We offer every customer the same price. It doesn’t matter where you live
April 21, 2016 7:31 PM Subscribe
Amazon Doesn’t Consider the Race of Its Customers. Should It? - Bloomberg This is a logical approach from a cost and efficiency perspective: Give areas with the most existing paying members priority access to a new product. Yet in cities where most of those paying members are concentrated in predominantly white parts of town, a solely data-driven calculation that looks at numbers instead of people can reinforce long-entrenched inequality in access to retail services. For people who live in black neighborhoods not served by Amazon, the fact that it’s not deliberate doesn’t make much practical difference.
Love these visualizations.
posted by oceanjesse at 7:37 PM on April 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by oceanjesse at 7:37 PM on April 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
I've spent a lot of time in New York, DC, San Francisco and Oakland.
One of the things that is striking to me (and this is my own anecdata) is that the unserved areas are areas that people I know tend to think of as Black*. The data doesn't line up with that impression as well as I expected. Perhaps affluent Black people are less visible to me than I thought? Or perhaps the neighborhoods that continue to have that reputation as Black are also more economically disadvantaged by phenomena just like this. Probably both and more.
Other similar negative effects are also evident in these areas. That doesn't make it right, but it may mean that it is worthwhile to look for places to fight underlying causes for greater impact.
*I think this is the currently preferred term for African Americans because it is more inclusive, but please correct me if I'm wrong.
posted by poe at 8:00 PM on April 21, 2016
One of the things that is striking to me (and this is my own anecdata) is that the unserved areas are areas that people I know tend to think of as Black*. The data doesn't line up with that impression as well as I expected. Perhaps affluent Black people are less visible to me than I thought? Or perhaps the neighborhoods that continue to have that reputation as Black are also more economically disadvantaged by phenomena just like this. Probably both and more.
Other similar negative effects are also evident in these areas. That doesn't make it right, but it may mean that it is worthwhile to look for places to fight underlying causes for greater impact.
*I think this is the currently preferred term for African Americans because it is more inclusive, but please correct me if I'm wrong.
posted by poe at 8:00 PM on April 21, 2016
Their last figure shows 8 cities where white residents get more same day service, and 6 cities where black residents get more same day service than whites. And 18 cities where same day is available in all areas. Sounds like the story is a bit overblown.
posted by shala at 8:02 PM on April 21, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by shala at 8:02 PM on April 21, 2016 [2 favorites]
I grew up in a middle class majority minority neighborhood in Chicago. My neighbors were cops, teachers, firefighters, city workers. You can't get a cab to go there. Public transit was shittier than on the north side. The grocery store was in the White neighborhood. And, unsurprisingly, they're not covered by Amazon.
It really is about race - not just class.
posted by dinty_moore at 8:06 PM on April 21, 2016 [10 favorites]
It really is about race - not just class.
posted by dinty_moore at 8:06 PM on April 21, 2016 [10 favorites]
4 of the 6 cities where more black residents get service than whites are cities where nearly every area is covered, and the percentages of the white and black populations covered by same-day service are both above 90% (95% in three of those cities, if I read the chart right). Meanwhile, the cities where white residents get more service often see huge margins. Nearly the entire white population of Atlanta gets same-day service, while less than half of the black population gets the same. Boston's gap is actually pretty small compared to many of the other cities, and yet its 20% gap is larger than the gap in any of the cities where the black population gets better service.
posted by chrominance at 8:09 PM on April 21, 2016 [5 favorites]
posted by chrominance at 8:09 PM on April 21, 2016 [5 favorites]
This seems like a good illustration of the way entrenched inequalities are further entrenched by these kind of feedback loops. Of course Amazon doesn't have an explicit policy of racial exclusion, but they're way too smart to not know that this is a natural consequence of their algorithm. There's a reason tech-bro apologetics always revolve around the inevitability of algorithms.
It's almost beside the point though. What could Amazon realistically do to change it (if they are, indeed, simply abiding by the numbers)? The reason people in underserved areas want Amazon Prime in the first place is that they can't get affordable goods close to home. Amazon has a part to play in that, but the problem is much older and much bigger than just Amazon.
Thinking of my own situation, though. I have mail-ordered items from a store that I could walk to in about 15 minutes. Probably, a lot of affluent (I'm not but I live in a very affluent neighbourhood) users of services like Prime are just lazy. Others are clearly not and do not have easy access to things they need. I wonder how that breaks down geographically.
posted by klanawa at 8:32 PM on April 21, 2016 [12 favorites]
It's almost beside the point though. What could Amazon realistically do to change it (if they are, indeed, simply abiding by the numbers)? The reason people in underserved areas want Amazon Prime in the first place is that they can't get affordable goods close to home. Amazon has a part to play in that, but the problem is much older and much bigger than just Amazon.
Thinking of my own situation, though. I have mail-ordered items from a store that I could walk to in about 15 minutes. Probably, a lot of affluent (I'm not but I live in a very affluent neighbourhood) users of services like Prime are just lazy. Others are clearly not and do not have easy access to things they need. I wonder how that breaks down geographically.
posted by klanawa at 8:32 PM on April 21, 2016 [12 favorites]
I think the article took the right tone: it's not a huge problem, but it is worth paying attention to. It's not entirely on Amazon - it sounds like they contract out to local carriers who might have a prejudice against these neighborhoods - but on the other hand, Amazon has a lot of leverage over those local carriers, and they could probably force the issue if they wanted to. If nothing else it shows the ongoing, cascading effects of housing discrimination.
This really jumped out at me tho: "The largely black and Hispanic borough of the Bronx, is excluded from the service. ... Berman says the Bronx is difficult to reach because the warehouses that serve the area are in New Jersey."
I don't know if this holds water. It's a hassle to get into the city, but that's only because you have to cross the river, and there's tolls and bottlenecks. Once you're in, there's a highway going right uptown. It doesn't make a difference whether you're going to Brooklyn or the Bronx.
"An April study of families with teenagers by investment bank Piper Jaffray estimates 70 percent of such U.S. households with incomes of $112,000 per year or more now have a Prime membership"
That's way more than I would have thought, honestly.
posted by Rainbo Vagrant at 8:37 PM on April 21, 2016 [3 favorites]
This really jumped out at me tho: "The largely black and Hispanic borough of the Bronx, is excluded from the service. ... Berman says the Bronx is difficult to reach because the warehouses that serve the area are in New Jersey."
I don't know if this holds water. It's a hassle to get into the city, but that's only because you have to cross the river, and there's tolls and bottlenecks. Once you're in, there's a highway going right uptown. It doesn't make a difference whether you're going to Brooklyn or the Bronx.
"An April study of families with teenagers by investment bank Piper Jaffray estimates 70 percent of such U.S. households with incomes of $112,000 per year or more now have a Prime membership"
That's way more than I would have thought, honestly.
posted by Rainbo Vagrant at 8:37 PM on April 21, 2016 [3 favorites]
What could Amazon realistically do to change it?
Extend service to uncovered areas in major metros?
posted by mwhybark at 8:49 PM on April 21, 2016 [13 favorites]
Extend service to uncovered areas in major metros?
posted by mwhybark at 8:49 PM on April 21, 2016 [13 favorites]
I have mail-ordered items from a store that I could walk to in about 15 minutes. Probably, a lot of affluent (I'm not but I live in a very affluent neighbourhood) users of services like Prime are just lazy. Others are clearly not and do not have easy access to things they need. I wonder how that breaks down geographically.
Im guilty of this too, but usually because it's actually cheaper to order 2 packs of dog chews for 15.99 than buy one pack of the same thing for 9.99 at Pet Smart. Or because the grocery store stopped stocking the 16oz bags of macadamia nuts because I was the only one buying them 1 bag a month at a time. Amazon's policy of not really caring if they turn a profit or not has messed up individual pricing considerations when their entire global distribution chain is willing to run an errand for you that you could do yourself in 20 mins, for less money (well, once you're a Prime subscriber).
I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt for now as well, because this article is limited to same-day delivery, which is clearly still undergoing testing. It's not yet clear that same day delivery is even possible long term without something insane like a fleet of drones. Prime is generally 2 day service, and there's only limited items that are available same day even within the service areas. It's not like they won't deliver to Anacostia at all. They'll even sell you a Prime membership, you just can't get the newest service (yet?).
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:49 PM on April 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
Im guilty of this too, but usually because it's actually cheaper to order 2 packs of dog chews for 15.99 than buy one pack of the same thing for 9.99 at Pet Smart. Or because the grocery store stopped stocking the 16oz bags of macadamia nuts because I was the only one buying them 1 bag a month at a time. Amazon's policy of not really caring if they turn a profit or not has messed up individual pricing considerations when their entire global distribution chain is willing to run an errand for you that you could do yourself in 20 mins, for less money (well, once you're a Prime subscriber).
I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt for now as well, because this article is limited to same-day delivery, which is clearly still undergoing testing. It's not yet clear that same day delivery is even possible long term without something insane like a fleet of drones. Prime is generally 2 day service, and there's only limited items that are available same day even within the service areas. It's not like they won't deliver to Anacostia at all. They'll even sell you a Prime membership, you just can't get the newest service (yet?).
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:49 PM on April 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
Extend service to uncovered areas in major metros?
Well yes, obviously. I'm assuming that Amazon is being honest and that their margins are actually small enough that this strategy is necessary. To me, personally, the best thing Amazon could do is implode.
posted by klanawa at 8:55 PM on April 21, 2016 [3 favorites]
Well yes, obviously. I'm assuming that Amazon is being honest and that their margins are actually small enough that this strategy is necessary. To me, personally, the best thing Amazon could do is implode.
posted by klanawa at 8:55 PM on April 21, 2016 [3 favorites]
It'd be nice to see a larger version of the Bay Area map instead of the map that include the central valley area at a smaller scale. As best as I can tell, it looks like the coverage gap in Oakland is everything east of a scraggly north-south line drawn between the Coliseum and Redwood Heights, while the cities immediately southeast (San Leandro, San Lorenzo, Castro Valley) have coverage.
posted by clorox at 8:57 PM on April 21, 2016
posted by clorox at 8:57 PM on April 21, 2016
That's way more than I would have thought, honestly.
I finally caved in and got Prime about a year ago. Turns out I really like it. You get all kinds of stuff, including Amazon's streaming service which is Netflix-lite. My conscience occasionally gives a twinge when I order small items next day free shipping but then I bribe it with candy and it quiets down.
posted by Justinian at 9:07 PM on April 21, 2016 [4 favorites]
I finally caved in and got Prime about a year ago. Turns out I really like it. You get all kinds of stuff, including Amazon's streaming service which is Netflix-lite. My conscience occasionally gives a twinge when I order small items next day free shipping but then I bribe it with candy and it quiets down.
posted by Justinian at 9:07 PM on April 21, 2016 [4 favorites]
it sounds like they contract out to local carriers who might have a prejudice against these neighborhoods
No, it sounds like they have to make a pretty major investment in a small area in able to manage to get same day service even remotely work well, and that requires a density of deliveries that they just can't get. It's not like amazon refuses to ship to those neighborhoods, or even refuses to do prime. It means 1-2 day delivery not same day. (1-2 day delivery means that more orders can get put in one truck, and also means that the warehouse that serves the truck can be further away, since picking can happen on off hours and a truck can be full at the start of the day.)
posted by aspo at 9:09 PM on April 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
No, it sounds like they have to make a pretty major investment in a small area in able to manage to get same day service even remotely work well, and that requires a density of deliveries that they just can't get. It's not like amazon refuses to ship to those neighborhoods, or even refuses to do prime. It means 1-2 day delivery not same day. (1-2 day delivery means that more orders can get put in one truck, and also means that the warehouse that serves the truck can be further away, since picking can happen on off hours and a truck can be full at the start of the day.)
posted by aspo at 9:09 PM on April 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
It's not just Amazon: The Dorchester Reporter, which covers Dorchester and Mattapan, two Boston neighborhoods with large minority populations, found: On-demand delivery apps slow to serve Dot, Mattapan.
posted by adamg at 9:19 PM on April 21, 2016 [5 favorites]
posted by adamg at 9:19 PM on April 21, 2016 [5 favorites]
Related from last year: Equations can't be racist
posted by Peccable at 9:41 PM on April 21, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by Peccable at 9:41 PM on April 21, 2016 [3 favorites]
The divide in DC is particularly stark, and along extremely racial lines.
Geographically, there's no reason for it. Washington, DC is smaller than a 10x10 mile square. Most of Amazon's same-day deliveries to the DC area come from Southeastern Virginia. It wouldn't exactly be difficult for their drivers to cross North Capitol Street or cross the Anacostia River to serve their customers who live there.
The nature of this exclusion is particularly painful because of how arbitrary and pointless it seems.
I'm not black, but most of my neighbors are. I can't help but feel that Amazon's service map must feel like another slap across the brow to them.
posted by schmod at 10:13 PM on April 21, 2016 [8 favorites]
Geographically, there's no reason for it. Washington, DC is smaller than a 10x10 mile square. Most of Amazon's same-day deliveries to the DC area come from Southeastern Virginia. It wouldn't exactly be difficult for their drivers to cross North Capitol Street or cross the Anacostia River to serve their customers who live there.
The nature of this exclusion is particularly painful because of how arbitrary and pointless it seems.
I'm not black, but most of my neighbors are. I can't help but feel that Amazon's service map must feel like another slap across the brow to them.
posted by schmod at 10:13 PM on April 21, 2016 [8 favorites]
What could Amazon realistically do to change it?
Amazon management is not subservient to its company's algorithms. The same way that Google manually adjusts its search results to rank things artificially higher or lower, the human beings running Amazon are always able to manually adjust the company's delivery system to account for poorly-decided edge cases.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 11:40 PM on April 21, 2016 [2 favorites]
Amazon management is not subservient to its company's algorithms. The same way that Google manually adjusts its search results to rank things artificially higher or lower, the human beings running Amazon are always able to manually adjust the company's delivery system to account for poorly-decided edge cases.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 11:40 PM on April 21, 2016 [2 favorites]
San Jose's black population is 3.5% of the total population of the city. There are zero zip codes in SJ where black people outnumber whites. Or outnumber Hispanics. I only know this because I actually live here, so I'm puzzled by how the article drew their conclusion regarding San Jose and wonder about the accuracy in reporting of the other cities mentioned above.
There's a whole section at the bottom of the article that outlines their methodology.
I'm not sure what you objection is, is it the somewhat ambiguous phrasing of the quote you posted? I think they're trying to say that a black person in those cities is more likely to live in a ZIP code that has service than a white person in those cities, not that the served ZIP codes have more black people than white people.
Also, I just noticed that in Tucson both black people and white people are less likely than the average Tusconan to live in a ZIP code with same-day service.
posted by clorox at 11:50 PM on April 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
There's a whole section at the bottom of the article that outlines their methodology.
I'm not sure what you objection is, is it the somewhat ambiguous phrasing of the quote you posted? I think they're trying to say that a black person in those cities is more likely to live in a ZIP code that has service than a white person in those cities, not that the served ZIP codes have more black people than white people.
Also, I just noticed that in Tucson both black people and white people are less likely than the average Tusconan to live in a ZIP code with same-day service.
posted by clorox at 11:50 PM on April 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
All I know is here in the Bay Area my girlfriend, who lives with me, regularly gets free same day delivery while I don't...
posted by inparticularity at 12:25 AM on April 22, 2016
posted by inparticularity at 12:25 AM on April 22, 2016
Related from last year: Equations can't be racist
Also The precogs were right -- St. Louis turns to predictive policing software.
It occurs to me, if you look at the map of Boston and think, you know, they really ought to deliver to Roxbury because it doesn't make sense not to, and it sure looks hella racist if they don't. Even if it's unintentional, it's unfair to have this accidental segregation.
If you think that, well it occurs to me that you just understood affirmative action.
posted by cotterpin at 1:03 AM on April 22, 2016
Also The precogs were right -- St. Louis turns to predictive policing software.
It occurs to me, if you look at the map of Boston and think, you know, they really ought to deliver to Roxbury because it doesn't make sense not to, and it sure looks hella racist if they don't. Even if it's unintentional, it's unfair to have this accidental segregation.
If you think that, well it occurs to me that you just understood affirmative action.
posted by cotterpin at 1:03 AM on April 22, 2016
"Amazon trucks"
I think a lot of these deliveries are actually being made by independent contractors with their own transportation.
Last time I was in Seattle I ordered tampons and Guinness and they were delivered to my hotel 20 minutes later by a young woman with purple hair and a nose ring. I felt like I was living in a Neil Stephenson novel.
Anyhow, I asked her about delivering for Amazon and she said she'd just gotten out of the Navy and was picking up Amazon delivery gigs to make extra money while she figured out what she wanted to do next.
posted by Jacqueline at 4:38 AM on April 22, 2016 [12 favorites]
I think a lot of these deliveries are actually being made by independent contractors with their own transportation.
Last time I was in Seattle I ordered tampons and Guinness and they were delivered to my hotel 20 minutes later by a young woman with purple hair and a nose ring. I felt like I was living in a Neil Stephenson novel.
Anyhow, I asked her about delivering for Amazon and she said she'd just gotten out of the Navy and was picking up Amazon delivery gigs to make extra money while she figured out what she wanted to do next.
posted by Jacqueline at 4:38 AM on April 22, 2016 [12 favorites]
I don't know if this holds water. It's a hassle to get into the city, but that's only because you have to cross the river, and there's tolls and bottlenecks. Once you're in, there's a highway going right uptown.
On which commercial vehicles are prohibited. Your options consist basically of the Cross-Bronx and the Major Deegan, both of which are better for driving through those areas rather than to or from them. In case you needed another reason to hate Robert Moses.
posted by the road and the damned at 4:56 AM on April 22, 2016 [5 favorites]
On which commercial vehicles are prohibited. Your options consist basically of the Cross-Bronx and the Major Deegan, both of which are better for driving through those areas rather than to or from them. In case you needed another reason to hate Robert Moses.
posted by the road and the damned at 4:56 AM on April 22, 2016 [5 favorites]
To me, personally, the best thing Amazon could do is implode.
Then nobody is getting same-day delivery (or two-day free Prime delivery for that matter). I would hate to see the logistics revolutions that Amazon has driven in the industry fade away, or be captured by an entity like Wal-Mart.
posted by theorique at 5:24 AM on April 22, 2016 [1 favorite]
Then nobody is getting same-day delivery (or two-day free Prime delivery for that matter). I would hate to see the logistics revolutions that Amazon has driven in the industry fade away, or be captured by an entity like Wal-Mart.
posted by theorique at 5:24 AM on April 22, 2016 [1 favorite]
If this were a bank and they rolled out some new credit/loan product like this, they'd get fined for red lining or some other similar violation of fair lending regulations citing the disparate impact. It doesn't matter what the intent is, if the effect is racist then the practice is racist, full-stop.
If someone suggested that we do this at the bank where I work, they'd get shot down so fast they wouldn't even have finish their first sentence.
posted by VTX at 5:28 AM on April 22, 2016 [4 favorites]
If someone suggested that we do this at the bank where I work, they'd get shot down so fast they wouldn't even have finish their first sentence.
posted by VTX at 5:28 AM on April 22, 2016 [4 favorites]
If this were a bank and they rolled out some new credit/loan product like this, they'd get fined for red lining
I bet there is some measure for approved loans/ ratio of approved loans that would show the exact same trend across all of the banks in a region. (Except I bet that Baltimore comes off worse than in this instance as it is completely covered for some reason.) Does that mean the government should come in and force the bank to make financially risky loans to help combat racism? Why can't amazon offer same day service to Vermont at all? It certainly isn't racism. Maybe these graphs are point out a symptom of an underlying problem and not the root cause of the problem itself.
posted by koolkat at 5:43 AM on April 22, 2016 [1 favorite]
I bet there is some measure for approved loans/ ratio of approved loans that would show the exact same trend across all of the banks in a region. (Except I bet that Baltimore comes off worse than in this instance as it is completely covered for some reason.) Does that mean the government should come in and force the bank to make financially risky loans to help combat racism? Why can't amazon offer same day service to Vermont at all? It certainly isn't racism. Maybe these graphs are point out a symptom of an underlying problem and not the root cause of the problem itself.
posted by koolkat at 5:43 AM on April 22, 2016 [1 favorite]
It depends on the bank. If you pick a bank in the region you're interested in, you should be able to look at their CRA (community reinvestment act) file and see some of that information.
Are they forced to make risky loans? No, not really. But they ARE required to offer products that meets the needs of all the communities in which they do business, including low-income areas. If there are credit needs then they do have to figure out ways of offering them.
They don't have approve every loan but they DO need to prove that they're ONLY making credit decisions based on credit worthiness and that cannot, by law, include anything having to do with protected classes. The controls and processes in place to ensure that we're doing that and to prove and document that we know we're doing that are...extensive.
So a bank might not be approving as many loans in a low-income area, but they do need to make sure that they don't discourage anyone from applying for them. In my world, applying for a loan is the equivalent act to making a purchase from Amazon.com rather than the approval.
I'd also venture a guess that you'd see a shift in denial reasons to DTI (debt to income ratio) from credit or collateral reasons (previous charge-offs, low credit score, loan-to-value ratio, etc.) in the lower income areas. I don't have any numbers to put to it but my impression (from reviewing thousands of loans) is that there is surprisingly little correlation to income and credit score. I've seen plenty of low-income applicant's with 800+ credit scores and I've seen people with $20,000/MONTH incomes trying to find the bottom of the scale (350 for those playing at home).
posted by VTX at 6:10 AM on April 22, 2016 [3 favorites]
Are they forced to make risky loans? No, not really. But they ARE required to offer products that meets the needs of all the communities in which they do business, including low-income areas. If there are credit needs then they do have to figure out ways of offering them.
They don't have approve every loan but they DO need to prove that they're ONLY making credit decisions based on credit worthiness and that cannot, by law, include anything having to do with protected classes. The controls and processes in place to ensure that we're doing that and to prove and document that we know we're doing that are...extensive.
So a bank might not be approving as many loans in a low-income area, but they do need to make sure that they don't discourage anyone from applying for them. In my world, applying for a loan is the equivalent act to making a purchase from Amazon.com rather than the approval.
I'd also venture a guess that you'd see a shift in denial reasons to DTI (debt to income ratio) from credit or collateral reasons (previous charge-offs, low credit score, loan-to-value ratio, etc.) in the lower income areas. I don't have any numbers to put to it but my impression (from reviewing thousands of loans) is that there is surprisingly little correlation to income and credit score. I've seen plenty of low-income applicant's with 800+ credit scores and I've seen people with $20,000/MONTH incomes trying to find the bottom of the scale (350 for those playing at home).
posted by VTX at 6:10 AM on April 22, 2016 [3 favorites]
Maybe these graphs are point out a symptom of an underlying problem and not the root cause of the problem itself.
I don't think that anyone is claiming that Amazon is the root cause of the problem here, the question is, what's the best way to fix it.
When you're talking about banks, and home loans, you had a situation in which there was a history of racist decision making by those very same banks that caused major problems for people of colour to the point where the disparate impacts needed to be addressed by regulation. But, that was after decades of explicit, intentional, racism affecting the ability of people to own homes -- and while home ownership is not essential, *shelter* is essential and segregated ownership leads to segregation in rentals too.
Here, you could argue that Amazon is providing a non-essential service, and you'd be hard-pressed to prove that Amazon is making decisions based on race. But, you can also argue (as has been) that Amazon has created a service that can help to improve the situation of people who end of living in these areas for reasons related to the intentional racism of the banks and real estate market from years ago. And, because Amazon's decisions end up breaking down, in some areas, based on race lines, it's reasonable to posit that Amazon has a responsibility to at least consider the impact that these decisions are having on places like, for example Roxbury.
I honestly think that it's too early in the rollout of this service to necessarily be trying to force Amazon to change it's process (beyond, for example, articles like this that point out the problem -- I think Amazon would be stupid to not be tweaking things now to make next year's version of this map look better).
I'd also be curious to see how this breaks down for availability of Prime Now same day delivery vs. Prime same-day-delivery, which are different in that Prime Now has a smaller selection of goods, but is available in more areas. For example, Prime same-day is not available anywhere in MN, but Prime Now has pretty good coverage in the Twin Cities metro. My majority white, reasonably affluent zip code has it, but the majority minority, mostly poor zips seem to have it too (For the locals: I checked Near North and Camden). I notice though that the Roxbury zip codes in Boston don't get Prime Now, either.
And it seems obvious that Amazon is trying to figure out ways of rolling out this service more universally -- if the problem now is finding contractors to serve majority-minority areas, is that still going to be a problem for delivery drones, for example?
So I'm glad that someone is watching this, and a little disappointed that Amazon didn't think to watch it too (though, maybe they did and decided it wasn't a big deal, but then I think they would have found ways to make it not look *quite* so egregious in places like Boston and Chicago). It will be interesting to watch as this continues to grow, so I hope that Bloomberg, or someone else, does a follow up.
posted by sparklemotion at 8:19 AM on April 22, 2016 [2 favorites]
I don't think that anyone is claiming that Amazon is the root cause of the problem here, the question is, what's the best way to fix it.
When you're talking about banks, and home loans, you had a situation in which there was a history of racist decision making by those very same banks that caused major problems for people of colour to the point where the disparate impacts needed to be addressed by regulation. But, that was after decades of explicit, intentional, racism affecting the ability of people to own homes -- and while home ownership is not essential, *shelter* is essential and segregated ownership leads to segregation in rentals too.
Here, you could argue that Amazon is providing a non-essential service, and you'd be hard-pressed to prove that Amazon is making decisions based on race. But, you can also argue (as has been) that Amazon has created a service that can help to improve the situation of people who end of living in these areas for reasons related to the intentional racism of the banks and real estate market from years ago. And, because Amazon's decisions end up breaking down, in some areas, based on race lines, it's reasonable to posit that Amazon has a responsibility to at least consider the impact that these decisions are having on places like, for example Roxbury.
I honestly think that it's too early in the rollout of this service to necessarily be trying to force Amazon to change it's process (beyond, for example, articles like this that point out the problem -- I think Amazon would be stupid to not be tweaking things now to make next year's version of this map look better).
I'd also be curious to see how this breaks down for availability of Prime Now same day delivery vs. Prime same-day-delivery, which are different in that Prime Now has a smaller selection of goods, but is available in more areas. For example, Prime same-day is not available anywhere in MN, but Prime Now has pretty good coverage in the Twin Cities metro. My majority white, reasonably affluent zip code has it, but the majority minority, mostly poor zips seem to have it too (For the locals: I checked Near North and Camden). I notice though that the Roxbury zip codes in Boston don't get Prime Now, either.
And it seems obvious that Amazon is trying to figure out ways of rolling out this service more universally -- if the problem now is finding contractors to serve majority-minority areas, is that still going to be a problem for delivery drones, for example?
So I'm glad that someone is watching this, and a little disappointed that Amazon didn't think to watch it too (though, maybe they did and decided it wasn't a big deal, but then I think they would have found ways to make it not look *quite* so egregious in places like Boston and Chicago). It will be interesting to watch as this continues to grow, so I hope that Bloomberg, or someone else, does a follow up.
posted by sparklemotion at 8:19 AM on April 22, 2016 [2 favorites]
Income inequality may also play a part. Many excluded areas have average household incomes below the national average. And households with Prime memberships skew wealthier—not surprising given the $99 membership fee.
Well, yes. Why frame this particular issue directly as race? Like many aspects of capitalism, this Amazon service discriminates against the poor. The fact that being poor in America correlates highly to being black is a huge problem in itself. The suggestion given in the article headline seems a particularly dubious way to try and fix these two conflated issues.
posted by iotic at 9:11 AM on April 22, 2016
Well, yes. Why frame this particular issue directly as race? Like many aspects of capitalism, this Amazon service discriminates against the poor. The fact that being poor in America correlates highly to being black is a huge problem in itself. The suggestion given in the article headline seems a particularly dubious way to try and fix these two conflated issues.
posted by iotic at 9:11 AM on April 22, 2016
They are not conflated - as you point out, they are inextricably linked.
posted by Zalzidrax at 9:14 AM on April 22, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by Zalzidrax at 9:14 AM on April 22, 2016 [3 favorites]
Well, yes. Why frame this particular issue directly as race? Like many aspects of capitalism, this Amazon service discriminates against the poor. The fact that being poor in America correlates highly to being black is a huge problem in itself. The suggestion given in the article headline seems a particularly dubious way to try and fix these two conflated issues.
"It's not race it's class" is a common argument brought up anytime there is a discussion about things that primarily impact PoC. But, as you state, poverty and blackness are highly correlated in this country. So the question is, what's the point in even making the argument here?
Is there really going to be a fix for this issue that doesn't also help poor whites? Is Amazon going to start selectively targeting all of those neighborhoods that are predominately affluent Blacks and Hispanics (you know, if they existed, because guess where the affluent blacks and hispanics tend to live)?
In a country where so much economic inequality is based on race, it would seem irrational to avoid looking at economic issues through the lens of race.
posted by sparklemotion at 10:15 AM on April 22, 2016 [1 favorite]
"It's not race it's class" is a common argument brought up anytime there is a discussion about things that primarily impact PoC. But, as you state, poverty and blackness are highly correlated in this country. So the question is, what's the point in even making the argument here?
Is there really going to be a fix for this issue that doesn't also help poor whites? Is Amazon going to start selectively targeting all of those neighborhoods that are predominately affluent Blacks and Hispanics (you know, if they existed, because guess where the affluent blacks and hispanics tend to live)?
In a country where so much economic inequality is based on race, it would seem irrational to avoid looking at economic issues through the lens of race.
posted by sparklemotion at 10:15 AM on April 22, 2016 [1 favorite]
The difference b/t Baltimore and DC is puzzling. I'd have guessed less coverage of the former and more of the latter.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 10:48 AM on April 22, 2016
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 10:48 AM on April 22, 2016
I'm more often on the side of defending the need to talk about race, I think, but this article tries to make it pretty much the only issue (mentioning class/income only as possible additional factor). That seems really the wrong way round, here. For this particular question to be primarily a race issue, for starters there would have to be some way in which Amazon's service did indeed effectively discriminate based on race - via say the names or consumer choices of customers. While this is possible, I don't see any evidence presented here for that. And what would a race-oriented solution look like? Does anyone really think the suggestion hinted at in the headline, that Amazon start racially profiling it's customers, is a good idea?
posted by iotic at 11:11 AM on April 22, 2016
posted by iotic at 11:11 AM on April 22, 2016
If this were a bank and they rolled out some new credit/loan product like this, they'd get fined for red lining or some other similar violation of fair lending regulations citing the disparate impact.
Except, this is a completely different issue. Does your bank have as many branches in the poorer neighborhoods? (From my experience there's no question that richer neighborhoods have better banking options). It's an infrastructure cost no
This falls into the greater problem of "minorities tend to live in poorer neighborhoods, poorer neighborhoods get less business investment because it's seen as less of a benfit" This is a problem, no disagreement, but the accusations like this one, or the earlier accusation that they suspect the problem is delivery companies won't deliver there (Amazon still delivers to those neighborhoods, just not same day which is a huge investment on their end) is being unfair.
posted by aspo at 11:18 AM on April 22, 2016
Except, this is a completely different issue. Does your bank have as many branches in the poorer neighborhoods? (From my experience there's no question that richer neighborhoods have better banking options). It's an infrastructure cost no
This falls into the greater problem of "minorities tend to live in poorer neighborhoods, poorer neighborhoods get less business investment because it's seen as less of a benfit" This is a problem, no disagreement, but the accusations like this one, or the earlier accusation that they suspect the problem is delivery companies won't deliver there (Amazon still delivers to those neighborhoods, just not same day which is a huge investment on their end) is being unfair.
posted by aspo at 11:18 AM on April 22, 2016
In fact the much bigger issue (which this highlights) is the systemic racism which disproportionately leaves black people poorer than white people. If that didn't exist, it's much less likely this effect would be happening at all. If the emphasis of the article was on that, I'd wholeheartedly agree.
It is an issue that Amazon's services are more available to the rich. But that's also generally true of selling anything.
posted by iotic at 11:22 AM on April 22, 2016
It is an issue that Amazon's services are more available to the rich. But that's also generally true of selling anything.
posted by iotic at 11:22 AM on April 22, 2016
I'm more often on the side of defending the need to talk about race, I think, but this article tries to make it pretty much the only issue (mentioning class/income only as possible additional factor). That seems really the wrong way round, here. For this particular question to be primarily a race issue, for starters there would have to be some way in which Amazon's service did indeed effectively discriminate based on race - via say the names or consumer choices of customers. While this is possible, I don't see any evidence presented here for that. And what would a race-oriented solution look like? Does anyone really think the suggestion hinted at in the headline, that Amazon start racially profiling it's customers, is a good idea?
Minorities (even minorities who aren't destitute) tend to live in neighborhoods that have poorer infrastructure than those in white neighborhoods for historical reasons due to redlining.
Amazon then blames the lack of infrastructure on why they do not cover those areas.
Some of these areas that aren't covered are huge, and they aren't a monolith. There are middle class neighborhoods on the south side of Chicago and the Bronx. What they are, however, are poorly serviced by their cities.
Again, nobody is saying that Amazon intended to be racist - it's just that their service areas are having a racist result.
posted by dinty_moore at 11:29 AM on April 22, 2016 [4 favorites]
Minorities (even minorities who aren't destitute) tend to live in neighborhoods that have poorer infrastructure than those in white neighborhoods for historical reasons due to redlining.
Amazon then blames the lack of infrastructure on why they do not cover those areas.
Some of these areas that aren't covered are huge, and they aren't a monolith. There are middle class neighborhoods on the south side of Chicago and the Bronx. What they are, however, are poorly serviced by their cities.
Again, nobody is saying that Amazon intended to be racist - it's just that their service areas are having a racist result.
posted by dinty_moore at 11:29 AM on April 22, 2016 [4 favorites]
Then nobody is getting same-day delivery (or two-day free Prime delivery for that matter). I would hate to see the logistics revolutions that Amazon has driven in the industry fade away, or be captured by an entity like Wal-Mart.
Amazon is an entity like Wal-Mart, and its "logistics revolutions" are no observably less entangled with the pathology of capitalism than any other entity of its kind.
posted by brennen at 11:38 AM on April 22, 2016 [4 favorites]
Amazon is an entity like Wal-Mart, and its "logistics revolutions" are no observably less entangled with the pathology of capitalism than any other entity of its kind.
posted by brennen at 11:38 AM on April 22, 2016 [4 favorites]
it's just that their service areas are having a racist result
Well yes, but there is no evidence given that that's for any reason except relative wealth. Anything that has a classist result will have a racist result, in a systemically racist society. Does anyone really think this is best tackled as a race issue (and please if so, could someone suggest a way that tackling could happen. Apart from the hint in the headline, the article doesn't), rather than one of class or income disparity?
posted by iotic at 11:42 AM on April 22, 2016
Well yes, but there is no evidence given that that's for any reason except relative wealth. Anything that has a classist result will have a racist result, in a systemically racist society. Does anyone really think this is best tackled as a race issue (and please if so, could someone suggest a way that tackling could happen. Apart from the hint in the headline, the article doesn't), rather than one of class or income disparity?
posted by iotic at 11:42 AM on April 22, 2016
At least on the Atlanta map, Southwest Atlanta, the West End, and South DeKalb are centers of the black middle class. Norcross has become the home of a thriving Latino community. There are plenty of other middle class people of other races who are getting Amazon same day delivery to other neighborhoods that are predominately white, but the neighborhoods that are predominately non-white are ignored. I don't know a thing about the other cities, but at least in Atlanta, this is explicitly racial. There may be complex reasons for that. But it is not just about class.
posted by hydropsyche at 11:59 AM on April 22, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by hydropsyche at 11:59 AM on April 22, 2016 [3 favorites]
If that's the case, I wish the article had emphasised that. It should be statistically demonstrable if true.
posted by iotic at 12:01 PM on April 22, 2016
posted by iotic at 12:01 PM on April 22, 2016
Iotic, here's a map of median household income by neighborhood in Chicago.
Here is a map that notes the percentage of African Americans in each neighborhood in Chicago.
You can compare that to the Amazon coverage area if you wish and decide whether or not there seems to be more of a correlation between race, or if it seems to only be class based.
posted by dinty_moore at 12:08 PM on April 22, 2016 [1 favorite]
Here is a map that notes the percentage of African Americans in each neighborhood in Chicago.
.svg/2000px-African_American_Population_by_Census_Tract_in_Chicago,_IL_(2011).svg.png){kind=link}
You can compare that to the Amazon coverage area if you wish and decide whether or not there seems to be more of a correlation between race, or if it seems to only be class based.
posted by dinty_moore at 12:08 PM on April 22, 2016 [1 favorite]
No, it sounds like they have to make a pretty major investment in a small area in able to manage to get same day service even remotely work well, and that requires a density of deliveries that they just can't get.
Except that they also cover huge amounts of the suburbs. If you look at the map of DC, like someone said, it's very stark. The small area of DC that isn't covered is hugely more dense than the suburbs. And to cover it would mean moving the border less than two miles. Kind of like Roxbury, they've already invested in the area RIGHT next to it, and there's no boundary (like a river) to stop the trucks, so what gives?
We don't have Amazon's data; even if there's a smaller ratio of Prime members, it's possible that there's almost as many of them per square mile, because there's so many more people.
posted by Rainbo Vagrant at 12:19 PM on April 22, 2016 [2 favorites]
Except that they also cover huge amounts of the suburbs. If you look at the map of DC, like someone said, it's very stark. The small area of DC that isn't covered is hugely more dense than the suburbs. And to cover it would mean moving the border less than two miles. Kind of like Roxbury, they've already invested in the area RIGHT next to it, and there's no boundary (like a river) to stop the trucks, so what gives?
We don't have Amazon's data; even if there's a smaller ratio of Prime members, it's possible that there's almost as many of them per square mile, because there's so many more people.
posted by Rainbo Vagrant at 12:19 PM on April 22, 2016 [2 favorites]
Except that they also cover huge amounts of the suburbs. If you look at the map of DC, like someone said, it's very stark. The small area of DC that isn't covered is hugely more dense than the suburbs.
Assuming this was a data-driven decision, those suburbs probably generate more and/or larger Amazon Prime orders (-> dollars -> profit) than the urban areas that aren't covered. I suspect Amazon will want to assure the media and public that they aren't racist, so we'll probably be able to read some kind of press release in the next few days explaining their rationale for the coverage areas.
posted by theorique at 12:23 PM on April 22, 2016
Assuming this was a data-driven decision, those suburbs probably generate more and/or larger Amazon Prime orders (-> dollars -> profit) than the urban areas that aren't covered. I suspect Amazon will want to assure the media and public that they aren't racist, so we'll probably be able to read some kind of press release in the next few days explaining their rationale for the coverage areas.
posted by theorique at 12:23 PM on April 22, 2016
Ah, I think I'm starting to understand now. It's the fact that this makes racism so visible and apparent that is difficult for people to swallow - rather than the existence of the structural racism itself? Assuming it's financially viable, Amazon will probably have to roll out the service to more areas ASAP as a PR move. It will be a sticking plaster over both race and other effects of capitalism, rather than contributing to altering those things. As others have pointed out, they really don't have to do anything but protect their bottom line.
posted by iotic at 12:41 PM on April 22, 2016
posted by iotic at 12:41 PM on April 22, 2016
As a person involved in social justice work in Atlanta, I am very familiar with the existence of structural racism here. I am also familiar with our food deserts and our inadequate public transit, both of which combine to make the parts of Atlanta not served by Amazon same day delivery exactly the kinds of places that could really benefit from Amazon same day delivery to acquire things like food.
posted by hydropsyche at 12:58 PM on April 22, 2016
posted by hydropsyche at 12:58 PM on April 22, 2016
> It's the fact that this makes racism so visible and apparent that is difficult for people to swallow - rather than the existence of the structural racism itself?
From this thread, you got the impression that people are pearl-clutching over the obviousness of racism, and are shocked, shocked! at the news that structural racism exists? Huh.
posted by rtha at 1:01 PM on April 22, 2016 [3 favorites]
From this thread, you got the impression that people are pearl-clutching over the obviousness of racism, and are shocked, shocked! at the news that structural racism exists? Huh.
posted by rtha at 1:01 PM on April 22, 2016 [3 favorites]
I experienced this last weekend - I live in a predominantly black neighborhood that borders the white hipster neighborhood. A lot of restaurants around there use Caviar and other delivery apps to outsource their delivery - but Caviar doesn't deliver to my neighborhood. Just literally a few blocks away from those restaurants. It's a strange feeling to learn that you're just a few blocks away from being "worthy" of giving your money to these places and services.
posted by naju at 1:02 PM on April 22, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by naju at 1:02 PM on April 22, 2016 [1 favorite]
I'm not saying there shouldn't be more availability of goods and services to poor areas. Not at all.
I don't think most people here are likely to be shocked at the existence of structural racism. But I do question the effectiveness of ignoring wealth disparity almost entirely in trying to understand the problem. Unless there's evidence for a race-specific mechanism, really it's poorer areas that are the ones left out. Yes, poor areas have more black people and people of colour. Yes, that's part of the negative (racist) experience of being black - even middle class or wealthy black, especially if you don't move out of black areas. Amazon covering these areas would be a sticking plaster solution - not in the sense that it won't be useful for people to have that service, but in the sense that it doesn't do anything to really change those issues, and there will still be lots of similar issues which are less widely visible. For example, middle class black people will still on average have to travel further to work, as more well-paying employers are located outside of black areas.
With that, I think I should probably leave this for others to discuss. I've made my point.
posted by iotic at 1:17 PM on April 22, 2016
I don't think most people here are likely to be shocked at the existence of structural racism. But I do question the effectiveness of ignoring wealth disparity almost entirely in trying to understand the problem. Unless there's evidence for a race-specific mechanism, really it's poorer areas that are the ones left out. Yes, poor areas have more black people and people of colour. Yes, that's part of the negative (racist) experience of being black - even middle class or wealthy black, especially if you don't move out of black areas. Amazon covering these areas would be a sticking plaster solution - not in the sense that it won't be useful for people to have that service, but in the sense that it doesn't do anything to really change those issues, and there will still be lots of similar issues which are less widely visible. For example, middle class black people will still on average have to travel further to work, as more well-paying employers are located outside of black areas.
With that, I think I should probably leave this for others to discuss. I've made my point.
posted by iotic at 1:17 PM on April 22, 2016
If anyone is interested, I found this neat map (you'll probably have to zoom in to read any of the town names) that shows a very detailed break down of population density of Greater Boston based on 2010 Census data.
This seems relevant because given the population density in Boston, including Roxbury, versus the some of the towns and cities on the outer edges of the Amazon prime same day delivery service area, it makes me wonder whether, per square mile, there is that much of a difference between number of prime memberships in Roxbury versus towns like North Reading, where the population density ranges between 500 to 2000 people per square mile versus the 10,000 to 40,000 people per square mile range in Boston. Not to mention Roxbury being geographically located right in the middle of the prime same day service area.
Seriously, could it really be a remotely significant cost or logistical hurdle to provide service there? It's really hard to imagine that it is, and frankly, it seems like a very glaring omission.
(I'm only focusing on Boston because it's the area that I know; clearly Boston isn't the only city where this is an issue.)
posted by litera scripta manet at 1:27 PM on April 22, 2016 [2 favorites]
This seems relevant because given the population density in Boston, including Roxbury, versus the some of the towns and cities on the outer edges of the Amazon prime same day delivery service area, it makes me wonder whether, per square mile, there is that much of a difference between number of prime memberships in Roxbury versus towns like North Reading, where the population density ranges between 500 to 2000 people per square mile versus the 10,000 to 40,000 people per square mile range in Boston. Not to mention Roxbury being geographically located right in the middle of the prime same day service area.
Seriously, could it really be a remotely significant cost or logistical hurdle to provide service there? It's really hard to imagine that it is, and frankly, it seems like a very glaring omission.
(I'm only focusing on Boston because it's the area that I know; clearly Boston isn't the only city where this is an issue.)
posted by litera scripta manet at 1:27 PM on April 22, 2016 [2 favorites]
"Amazon trucks"
I think a lot of these deliveries are actually being made by independent contractors with their own transportation.
I've definitely seen Amazon-branded trucks making deliveries in Chicago.
posted by stopgap at 9:08 PM on April 22, 2016
I think a lot of these deliveries are actually being made by independent contractors with their own transportation.
I've definitely seen Amazon-branded trucks making deliveries in Chicago.
posted by stopgap at 9:08 PM on April 22, 2016
Update: Boston political pressure causes Amazon to give in (link)
posted by theorique at 2:49 PM on April 27, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by theorique at 2:49 PM on April 27, 2016 [2 favorites]
« Older This is one Big Dance they're all winning | The Secret History of Tiger Woods Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by adamg at 7:35 PM on April 21, 2016 [14 favorites]