Is technology diverse?

Through the development of technology the world has grown to rely on it. Technology is apart of our daily lives, without it many would feel as though they could no longer continue life fluidly. The controversy that comes with technology is who the consumers are and how it affects the rest of society when the platform, software, or product itself is made for one select part of the community and not them.

Lack of resources one would say is a set back that negatively affects the ability to move forward and develop in today’s society. In this post it is mentions that “Silicon Valley design platforms and services mainly for urban elites, like themselves often young, white, male, and technically savvy”, the ability to create and develop requires someone with money and someone who is willing to spend it. The post goes on to say that although technology is largely valued all over the world, many times it is designed for a certain place or certain people. This leads me to believe that although many believe technology will be diverse and accessible to people all over the world, in order to make development easier, it’s not. Diversity is false advertisement in the world of technology and in order to obtain and use efficiently you must be part of the designer’s social class.

https://01anthropology.wordpress.com/2014/04/07/producing-design-ethnographies-of-inequality-and-difference-in-digital-technologies/

2 thoughts on “Is technology diverse?

  1. I agree that socioeconomic status plays a huge role in determining the audience for tech products, and the tactics used to market those very products. A striking example is the newly unveiled Apple Watch, which comes with an edition specifically catered to wealthy individuals, with a pricetag of over $10,000. The watch targets those of upper class who A) have enough money to spend on such an item, and B) wish to directly express that wealth through a material object on their person, and this is just one example that illustrates your/the article’s point regarding the connection between technology and wealth. I would however argue that for the most part, technology is marketed to those with more money, and is not aimed towards all socioeconomic classes. This could have several factors: the cultural background of those designing the tech, the intended or necessary profits from the item, or the status that is designed to be associated with the tech itself. Everything from the design of a tech item, the Apple Watch is a good example, to the pricetag and the marketing campaign, uses an understanding of it’s customer base and the greater human world to cater towards a specific audience and reap certain rewards. In that respect, anthropology is crucial towards not only creating a successful customer base, but also associating a particular socioeconomic status with the product, and likewise I believe that some companies would rather not market their products to lower socioeconomic classes (“the rest of the world”).

    You did a great job of touching the surface of this issue, but I believe there is much more to be found regarding the web of anthropological strategies used to market products to wealthier classes, and the ways that people not only market, but look to be associated and connected with certain classes.

  2. I like this post because it relates to today’s technology problem, which is interesting because most things in this day in age is all about technology. If you know how to work with computers you have an advantage at a job interview it’s another skill to add, and a very important one with all the jobs today that use technology. The poor who can’t afford technology don’t then have this advantage of applying for jobs, where technological skills are needed. I really believe that this article reflected one of the top problems with technology that people overlook.

Comments are closed.