Live podcasting with participation function – but unfortunately not for everyone
No time right now?
Clubhouse has now really picked up speed in Germany. However, the audio chat app is not included. But that’s not what the founders want either, says a startup and diversity expert.
The local radio is giving away invites, on Ebay the invitations are traded for 15 euros each. We’re talking about Clubhouse, the new, exclusive audio chat app from Silicon Valley. Anyone inside can discuss all sorts of topics in rooms with greats from business, tech, the music and startup scene and now also politics. A podcasting app with the possibility of participation, so to speak. But is that really cool? Julia Kuemper deals with startups, diversity and equal opportunities. She says no.
US Twitter has been tweeting about invite links, exclusivity and personal experiences with the app for about nine months. In Germany, Clubhouse has only really picked up speed in the past two weeks. The catch: the live audio format suggests closeness to otherwise inaccessible people, the app offers new networking opportunities and, because it is so new, makes it comparatively easy to position yourself as an expert on a particular topic. Due to the still existing perceived exclusivity, the feeling of being part of an in-crowd arises.
Contents
Not accessible to everyone
On the other hand, this also means one thing above all: not accessible to everyone. And this is not only due to the artificial shortage caused by the invite structure or the fact that Clubhouse has so far only been available for iOS. Unlike podcasting, Clubhouse only works live. Anyone who wants to take part in a discourse must then be able to find the time to listen and have a say. “This is the time especially for people who have no children, do no other care work or people who can use the platform during working hours,” says Kuemper. A standing can also be achieved on other platforms if you do not constantly show presence. Once canceled, tweets and Facebook postings also spread without their author being constantly online.
Deaf and hearing impaired people cannot use Clubhouse at all. Those who cannot speak can listen, but not actively participate. There is no way to record conversations, for example to make them accessible to these people via transcription software. Even introverted people who don’t like speaking in front of an audience are somehow out.
Accessibility – or barrier freedom – is no longer a niche topic. UX designers and front-end developers are well aware of this, seo experts have the topic on the slip and there are courses that deal with it from different perspectives. Information offers from authorities and other public bodies must be available in Germany minimum requirements specified by law suffice.
Get to the unicorn as quickly as possible
In short: that the platform has these difficulties can hardly be because these aspects were overlooked. “Clubhouse is inaccessible by design for certain groups, and probably with full intent.” Special solutions are often not taken into account in favor of faster scaling, according to the expert.
The founders behind Clubhouse, Paul Davidson and Rohan Seth, are both well-known tech giants from Silicon Valley. The common narrative of the techie underdogs who set up a project together cannot be used at this point. Both have a lot of experience with social media platforms and should be aware of the problems mentioned. Behind Clubhouse is not the story of the idealistic founding collective that wants to change existing conditions with its innovative product. On the contrary. “Right from the start, Clubhouse was mainly geared towards becoming a unicorn as quickly as possible,” says Kuemper.
“The costs should be kept as low as possible”
Shortly after it was founded, Clubhouse received funding of twelve million dollars from the well-known investment firm Andreessen Horowitz, according to Forbes. A short time later, the startup was valued at just under $ 100 million. According to the Crunchbase database, the platform has so far only operated with one to ten employees – how up-to-date these numbers are, however, is unclear. According to Kuemper, this fits perfectly into the picture: “The costs should be kept as low as possible, with the highest possible return on investment.” Functioning mechanisms such as an artificial shortage of participation and the triggering of a hype fueled by this exclusivity and Fomo should ensure that the app grows as quickly as possible.
The discourse about clubhouse takes place on clubhouse
“So-called soft or blended values ​​unfortunately fall behind with such an alignment,” says the expert. In the end, this is a shame not only for those who cannot participate, but for society as a whole. The diversity expert finds it particularly absurd that the clubhouse discourse takes place in large parts on the clubhouse itself – i.e. within the comparatively exclusive circle of people who have previously had access to it. She was annoyed that some panellists actually expressed the view that Clubhouse was “public space”. So far she has perceived the app as a space that excludes entire groups of people by design and business model and gives others – those who are already loud, visible and audible – another platform.
Still in beta
Basically, it remains to be seen what will become of the clubhouse. At the moment the app is still in the beta phase (version 0.1.24). It remains to be seen whether opening it up to a wider public will result in the Clubhouse losing its appeal. Whether the prominent regulars will flee if the exclusivity continues to decline. With the one that started in December Creator’s Program Clubhouse wants to offer so-called power users incentives to plan for the long term with the platform. If you believe your own Twitter US bubble, the hype in other parts of the world has already flattened noticeably.
The question is also whether we will lose interest in hanging out with strangers on an audio app if we leave the house without hesitation and without a mask and can meet any number of people in person on a daily basis. It is conceivable that existing problems, not only in terms of accessibility, but also in terms of data protection or content moderation, will be resolved over time – possibly at the price that the user experience will then feel less unique. In addition, alternatives are already in the works. Twitter is currently testing an audio chat feature: Spaces.
