Classy: Danah Boyd. Photograph: James Duncan Davidson/O'Reilly Media
You can't move for people talking about Facebook at the moment. We're as guilty as anyone else - Vic Keegan, John Naughton, Jeff Jarvis, and Charlie Brooker have all written about it in recent weeks. Even Jack joined.
But aside from all of the boggle-eyed social butterflies who spend hours each day updating their profile and the hand-rubbing money men (including those who enjoy stating the obvious) the real interest for me lies in who uses it, and why.
A month ago I posted here that part of Facebook's value is that it isn't MySpace (and vice versa):
MySpace is about teenage rebellion; ugliness and defiantly folded arms. Facebook is much more popular among those of college age and older - it's more grown up, and looking at it isn't like pouring acid into your eyeballs.
So it's timely that Danah Boyd, one of the most incisive researchers looking at societies on the web, has come up with a paper on the class structures of Facebook and MySpace. In essence, she says good middle class kids use Facebook, while the working classes use MySpace. In many respects it is one of those things that puts what you already know into context, but it's a worthwhile read.
MySpace is still home for Latino/Hispanic teens, immigrant teens, "burnouts," "alternative kids," "art fags," punks, emos, goths, gangstas, queer kids, and other kids who didn't play into the dominant high school popularity paradigm. These are kids whose parents didn't go to college, who are expected to get a job when they finish high school.
We all see stereotypes living inside social networks - LinkedIn is used by suited execs, for example - but does her analysis ring true with you? And how do other networks fit into this pattern?
