Page 54 (Teich) our author talks about all the low hanging
overpasses in Long Island and New York.
Our author goes on to say this: “It turns out, however, that the 200 or
so low-hanging overpasses on Long Island were deliberately designed to achieve
a particular social effect.” “According to evidence provided by Robert A. Caro
in his biography on Moses, the reasons reflect Moses’s social-class bias and racial
prejudice.”
I know this was in the
1920-1970’s but do you think there are any forms of technology today that
reflects “social-class bias” or “racial prejudice”?
The author shares, “Technological change expresses a panoply of human motives, not the least of which is the desire of some to gave dominion over others, even though it may require and occasional sacrifice of cost cutting and some violence to the norm of getting more from less” (Winner, p. 55). I see this example in those individuals of higher SES gravitate away from living in the inner cities with those who are primarily poorer and of minority groups. We studied this in Sociology of Healthcare and studies have shown this to be true. Those who are wealthier have the means to move out of the cities and have access to better schools and healthcare, not to mention the feelings of safety and security in their environment.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn the case of Moses it wasn't the technology of the bridge that caused racial bias but rather the way it was utilized. This could be said of many technologies today. The pricing of cars for example, the price of small sport cars are much higher than that of larger vans. The car a person drives and the price tag that goes with it is a status and social symbol.
ReplyDeleteAnother example would be larger homes are built farther outside of the city where people who can afford to commute longer distances, can live. Small homes are built closer to the factories and jobs, so those in low paying jobs don't have to spend the money commuting to work.
You make a valid point about some people living close to the city because they cannot afford commuting long distances. This reminds me of how somes things that technology brought about during the Industrial Revolution are still in effect today. Would you agree?
DeleteI believe that commercial airlines still use this to this day. Some are different then others, but the bottom line is if you have the money you can purchase the "First Class" ticket. I feel this is still viewed as an social class bias, it still infers that these passengers are superior to you. They get more space beverage service before you and board before you. I know it can be purchased by anyone but it still promotes that concept.
ReplyDeleteIt is a way to separate classes; and is a very good example of our capitalist economy. If you have the money, you will be treated much better, given better seats, foods, and will be able to board first. If you dont have the money for this, you will have much less leg room, smaller seats, and may possibly get food. The only augmentation of this system is with southwest airlines which has no class system. All seats are the same; fares may differ but the physical space and food service is universal.
DeleteThere are some forms of technology that reflect social class bias in the modern times. An example of this would be when you are buying a new car from a dealer, they treat you far better than someone who is buying a used car, because they know you are not willing to spend the money to buy a new one. The same comes when you are buying jewelry, when you go to Tiffany's they sit you down and get you wine or anything else to make you more comfortable, where if you went to your local jeweler they would just look at you as profit instead of a high end client.
ReplyDeleteThere are certain products which are not marketed toward a large demographic, but a very small one. There are very expensive cars targeted at middle and upper class families. We do see a stratification of technological availability by class in our capitalist society among many of the new and highly advanced technologies. Once a technology has been around, it usually comes down in price and is available to a larger number of people. Flat screen televisions are an example of a product that only the wealthy could afford, but after a few years of development, they have become relatively cheap. Teich writes "societies choose structures for technology that influence how people are going to work" (52). Sometimes this discrimination is not able to be prevented, but its just a part of technological development.
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting topic. I can honestly say that aside from initial price, I don't see or feel any built-in racial bias in technology. I may be unaware of them if they do exist. But no, I don't notice any. Maybe I will though, now that you've mentioned it.
ReplyDeleteAlthough not entirely class based, I think to a certain extent, that any technology that exists online could be considered to be biased. Everyone does not have to same access to the resources necessary to connect to resources, information, and services online.
ReplyDeleteOnline courses like this one, for example, take advantage of technological resources that simply may not be affordable for some members of society.
Tom S.
Tom, you make a good point. Not only do people that can't afford the technology get left behind but also those who aren't able to keep up with the advances. Many of our older population have a hard time adapting to the new technology that is out there and for that reason aren't always able to compete in the business world.
DeleteI think that the concept of technology has an inherent social-class bias. When a new technology hits the market it is often outrageously expensive and unavailable to common people. This being said, the wealthiest people always have access to the newest technology. Being that monetary gain is often a driving force in the development of technology, it only makes sense that new technologies are going to be marketed to those most willing to pay a lot for them. New technologies are often developed by existing companies who are not in the business of losing money by giving things away.
ReplyDeleteThe new version is always more expensive than the previous technology, but is it really to a prohibitive level?
DeleteThis is very true and we see it over and over again. First with computers, then laptops, cellphones, ect. I guess you could argue that it is not a prohibitive level due to the credit card technology, but it is much harder to gain access to in the initial development. Wealthy people have the disposable income for these new technologies while middle and lower class people may want to buy food and housing instead of a new television.
DeleteI know this was in the 1920-1970’s but do you think there are any forms of technology today that reflects “social-class bias” or “racial prejudice”?
ReplyDeleteI don't know that I can think of any technology that helps to perpetuate racial biases. But in the same way that Robert Moses effectively oppressed African Americans by excluding the lower caste, you do find social class bias.
One example could be that more and more it is becoming necessary to have a well-working computer with strong internet access in the home. Children are sent home with work that involves going to educational sites, and printing out results (just look at what our course requires, for adults). More government agencies are offering or requiring that you use a computer to perform some task, print forms, submit information, etc. The common answer to people who may say they do not have access to a computer is "Well we have a couple set up at your local library," assuming that is always accessible to everyone.
There are several technologies that could be used for this argument. Cars for example can be used because expensive, luxury cars are marketed to a certain demographic and cheap cars to another. I think however that it is more in how the culture perceives and uses a technology that determines the perceived "class-bias" or "racial prejudice". The technology itself I do not believe has anything to do with the cultural perception.
ReplyDeleteI would agree. At this point I would say we've move away from racial prejudices and more towards class bias. It seems we've replaced one negative for another.
DeleteThe form of technology that comes to mind is the automobile. There are countless types of cars and there is such a large price difference. A family with a moderate income will not be found driving around a Mercedes-Benz S600. Different vehicles are essentially made for different "social-classes".
ReplyDeleteThis is very true and visible in the advertising. Mercedes ads are usually associated with wealthier families with nice homes and good jobs. You are going to see normal vehicles advertised in media formats viewed by the masses. But cars like Mercedes will be advertised almost exclusively to the elite via business and investment magazines.
DeleteThis is so true. You never see the Mercedes ad showing a family of four heading out to a soccer game. The ad usually shows someone in business attire pulling up to a home most of us cannot afford.
DeleteYeah, but you do see the more affordable car companies (Hyudai, Kia, Honda) trying to cater to the upper classes too. Or at least make their cars look and feel luxurious and yet attainable to the masses (price). It is an interesting dichotomy where these companies make cars for the masses yet make the commercials look like luxury.
DeleteCertain vehicles today are geared towards certain ethnic groups. I can say this is true because I work at a very prestige’s car dealership. In my opinion, Cadillac’s are geared towards African Americans at least where I work. It seems 9 out of 10 Cadillac’s sold there are meant for mostly that ethnic group. “Marx tries to show that increasing Mechanization will render obsolete the hierarchical division of labor and the relationship of subordination that, in his views, were necessary during the early stages of modern manufacturing.“ (Pg. 60)
ReplyDeleteI believe that there are many technologies that showcase a person's social status. Generally, the person who has more money feels pressured to buy the much more expensive "brand new" car rather than saving their money by buying an older model or a "used" version. Another technology that showcases this is a person's type of cell phone. People with the standard flip cell phone is looked down upon as either not being able to afford the latest iphone or maybe they are just stuck in the stone age. "It is obvious that technologies can be used in ways to enhance the power, authority, and priviledge of some over others..." (pg. 56).
ReplyDeleteThe cell phone point made me think of when I was younger and remember people commenting on a persons cell phone if it was still not a color phone or then it moved to not having a flip phone and then flip phones where stone age. You make a good point on how people are viewed just because of a cell phone.
DeleteI think that technology is still probably being used in clever ways to help maintain social stratification among people and societies. The major example I can think of would be computers, the internet and cell phones. If you are too poor to afford these things, you are not going to be able to remain competitive or in the loop today. You need these things just to get a job, and without access to them it would be very difficult to move up in society.
ReplyDeleteI think the fact that people that are poor and don't have access to things like this shouldn't make people want to judge them, but need to work together to assure everyone the access. Our hometown library is always encountering people to use the computer lab and make printing manageable. It doesn't matter what the item is people are going to try to exclude certain individuals. It has happened so many times throughout history you would think someone would learn.
DeleteI am not so sure that we engineer for social reason as we do for capital reasons. Sure advertising is geared to specific groups but that is just because they are most likely to buy that product. There is probably still social engineering going on but it may not be obvious like it used to be. The reasoning has most likely changed as well.
ReplyDeleteI would be willing to argue that technology does show both class and racial bias, but only with the influence of man and how the wealthier percentile utilizes that technology to their benefit. Take a large city for example. In a large city you will find many roads and streets, all paved and well maintained as the areas are important to the incoming wealth of a city. Now move outside of that city and compare two areas, a wealthy gated community just outside of the city, and a.lower income neighborhood found inside the city limits. Of these two areas the area with the higher wealth will be more maintained over time. While the funds come from the same places, cities almost always favor the wealthy areas over the urban ones.
ReplyDeleteI think a lot of technology has a social class bias. Wealthy people are going to be able to afford the computers and internet and other technologies more so than poorer people. This can allow the wealthy to get more wealthy and the poor are left in the dust. Its hard for poor people to apply for better jobs because applications are becoming more and more online and if they don't have access to the internet or a computer, they won't be able to get these jobs to better themselves.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree. The state of Ohio, even, has moved to a predominately online system within our own state government. Today, if someone becomes unemployed, they have to file their weekly job searches continually online to keep their benefits while searching for new employment.
DeleteStandardized tests seem to always come up when there are discussions of something having a gender, racial, or socioeconomic bias. We talked about an historical example in my Industrial Psychology class: at the beginning of WWI, when they had to process tens of thousands of potential soldier recruits in a short time, they used standardized tests to rate "intelligence" - basically attempting to quickly plot a recruit correctly somewhere on a spectrum between cannon fodder and strategic thinker. Each recruit would answer verbally to a standardized test aimed at expediency. What had not been taken into account though, was the large number of illiterate (often immigrant) and/or unsophisticated rural enlistees, and that illiteracy or unsophistication was not a measure of intelligence. The early tests were classifying a large percentage of the men as imbeciles, when actually they just couldn't read, or didn't have a context for visual images that were part of questions. A poor rural farmer who had never left Illinois may not be able to correctly identify a drawing of opera glasses, for example, or of a landmark in Philadelphia.
ReplyDeleteYour example is a really good one that I didn't even think of. The same thing can sometimes be said today. If people are illiterate or have learning issues people still look down on them. My girlfriend's little sister has dyslexia and alot of her classmates call her dumb because she has a hard time reading. She is a really witty girl, but yet society doesn't try to help they just look down.
DeleteI think many of the racial or social bias that is around is due to the fact that it's noticed as a cultural norm more than anything.
ReplyDeleteSomeone mentioned the "first class" thing as before as a barrier. I don't think that's how it exactly was meant. I think it was more or less if you're willing to pay more you get more.
I don't think racially biased exists as heavily as it use to. However I could miss it and perhaps it will be more noticeable.
Every consumer technology is inherently economically class biased. If a class cannot afford to purchase a technology then they will not be able to receive the rewards of that technology. Where the problem comes in is when it comes to technology that affects quality of life. Such things as health care technology or education should be made available to all that want to utilize it. Where it gets tricky is who pays for this spreading of technology. Should the company making it be required to give some away to those in need, then they will be forced to raise the price to the consumer possible affecting their ability to be competitive. Should tax money be used to buy it for those that need it, what if those that pay the taxes can’t afford the technology for themselves. It becomes extremely tricky when trying to erase the economic class lines.
ReplyDelete