So it seems that some company, BBH Labs, set up a program in Austin, TX during the annual South by Southwest (SXSW) music/film/whatever conference whereby homeless people were given a device that made them into mobile WiFi hotspots. BBH Labs paid each homeless participant $20 up front and then at least $50 per day to walk around SXSW with a t-shirt proclaiming “I am a 4g Hotspot.” Passersby then could make a donation in order to gain access to that hotspot, and the homeless people kept all the money that was given to them by patrons.
Somehow, there seems to be some controversy about this.
[
](http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SXSW_HOMELESS_HOTSPOTS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-03-13-21-41-05)
Honestly, I don’t get the outrage. These folks were provided with equipment that gave them an opportunity to make some money, as well as being paid what seems to be minimum wage by BBH Labs to begin with. They then went out and were able to provide a service to people in exchange for cash. It seems to me that the better they were able to engage people and sell their service, the more money they each likely made.
At least one of the homeless participants spoke positively about the experience:
[
As a one-day snapshot, I think it’s sort of similar to the StreetWise program, at least as far as it looks to those partaking in/donating to the service. While it’s obviously not a long-term model, it’s something productive for the day, provides more income than the people would likely make from panhandling, and keeps those who might panhandle from doing just that during the festival. It’s a win-win to me.
Dehumanizing? Seriously, what are those guys going to be doing otherwise? Uh - panhandling outside the venue, perhaps? What’s more dehumanizing than panhandling?
I had heard it was $50 minimum for six hours work. So about $8.33 an hour or more if people “tip” you.
That seems fair enough. I mean, it’s normal low-end wages type money but it seems suitable. Is it any worse than the guy standing on the street corner with the “Mattress Center Going Out Of Business Sale!” sign or the poor sap dancing around on the sidewalk outside some tax preparer’s office wearing a Statue of Liberty costume?
Yea, I don’t really get it either. At first I thought the shirts somehow refered to the people wearing them as homeless, which I guess I could see would be kind of mean, but it doesn’t look like that’s the case. So I don’t really get the outrage. I’m kind of suspicious that the Washington Post op-ed writer just didn’t have anything else to write about and needed to meet a deadline.
Here’s the OP-ed You will be stupider for having read it. Apparently all homeless people need to be artists, and shouldn’t make money in other, less creative jobs. Also support the troops, for some reason?
(Doesn’t Austin have a free citywide wi-fi network though? )
OK, so BBH Labs wanted to use the event to have some advertising and, rather than put up huge billboards or paint ads on buses or hire students from local universities, they hired people who were worse off than your average college student.
The Op-Ed’s writer should see a proctologist about that cranial problem.
I imagine the city network isn’t 4g, Simplicio. We just had a huge mobile technology fair in Barcelona and Telefónica upgraded the areas close to the fairgrounds to 4g, but WiFi spots provided by City Hall didn’t get upgraded automatically; the 4g service was available to those willing to pay its tariffs.
I’ve been homeless before, probably will be again (and very soon at that.) I would have loved an opportunity like this back then. I don’t see it as exploitative at all. For that matter I’d jump at the chance to do this now.
Maybe it’s because it takes advantage of a homeless person’s homelessness? By being in the program, they are essentially paid for being on the streets. So the incentive to get off the street is removed. If I can make minimum wage (or more) just for sitting out on a street intersection, then I don’t have the incentive to get off of the street intersection. It enables homelessness, rather than fixing it.
</Devil’s Advocate>
I thought the idea was cool too. It’s no different than giving homeless people newspapers to hand out (newspapers no one really wants to read). I know I’m always looking for a hot-spot. I didn’t read the article, but I’m curious. What is the reach on those devices? Do you have to actually be right next to the homeless person to use the hot-spot, or could you be in a building far away? I’d love if the homeless folks that hang out downtown were wired. I’d be able to waste more time playing on my Kindle during the day.
monstro, I think the signal is supposed to go not terribly far, but far enough that with a group of these “hotspot” workers, the network will at least cover much of the festival. (And that’s an extra-good idea as these big festivals can quickly tax cell and wireless resources in an area, so having a supplemental network is a must.)
The article I read said the hotspot was free, but the code was printed on the wearer’s T-shirt (and tipping is encouraged) so there’s some degree of interaction involved. I think that contrary to some naysayers, it’s actually rather humanizing to walk up to someone homeless and have to look at them and hang out for a short time (to get the code and input it) rather than avert your eyes or shove some money at them and get away without looking closely.
My local news radio station did a report on this yesterday before the plan was “put on hold”. They had sound bites from a number of homeless people expressing enthusiasm for the idea and saying it would bring in more money than they could get most other ways.
I certainly wouldn’t call it “dehumanizing”, especially compared to sitting by a subway station with an old styrofoam cup begging for change. That’s far more degrading.
Freeway underpasses will become the new Starbucks!
I picture driving to work and seeing a bunch of hipsters sitting on the concrete incline with their laptops open and a homeless guy in a HOTSPOT t-shirt sleeping on a ledge nearby.
Basically, they were what should be considered a good thing. Basically giving an easy, low-level job to needy people that otherwise would have gone to teenage volunteers or whoever.
But somehow it ended up conjuring images of rounding up homeless people, strapping some sort of WIFI antenna to heir head like some sort of unholy half man / half insect cyborg and having them shuffle around aimlessly with a “will provide WIFI for food” sign.
At $50 for six hours, they are earning more per hour than many of the employees at my company. I don’t get why giving them a temporary job at a decent wage is somehow dehumanizing.
I think the negative “dehumanizing” impression comes from a perceived contrast between the homeless have-nots acting as human machinery, and the “I want my MTV”, or in this case, “I want my free 3G”, haves acting entitled
That’s not really my opinion, but I can see how others imagine the distinction.