Do Facebook and MySpace suffer from a class divide in the UK?

US academics have found that users of Facebook and MySpace are split by income, race and religion, with Facebook attracting mainly people from white, middle-class backgrounds. Are there any such divides in the UK by users of social networks?  Read the story

Probably not as much as the US for a number of reasons, primarily because Facebook hasn't been active as long here as it has over the pond. Facebook started life as a US college networking site where you had to have a uni email address to register. It was a denizen of the frat boy culture for a while out there as well. When it came over here the first unis that got it were the Oxbridge duo and then it gradually filtered down, until recently they scrapped the whole 'need a university email address to join' thing completely which led to a bunch of people joining.

MySpace's user base was heavily influenced by the ability for musicians to showcase their work and interact with their fan base (which sets it apart from sites like Purevolume which is just a listen to our music type of site) and you got a lot of kids joining up because they thought it was cool to have their fav bands as their friends etc. Also MySpace is seen as a haven for the angst-ridden teenagers who consider themselves outcasts (and then ironically identify with groups - metalheads, emo etc. and claim they're individual..sigh. And having been to a public school myself I was surprised by the number of middle/upper class kids who are into the emo/metal scene) whereas facebook is more of 'find your old friends and colleagues' ethos.

So in a nutshell, you do have by its design more university students/graduates on Facebook in the UK, but the divides of race/social class may be harder to pin down because the racial makeup of UK universities is broadly more diverse than those in the US, partly down to barriers to entry (cost) and also the immigrant community that showed up here in the 50's is partaking in social ladder climbing with 1st and 2nd generations getting better jobs than their parents, better education etc.

So the divides are there, in some categories, but probably not so pronounced in others.

Or I could be wrong.

Hi Sam, you raise some very interesting points here. I don't think the socio-economic divide (on MySpace etc) is pronounced in the UK. Having attended universities in the US and the UK, it's fair to say that the cost of higher education over there is far higher proportionally. Perhaps that accounts for why there seem to be more people from middle class white backgrounds on Facebook. In short, many young people in the US are priced out of the university system if they can't secure sponsorship.

If there is a notable divide, I very much doubt there's something sinister going on, more that the websites are a reflection of pervading attitudes, aspirations and needs. Ultimately, people gravitate towards the sites which fit their needs best. If I was in a band I'd be more inclined to be on MySpace (I'm not). Having said that, I'm not on Facebook either...

But what of the people who are registered on both?

I think its interesting that the academics have decided to take, what is in effect a demographic difference between web properties and call it a social divide.  Bottom line is everyone will use a site for different reasons. Myspaces primary utility to users is the act of self expression (more inward focussed) As Sam points out you can find angst ridden teenagers wanting to express all over the place.  Whereas face book is more about the network (outward)  The primary reason Face book and My space differ demographically is about usage.  There been recent research published recently that identifies how people are disloyal to each social network, using each for its primary benefit, switching when it suits.  This shows not how people are divided, but illustrates how the web makes it easy for people to get what they need.

No.

 

Myspace is predominately for music, and is amazingly badly designed.

Facebook is for everything else, and is well designed.

 

As a result, predominately you get musicians/music led folk on Myspace (who, by their very nature, tend to be young), and the rest on Facebook.

 
Facebook is currently blowing Myspace out of the water because of usability/widgets, rather than some damned piss poor bit of html and a song that autoplays that makes up a MySpace page.

 

Bringing class into it is a bit nonsensical to me. There are no restrictions any more. This debate would have made more sense when (as Sam points out) it was just for Oxbridge students/grads. 

I'm registered on both but use Facebook everyday and myspace much less. I was disappointed in myspace as I thought it would allow me access or at least advance notice of when bands or comedians were playing gigs, but it doesn't seem to.

The interface on facebook is far more pleasing to the eye than myspace, which seems to encourage even the most sane person to daub their page in bright flashing colours, sounds and clips. If you get tired of an application that you add you can get rid of it pretty easily.

 Anyway - why are we talking about class divides anyway? Didn't realise that got listed on your profile, or that they even exist anymore.

I agree that the class thing is less of an issue in the UK, but its interesting that having expanded from an academic higher education base it now seems to have attracted a largely professional educated crowd on top - like most of the people talking here. I'm guessing, while now exclusively white university educated accounts for a very high proportion.

I'm with Will H above. It'd be interesting to hear what advertisers and their clients think though. Aren't Facebookers too busy interacting with their friends to click on ads?

I would have thought, given the size and visibility of the sites included in the research, that it would be useful to understand how the research was carried out (approach, sample rate, interview criteria, data analysis methodologies, definitions, etc) and under what classifications the resulting data was interpreted.

As far as I can see, none of this information is available. The BBC when reporting on this research quotes Danah Boyd (the research author, a PhD candidate at the University of California-Berkley) as having said that her conclusions were derived from "many" interviews with teenage users of these sites. Why only teenage users I can't help but wonder, as there are plenty of non-teenage users on both.

This hardly inspires confidence in her findings; especially when you consider that in a previous paper entitled "Why Youth (Heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life" (no publication date available, but clearly post 2005) she says: "I have found that race and social class play little role in terms of access beyond the aforementioned disenfranchised population. Poor urban black teens appear to be just as likely to join the site as white teens from wealthier backgrounds."

"aforementioned disenfranchised population" is a reference to those folk (again, teenagers) who do not have a presence on such sites; her categories for such people are a) kids who basically don't do it because their parents say not to and b) politically aware kids who object to Rupert Murdoch owning MySpace (or as she says "conscientious objectors").

In addition, entries like "I have also spent countless hours analyzing the profiles, blogs, and commentary of teenagers throughout the United States." give additional pause; since when did we start taking at face value anything contributed by end users? Unless blog/profile users are the subject of mind control, there is nothing to say that what appears online via such channels is even vaguely true or to be trusted - certainly not as a component part of research that is attempting to identify something as important as the extension of class division to the online space.

Its all far too sloppy for my liking - and really, as an industry we should look a lot harder at such things before assuming they have any veracity at all. Of course, Danah Boyd's findings are only interim at this stage; the full paper is yet to be released and I presume that by the time we do see the final output, it'll have had the necessary academic and investigative rigour applied to it.

Interesting post Chris, thanks. I hope advertisers take the same care you have.

Advertisers don’t seem to be concerned with the divide that may be apparent on the sites, they are more concerned about keeping up with the next big thing that is attracting an audience, at the moment that’s facebook. More and more users are migrating from MySpace to Facebook which makes it the perfect site to reach all types of audience and I would imagine that the divide, if there really is one, will become less noticeable in the near future.

Face book also provides a source of volume for large DR advertisers, UGC inventory will also be much cheaper which is great if you optimize it correctly.  Things like frequency capping are key here, as one unique may create many hundred impressions

 

Having explored both Facebook & MySpace, they generally target different audiences. Your average teenager will run a country mile from Facebook as it is generally 'not relevant' to their life. The point behind MySpace is music, giving interested individuals access to their favourite  bands , DJs etc. MySpace allows strangers to  become 'friends' based on their common interest. Facebook on  the other hand (along with Linkedin - another networking site aimed at business users) does not let you do that. Yes you can connect with people in your 'network' but you have to actually know them in the 'real world'. The beauty of MySpace is its anarchy, unweildiness. Facebook is 'cleaner' and connects more to the real world. Demographically yes they do appeal to different audiences and offer brands & services new channels to reach their target audience. 

Amongst the 'yoof' there is a wee phrase to distinguish between the social networking sites:

 

bebo is for neds

facebook if for geeks

and myspace is for the cool 

 

I think that pretty much sums up the class distinction.