such as Popular Science to shut down the comment sections on their articles, it would be highly questionable to draw an analogy to the censorship of Nazi Germany. Though it is absolutely worth considering the way that these digital developments propagate a history of existing power structures, it is also important not to go too far in our analogies.

Again, most of boyd’s argument is reasonable, and anyone who has spent time on these spaces can attest to lingering racism, mirrored social dynamics, and replicated power structures. What is interesting, however, is that Facebook now has one billion users and MySpace exists mainly for music purposes. What has become of the so-called ghetto? Would this be called “gentrification” in an update to this article? Or, is it possible that in our continuing quest to make sense of the world vis-a-vis an entrenched narrative, we must realize that the digital often takes us into uncharted territories that do not always have neat historical parallels?