COMM 202 Journal #1

Link to the article


The article draws attention to the racial issues brought about by the Internet and criticizes the Utopian vision of the Internet as a global village. The anonymousness of people on the Net seemed liberating at first, but in fact it leads to a” default whiteness” in cyberspace. People assume you are white since there isn’t any visual indicator of race on the Internet. Moreover, Internet might be promoting racial stereotypes. For instance, people create and act out racial characters in MUDs and thought that they really understand what it meant to be a minority. The article then suggests that more scholarship should focus on discussing the question of race in cyberspace. At the same time, visual devices online like Webcams and Videoconferencing might be a way to express cultural identity online.


The article brings out the problem of net-related racism and sought for more discussion by scholars. I tend to agree with the article’s claim that a race-free cyberspace is not as idealistic as it seems. Racism is present in the cyberspace even though the lure of the Internet is supposed to be creating a race-free utopia where everyone is not judged by his or her race. In fact, “part of the utopian myth of the Net assumes that race is only a burden, when in fact the burden is racism”. The article is essentially condemning the widespread utopian vision of Internet as a race-free global village.

The article also poses the danger of the culture of simulation, which causes the blurring of reality and the virtual world. Some people believe that they can understand the complexities of being a minority while they act out racial stereotypes in MUDs once or twice. This affects their attitude towards particular races, which they become less sympathetic. While people are fascinated by anonymous social interaction, the article reminds us of the disparity between real life and virtual world. Cultural experiences are unique and stereotypes are far from reality. The so-called “identity tourism” cannot make you a Latino, African American, or any other race. We are still bound by our own race and culture from our life offline even though we can create multiple identities online. This reminds me of Turkle’s story which she realized that somebody was impersonating her on a MUD. She was annoyed and feeling out of control. Similarly, it is as disturbing to people of a particular race knowing that somebody is acting out a false imitation of their race.

As long as the default mode of cyberspace is White, it troubles people of other ethnic origin. As a Chinese, I was always being mistaken as a Caucasian when I go to public chat-rooms. Whenever I insist I am Asian, people start to act differently towards me. Many users simply ignore me when I tell them I am Chinese. In social interactions online, most non-White users feel like outsiders. Often, people left racist comment since they have the assumption that all people in the chat-room are Whites and they can be irresponsible for what they said since they cannot be identified online.

The absence of racial distinctions and the default “Whiteness” has stifled manifestations of the cultural identity of other races. Besides blaming the nature of the text-based online interaction, the existence of the “Digital Divide” also account for that. There is a predominance of Caucasian, especially Americans, over other ethnic groups in terms of Internet access. There are only 6% of the overall world population that has access to Internet, and 41% of that comes from USA and Canada. Furthermore, most websites are written in English. Many people who have a different race and/or different language are always intimidated by the overwhelming “white” presence on the Net.

In order to let minorities express their authentic identity online, the article suggests that we can move towards a more visual Internet. That is, from the traditional text-based interaction, we can go on to video conferencing. However, I don’t think that new technology should completely replace the text-based tools of communication online. Their relationship is like books and television. The text-based media of chat-rooms, MUDs and MOOs are in fact cold medium since they require high level of participation but with low definition as they are very little information about each person u are chatting with. You can just see their messages and imagine how they look like. On the other hand, video conferencing is hot as it is low in participation but high in definition. You can meet the person face-to-face and hear his/her voice over the Net. Both media has their own advantages and disadvantages. Like books and TV, television is popular but it does not completely overtaken books.

In my opinion, even though a race-free environment in the cyberspace can become the haven for racism, we should leave for people to choose whether they want to disclose their ethnic identity online for reasons of privacy and freedom. People should differentiate for themselves what is real and what is not. In fact, I believe that as more and more people gain access to the Internet, the more diverse it will become. Eventually, the gap of the Digital Divide will become smaller and this will be the end of the “white” dominance of the Internet. Yet this will probably take some time.