Hashtag Inclusion
Digital activism tools highlight the progress—or lack thereof—in engineering workplace diversity.
By Aditya Johri
As we approach a year since the #MeToo hashtag first appeared, it is important to reflect on how new modes of activism are being employed to shed light on issues such as the abuse of power and the disenfranchisement of women and other minorities in the workplace. Women’s participation in the U.S. engineering workforce began in earnest in the 1940s to fill positions necessitated by World War II. It was also around this time, in 1950, that the Society of Women Engineers (SWE) was formed. Since then, however, the representation of women in U.S. engineering education and the industrial workforce has stagnated. They make up less than 25 percent, and in spite of decades of effort to redress this, little progress has been made. If anything, the new technology firms representing the Silicon Valley culture have exacerbated the problem by cultivating practices not conducive to a diverse workforce.
New forms of communication provide an avenue toward revealing inequity and allowing participants to coalesce around issues. Social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook have emerged as channels for users to voice their concerns and show their support. Hashtags such as #ILookLikeanEngineer, #WomenWhoCode, and #WomenInStem have become popular markers of a lack of workplace diversity, particularly in technology—but they are also indicators of how different people are working to address the problem.
Social movements in support of equity and diversity and against the mistreatment of women in the workforce are not new. From the suffrage movement to equal pay for equal work, women and other minorities have been at the forefront of social justice causes since the mid-1800s. Earlier movements relied on a sense of collective identity, were place-based, and had a hands-on approach. Social media activism relies on connective action—the idea that it can bring together disparate actors across geographical boundaries. Digital technologies enable activists to disseminate information quickly to a large audience. Activists use networked technologies not only for creating and sharing information but also for forming public opinion, planning, calling for action, protecting activists, and mobilizing resources online and off. This is powerful—but the low barrier for participation calls into question the commitment of those who participate. Still, increased use of this form of activism and the role that movements such as #MeToo play are showing that these are important tools in the overall ecology of social justice advocacy.
In my lab, we have been studying hashtag activism campaigns related to engineering diversity. One of the first studies we conducted of the campaign #ILookLikeanEngineer highlighted the diverse nature of participation in the campaign in terms of not just individuals but also organizations, events, and activities. We found that offline events aligned with the campaign provided momentum, particularly through media coverage. We also found that large organizations such as Microsoft, Tesla, and GE used the campaign to highlight their activities. Individual stories, especially those shared by popular personalities, were shared widely. A deeper analysis uncovered that the campaign reflected the complicated relationship that users have with their engineering identity. We found that, consistent with an intersectionality perspective, participants opted to express the multiplicity of their identity. In addition to being an engineer, they stressed personal aspects of their life, expressed their affiliations with institutions, and demonstrated solidarity with other causes. We also found that, although hashtag activism campaigns can become abusive, only a small proportion of messages attracted negative attention.
What implications for engineering education can we draw from this work? I think it cautions us to be ever cognizant of the lack of representation within engineering and alerts us that these issues are not just in the classroom but probably even more potent in the workforce. It also tells us that we have a voice and can contribute to change—and that we need to prepare our students to be forces for change over the course their careers. Finally, it questions what it means to be an engineer and how much is at stake when we emphasize an engineering identity above all. We need to question what this approach conveys to those who want to be engineers and whether it hinders, rather than encourages, participation.
Aditya Johri is an associate professor in the Department of Information Sciences and Technology at George Mason University.