If Corporations Are People, Can Homeless People Be Hotspots?

If corporations are people, does that mean that homeless people can be hotspots? BHH thinks they can. I beg to differ.

A marketing agency, BBH, hired homeless people to walk around carrying mobile Wi-Fi devices at a technology conference, promoting what it hoped would be an appealing idea: homeless hot spots. Calling it a "charitable experiment," BBH argues that it is simply trying to develop a new digital age alternative to "street newspapers."

So what's the problem? Homeless people and technology are not incompatible. In fact, homeless people often rely on email at public libraries as a way of connecting to vital resources such as jobs and services.

Street newspapers serve an important purpose too. They are a source of revenue for the homeless vendors who sell them, and a source of information about homelessness, serving an educational purpose. They provide a measure of dignity to both the vendor and the buyer.

In contrast, using homeless people as mobile hotspots emphasizes the dehumanizing effects of homelessness itself. The reality is that homeless people are already treated as "part of the landscape" or, worse, as detritus to be swept away. As documented in numerous studies, people living on the street are routinely subjected to laws and police actions meant to remove them from public sight.

The hotspot "experiment" makes this type of dehumanization acceptable. It says: "Hey, homeless people are out there anyway; why not turn them into a marketing opportunity for our cool new product?" A product that sends no message other than enhancing the convenience of the user -- and the profits of the company.

In that sense, it's the perfect metaphor for our nation's upside-down priorities: corporations are people, while homeless persons are vehicles for corporate use.

But BBH isn't really the problem. The problem is that we've allowed the homelessness crisis to persist for so long that it now seems normal to have people living in the street, in parks, or in doorways. It's become acceptable. And until we make ending homelessness -- ensuring the basic human rights and dignity of all people -- a true national priority, that's not going to change.

The BBHs of the world will continue to distract us with their disturbing "experiments."

 

Follow Maria Foscarinis on Twitter: www.twitter.com/NLCHPhomeless

Comments

[lnstrlindy]

12:45 PM on 03/15/2012

Perhaps you would have felt differently if you would have actually seen and talked to the individuals recruited to do this. The following was written by a volunteer at Mobile Loaves and Fishes, and it echoes my personal experience crossing this gentleman's path at the convention center when he was doing his work with joy. He was part of the community and not at all detritus. "The thing is, homeless people don’t actually want to be alienated by their homelessness. The derision, pity, or fear they see in the eyes of passersby is as harmful to them as any drug or alcohol. They want to be part of a community, the same way every other human on earth does. At SxSWi, I witnessed the same homeless dude who may have had to sleep in a shelter that night working smack dab in the middle of the biggest geek conference in America, swimming in a sea of humanity, interacting with people, earning money, and feeling like he was a part."
http://mlf.org/2012/03/15/on-the-humanity-of-homeless-hotspots/

[Dewts]

12:03 AM on 03/15/2012

i have no idea what is "dehumanizing" about the human hotspots at sxsw. in fact i have no idea how this is in any way negative to anything at all.

[norby413]

04:36 PM on 03/14/2012

"Ending Homelessness" is a fantasy. There will always be those that prefer the streets. You can reduce it by jobs and housing for the ones that don't, but eliminating it will never happen.

[cyang]

01:52 AM on 03/15/2012

Do you really think that people "prefer the streets" over living in a place with a roof over their heads, adequate food, clothing and a place to call their own?

[tesuji68]

11:44 AM on 03/15/2012

yes.

[tesuji68]

11:45 AM on 03/15/2012

I have dealt with enough homeless people that I can say for certain that yes, a significant number of them prefer to live on the streets.

[DrMMcLaughlin]

01:54 PM on 03/14/2012

I've been conducting research among chronically homeless people for most of the past year under the bridges, along the railroad beds and in the alleys and streets of a New York State community and I do not believe that any of my contacts would feel "dehumanized" by doing this kind of work.

What I have found is that most chronically homeless individuals have multiple and significant disabling conditions. This kind of work offers an independent work schedule and would very likely pay more than collecting discarded bottles and cans.

It also offers an opportunity to interact in a positive manner with the general public, which many of my contacts would welcome enthusiastically.

In the rehabilitation field, "normalization" is a priority concept. IMO, being isolated from the mainstream and feeling ostracized due to the highly stigmatized condition of homelessness are far more dehumanizing than providing a useful service and doing productive work for pay.

People interested in such work - whether homeless or not - could advertise that they provide "Mobile Hotspot" services; they would not have to use the term "Homeless Hotspot."

I encourage attorneys to focus intensely on any possible conflicts between agencies accepting federal HUD funds and any possible violations of federal laws like the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Americans with Disabilities Amendments Act. A very significant route to the resolution of homelessness issues may lie within our court system.