12Roots and Revelation

Genetic Ancestry Testing and the YouTubeGeneration

ALONDRA NELSONColumbia University

JEONG WON HWANG

Just wanted to take ya’ll through the steps of me doing my paternal Africanroots . . . I’m going to send you all on a trip with me. And, hopefully . . .ya’ll will have positive feedback about my results . . . Give me questions,give me comments, share this video with your friends and family, becauseI want ya’ll to do this, too.

(yeamie, genetic genealogist on YouTube)1

As is widely acknowledged, parallel developments in computing and molecularbiology precipitated the genomics era. A noteworthy extension of thisinterdependence of bytes and genes is the budding role played by social networksites (SNS) on the terrain of consumer genetics.2 The Google-backed personalgenomics company 23andMe that sells consumers genetic inferences about their“health, disease and ancestry,” for example, was launched in 2007 as an e-business with a social networking component.3 As envisioned, this feature allows23andMe’s clients to tap into the wisdom of the crowd by sharing andaggregating data about their respective genetic analyses. Virtual communitieshave also risen up more organically around other types of direct-to-consumer(DTC) genetic testing in the form of listservs and blogs through which usersdisclose and discuss the SNPs (“snips”), Y-chromosome DNA (Y-DNA),mitochondrial DNA (mt-DNA) and haplotype group results they purchasedfrom various enterprises toward the end of conjecturing identity, familialorigins or disease predisposition.4 In this essay, we examine another iterationof the interplay between on-line community and DTC genetics—the use of thevideo-sharing SNS YouTube (Broadcast Yourself)TM by African Americangenealogists, who have purchased DNA testing to learn about their ancestry.With this phenomenon, the authoritative “imprimatur” of genetic science andthe practice of genealogy are married to the media cultures of Web 2.0 and realitytelevision.5 These broadcasts that predominantly feature men and women in

11112345111678910111231114567811192011112345678930111123435678940111123111

their twenties and thirties suggest the centrality of social networking tocommunity formation among young adults. This phenomenon also suggeststhe broadening demographic appeal of genetic root-seeking; interest ingenealogy, a practice that has long been the provenance of older adults andretirees, may be growing in a younger generation, owing in part to the recenttechnological mediation of root-seeking.

SNSs such as Facebook, Twitter, Flickr and YouTube capture the public’simagination because of their capacity to facilitate the creation of community.These sites share Web 2.0 features such as information sharing, interaction andcustomization. But YouTube, established in February 2005, is unique amongSNSs for the ease with which it can be used to upload and circulate videos. Injust a few years’ time, YouTube has become the most important virtual spacefor the sharing of music videos and songs; news segments and current events;memorable moments from movies and television shows; how-to demon -strations and homemade viewer videos, as well as opinions about this postedmaterial. The prominence of this SNS is reflected in the ability of its videos torapidly draw the eyes of millions of viewers: that is, in the language of socialmedia, “to go viral.”

The founding of YouTube followed by just a few years the emergence of DTCgenetics. Recently a genre of broadcasts that we describe as roots revelationshas emerged on this SNS. With these videos, genealogists use YouTube’sfunctions to disseminate and court reactions to their root-seeking journeys.6In these tightly shot, almost confessional videos, genealogists describe thegenetic ancestry testing process and their reactions to it. They try on geneticallyderived identities. Using image, sound and text, they perform the new orelaborated selves made available to them through genetic ancestry testing.

The practice of genealogy was popularized in the late 1970s after thepublication of Alex Haley’s book Roots: The Saga of an American Family and,soon after, the debut of the eponymous television mini-series.7 The rootsjourney involves the reconstruction of family history, principally through theuse of archival documentation dutifully assembled by the root-seeker over manyyears or decades. More recently, a spate of genealogy-themed, unscripted (or“reality”) television shows, such as prominent Harvard University academicHenry Louis “Skip” Gates Jr’s successful African American Lives franchise, havehighlighted the ease and immediacy with which the roots endeavor cancurrently be undertaken, be it carried out for a root-seeker by another individual(e.g. a certified genealogist) or a company (such as Gates’ African DNA thatsells traditional and genetic ancestry tracing). On this novel family historylandscape, the apex of the roots journey is “the reveal”—to borrow a conceptfrom reality television—the revelation of new or surprising information, oftenbased upon genetic test results, to a subject who expresses astonishment orelation or both before an audience. Thus, in the post-Haley era, the practice ofroot-seeking might be said to now require not simply the reconstruction of a

272 • Alondra Nelson and Jeong Won Hwang

familial narrative or excavation, but also the performance of one’s response tothis genealogical account, as well as the presence of an audience to observe it.Broadcasting oneself on YouTube is one means to these ends.

Moreover, as an SNS, YouTube is inherently a vehicle through which theaudience can express its opinions about roots revelations back to the videos’creators. These broadcasts provide not only a way for genealogists to circulatetheir genetic test results, but also an audience with whom to share theirexperiences and, potentially, with whom to develop affiliations. In the wordsof yeamie, from the epigram that begins this essay, genetic genealogists use thesite, in part, to generate “positive feedback about [their] results.” A diverse arrayof viewers differently bears witness to the roots journey: Viewers’ reactionsindeed include “positive” responses. Audience members claiming ties to theethnic groups or countries to which a root-seeker has been associated by a testingservice, for example, may enthusiastically receive (and thus authenticate) abroadcaster’s results. At the same time, some in the audience may reflectskepticism about genetic ancestry testing and, implicitly, also about thepresuppositions about kinship and community that undergird it. In bothinstances, the circulation of roots revelations offers a small window on publicperception of the growing use of genetic ancestry testing.

As Nelson has described previously, “affiliative self-fashioning”—theconstitution of individual identity, through and toward the goal of associationwith others, including ancestors and DNA “kin”—is a significant aspiration forconsumers of genetic ancestry testing.8 As we detail here, roots revelations areone manner in which this affiliative identification and interchange is achieved.The videos thus serve not only as a forum for the evaluation of new selves bya multifaceted social network, but also a vehicle of self-making. In other words,although prompted by the consumption of genetic ancestry testing, our root-seekers and their viewers interrogate and assess identity and communitymembership via social network interaction. More specifically, drawing on thework of the anthropologist John L. Jackson, roots revelations might beunderstood as enactments of “racial sincerity”—that is, a race-based yet non-essentialist form of negotiated, interactional identity.9

Genes and BytesDTC genetic genealogy testing has burgeoned over the last several years. Thiscommercial enterprise evolved from techniques developed in moleculargenetics, human population genetics, and biological anthropology.10 With thisform of analysis, a consumer’s ancestry or family history is inferred from thecomparison of his or her DNA with a company’s proprietary database ofgenetic samples.11 Several types of tests are offered by the growing number of purveyors of DNA analysis for genealogical purposes:12 “Racio-ethniccomposite” testing—such as the Ancestry Painting evaluation sold by 23andMe—yields to a customer percentages of African, Asian and European ancestry.

11112345111678910111231114567811192011112345678930111123435678940111123111

Roots and Revelation • 273

A second type of testing, haplogroup analysis, of which the Genographic Projectis paradigmatic, informs a consumer of distant ancestry, typically thousandsor tens of thousands of years in the past.13

A third common category of genetic genealogy is “ethnic lineage” testing—analysis of Y-chromosome DNA and mitochondrial DNA (mt-DNA). Y-DNAis passed inter-generationally from fathers to sons. Through examination of thesesex-linked genes, a direct line of male ancestors (patrilineage) can be traced.mtDNA, the energy mechanism of cells, is inherited by sons and daughters fromtheir mothers; it contains characteristic “hypervariable” regions that can beassayed to discern genetic matrilineage. A hypothetical ethnic lineage result,based on analysis purchased from the African Ancestry company, might suggestthat a root-seeker’s Y-DNA traced to the Yoruba people, who reside in manycountries in contemporary West Africa. Or, using the Oxford Ancestors service,it might be inferred that a client’s mtDNA showed commonality with residentsof Central and Western Eurasia.14 For genealogists, part of the appeal of ethniclineage testing is that it intimates “mothers” and “fathers” and generates a specificcontemporary region, nation-state or community to which a consumer can traceorigins (rather than, say, an association with a historically and/or temporallydistant population). This third type of testing might be said to be the form ofgenetic analysis that best approximates the narrative arc of Haley’s Roots, inwhich “lost” national and racio-ethnic identity and kin were recovered.

Haley’s family tree was refashioned from the author’s own (and subsequentlysomewhat controversial) research. Twenty-first-century genealogy, on the other hand, relies largely on technical developments that make the practiceaccessible to the general public as a product. Both the digitization of documentsnecessary to root-seeking practice via websites such as Ancestry.com and thecottage industry of DTC genetic testing companies that promise to uncoverfamily history with DNA analysis have contributed to growing interest ingenealogy. In the process, the reduction of genealogical labor for individual root-seekers—relative to the more arduous Roots example—has also becomepossible.

Reveal YourselfTraditional, digital and genetic methods of ancestry tracing are prominent inthe recent spate of genealogy-themed, reality television shows. “The reveal” is an essential element of genealogy programs such as Motherland: A GeneticJourney (2003), Motherland: Moving On (2006) and Who Do You Think YouAre? (2004—) on Britain’s BBC and, in the U.S., celebrity-driven shows suchas PBS’s African American Lives (2006), Oprah’s Roots (2007), African AmericanLives II (2008), and Faces of America (2010), and NBC’s Who Do You ThinkYou Are? (2010—).15 Media studies scholar June Deery writes that “the reveal”functions “both to uncover and to display. . . to a dual audience of subject andTV viewers.”16 With televised genealogy shows, furthermore, what is uncovered

274 • Alondra Nelson and Jeong Won Hwang

or displayed—most often to a root-seeker via a host—is information about anotable predecessor, a significant historical event, or unexpected affiliations.The poignancy of these televised reveals is manifested by our root-seekers asheightened emotion or with the flat affect of shock. For example, in AfricanAmerican Lives, a show that featured the genealogy of prominent blacks, geneticgenealogy results destabilized long and dearly held ideas about ancestry andidentity: Social scientist Sara Lawrence-Lightfoot, who self-identifies as AfricanAmerican and American Indian, was stunned when host Skip Gates disclosedthat racio-ethnic composite testing suggests she has “no Native American”ancestry whatsoever. Astronaut Mae Jemison, the first black woman to travelto space, on the other hand, was pleasantly surprised to learn that her compositeincludes an inference of 13 percent “East Asian” ancestry. Similarly, during astriking moment in African American Lives II, the comedian Chris Rock wasbrought to the brink of tears when he learned from host Skip Gates that apreviously unknown forebear bootstrapped his way up from slavery to two stints in the South Carolina legislature.17

In the post-Haley era, genealogical labor can thus be at a remove from theinterested root-seeker. Genealogists may accordingly take on a new role: Nolonger solely family history archeologists engaged in the lonely pursuit ofexcavating vital records and census documents, they can become performerswhose job it is to react to genealogical information that is revealed to them.Perhaps unsurprisingly then, less prominent root-seekers than those featuredon televised genealogy programs have taken to YouTube to perform andbroadcast their reveals and to disseminate their reflections on the geneticgenealogy testing experience. Below we describe and analyze several of theseroots revelations.

As of October 2010, a search for the terms “genealogy,” “genetics” and “DNA”resulted in several hundred videos. Many of these can be described as “rootsrevelations” videos because they feature some aspect of the genetic genealogytrajectory from the collection of the DNA sample to the results reveal. Here wefocus on a small subset of black genealogists because we are specificallyinterested in genetic ancestry testing and African diasporic identity.18 Weaccordingly employed purposive sampling and sought out videos that conveyedblacks’ experiences with genetic genealogy.19 (Our sample is therefore andpurposely not representative of all genealogy videos on YouTube or of all African American root-seeking practice; moreover, our discussion of the rootsrevelation phenomenon is impressionistic and our conclusions are necessarilyprovisional.)

We arrived at this sample by searching the YouTube site for combinationsof the keywords or search terms “African,” “ancestry,” “roots,” and “black” inaddition to “genetics,” “DNA,” and “genealogy.” Of more than 500 videos,twenty-two met our criteria. However, nine of these were explicitly promo tional:that is, they were intended to advertise the services of one or more genetic

11112345111678910111231114567811192011112345678930111123435678940111123111

Roots and Revelation • 275

ancestry testing companies. Here, we examine thirteen roots revelationsuploaded to the SNS by ten root-seekers between 2007 and 2009.20 The videosspanned from five to ten minutes in length. We viewed each of these videosseveral times and also transcribed them. We then coded these transcripts aswell as the associated “comments” sections (i.e. the social network audience’swritten responses to the videos). The “tags” that root-seekers assigned to theirvideos were also recorded; as we note below, tagging is one strategy thatYouTube users employ to shape the audience for their videos. As well, we madenote of the broadcasters’ descriptions of their videos; these brief writingsoffered additional perspective on why our root-seekers purchased geneticgenealogy testing.

Five of the root-seekers are women and five are men. They are all youngadults. Although we do not know any of the broadcasters personally, all appearto be under forty years of age; the majority are younger than thirty. Becausegenealogy has typically been time- and resource-intensive, it has traditionallybeen the provenance of older adults or retirees with leisure time. But genealogy’sintersections with cutting-edge DTC genetic testing and social networktechnologies have helped to increase its popularity among a youngerdemographic. Although it is considered a hobby, ancestry tracing can be aserious undertaking for this new generation of genealogists. One root-seeker,an African American male, who appeared to be in his late teens and used thename NurturingOurRoots101, stressed in his video that genealogy was no mererecreational pursuit for him. The goal of his broadcast, he stated, was to helpother “students to see where they come from in Africa, to know their ancestorsand genealogy.” He continued,

some . . . [ask] about genealogy being a hobby. It’s not a hobby, definitelynot a hobby, because a hobby is something you do for relaxation andpleasure. But we do not do [it] for pleasure . . . Genealogy . . . is a necessity[for] knowing who you are and everything you hope to be.21

Notably many had also been tagged with terms that signaled the history and politics of black experience like “racism” and “slavery.” Discussing public and private spheres on YouTube, media studies scholar Patricia Langeexplains that broadcasters may deliberately “calibrate access to their videos”and “create larger or smaller media circuits by using technical features such as . . . strategic tagging.”22 Tagging refers to designating keywords for videos.Tags may serve to hail viewers based upon common language or shared racial,sexual, religious, or national identities; in turn, tagging may help to foster theformation of affinity groups and feelings of community between broadcastersand the audience.

Another way that these root-seekers shaped their audience was by placingtheir videos into YouTube’s “Education” category (rather than in the more

276 • Alondra Nelson and Jeong Won Hwang

11112345111678910111231114567811192011112345678930111123435678940111123111

Roots and Revelation • 277

expected “People & Blogs” category). This was true of vegasview77, whoassigned “education” as both a category and a tag to his reveal. In a writtenstatement appended to his video, this root-seeker declared: “Always rememberthat DNA has memory . . . I’m so pleased my results came back as 100%certain, yeah that’s right 100%!”23 This categorization was likely utilized by thisroot seeker to impute gravitas and validity to both the root-seeking journeyand genetic genealogy testing.

Roots RevelationsRoots revelations depict genealogists’ receipt of genetic information abouttheir ancestry. Although we found considerable variation among the videos,they share several qualities. Most broadcasts suggest why root-seekers embarkupon genetic genealogical testing and why they were prompted to create theirvideos. Videos may feature detailed step-by-step descriptions of the geneticgenealogy testing process, from purchase to results. yeamie, for example, filmedhimself collecting the DNA sample that he would send to the African Ancestrycompany for analysis:

These are the test kit instructions right here for the “premium ancestrykit.” [He holds a piece of paper containing instructions up to the camera.]I’ll just read them to you. “Number one, fill out the specimen informationform . . .” Check . . . I’m gonna swab my cheeks right now with theseswabs. But, first, I wanna get some water to rinse my mouth. [Rinses hismouth and spits the water out.] [Again, reading directions.] “Removecotton swab from package. Swab firmly along the inside of each of yourcheeks, approximately 20 times per cheek.” [Counts 1, 2, 3, 4, etc., as hewipes the inside of each cheek.]24

A few of the other roots revelations we documented also include display ordiscussion of the collection of DNA samples. However, the broadcasts moreoften than not center on the moment of “the reveal” and the genealogists’reactions to this new genetically derived information.

The Reveal

Roots revelations customarily involve the public disclosure of one’s oftenpreviously unknown genetic affiliation (i.e. racial composite, ethnicity,haplotype group, etc.). Although a few of the genealogists we followedperformed or recalled their reveals post hoc, most allowed the audience towitness the climactic moment when their genetic ancestry test results wereopened. The root revelations we examined appear to be self-filmed with theexception of that of Jasmynecannick, who had her reveal documented by a friendwith whom she converses in her video. Whether or not the results are revealed“live” on camera, the root-seekers consistently share their results with theatricalflair.

278 • Alondra Nelson and Jeong Won Hwang

Figure 12.1b In a celebratory gesture, jasmynecannick holds up the map andcertificate of ancestry that she received from African Ancestry.These documents indicate her inferred African ethnicity.

Figure 12.1a jasmynecannick’s reveal filmed by a friend

yeamie, who identifies as a black man, filmed himself opening the envelopecontaining the results of the Y-DNA test he purchased from African Ancestry.Before the camera, he slowly reads from the letter containing his results: “TheY chromosome that we determined from your sample has European ancestry. . . We understand this information may be diffi—” At this point, yeamieinterjects, “No, it’s not. That’s what they say, but I already know I got white inme.” Carrying on reading the results letter where he left off, he says, “. . . difficultto accept, especially if you are not aware of any European men on your paternalline . . .” Again, yeamie inserts his perspective between the lines of thecompany’s result letter: “That I know; that’s why I did my father’s [the paternalline].” Towards the end of his broadcast, the root-seeker endeavors todemonstrate to the audience that the results were anticipated: “I am notsurprised . . . I’m not shocked to get any results because I pretty much knowmy make-up already.” Wrapping up, he musters the following statement ofbittersweet fulfillment: “I’m very proud to know what I am. I am European andproud of it. So, all the Europeans out there and my Europeans in YouTube land,I’ll check you out later. Peace! Black power!”25

With yeamie’s broadcast, viewers witness the very moment when he learnshis test results and discovers, furthermore, that his Y-DNA traces to Europerather than Africa. Proclaiming his prior awareness of and, moreover, hissatisfaction with this news of European ancestry, yeamie seeks to downplay thefact that his results may have been surprising. The exclamation of “Blackpower!” after his expression of European pride is perhaps intended to be ironic.It may also be a subtle negation of the test results, evidence of yeamie’srecognition that “European DNA” does not make him a white person.

11112345111678910111231114567811192011112345678930111123435678940111123111

Roots and Revelation • 279

Figure 12.2 yeamie’s reveal. Here he displays the map of Europe that wasincluded in his results package. In keeping with his Y-DNA result,the map is titled “Europe” (the continent of Asia also appearsprominently on this map)

A broadcaster going by the name of cocopuff236 also permitted the YouTubeaudience to observe him as he read for the first time the results of a geneticgenealogy test he had purchased.

I’m just going to jump into it . . . These are the results of my mother’smaternal lineage from AfricanAncestry.com. And, the results are . . . “It’sa great pleasure that our report on the Matriclan analysis had identifiedyour maternal genetic ancestry. The sequence that we determined fromyour sample is of Middle Eastern ancestry. The sequence belonged to thehaplo-group N1C, a non-African lineage.”26

He continues, describing elements of his results package: “There is a map thatsays haplo-group N1 is most commonly found among the Ashkenazi Jewishpopulation in Central and Eastern Europe.”27

In contrast to yeamie, who tried to minimize the extent to which his shockwas apparent to the social network audience by repeatedly interrupting thenarrative flow of African Ancestry’s results letter, cocopuff236’s reveal is morea straightforward reckoning with unanticipated information. Nevertheless,cocopuff236 almost immediately follows his reveal with qualification: “Now, likethey say further in the letter, it doesn’t mean that we’re not African American.That’s just . . . one side of the family, one portion.”28 He surmises that “it goesto show that you can’t always go by hearing from your family members, becausein our family we were told that we were mixed with Native Americans. But Iguess the DNA test shows otherwise.”29

Born Again

The “Certificate of Ancestry” that African Ancestry gives to its clients as partof their results packages is featured prominently in several of the rootsrevelations we analyzed. This document, signed by the company’s chiefexecutive officer, Gina Paige, and its chief science officer, Rick Kittles, illustratesa customer’s genetic ancestry designation in attractive detail. African Ancestry’s“certification” is of symbolic importance to root-seekers like Jasmynecannick,who declared that she felt “complete” after receiving documentation thataffiliated her with both the Bubi people in Bioko Island, Equatorial Guinea, andthe Tikar tribe and Fulani people of Cameroon.30 The power of the certificatewas also evident in a video posted by a root-seeker named CameroonStar, whoarticulated the certificate’s influence in this way, “I’m extremely excited becauseI’ve known this for years ‘inside,’ but to actually have it on paper, coming fromyour DNA . . .!”

African Ancestry contributes to the valorization of its ancestry certificatesby advising root-seekers to put the documents on show in their homes. yeamie,reading from his results letter, conveyed the company’s recommendation in hisvideo: “We have also enclosed a certificate of ancestry authenticating that yourpolymorphisms match with people living in Europe. You can display it among

280 • Alondra Nelson and Jeong Won Hwang

other important family documents.”31 Indeed, in several videos, genealogistsannounced their intention to frame their certificates, store them with othercherished possessions or exhibit them in a prominent place. One root-seekerstated, for example, “I’m going to get a frame for it! But not before I scan andsend it to everybody in the family!”32

For some, these documents authoritatively confer identity. KILLcolorstruck’sreveal included quotes from his Certificate of Ancestry: “‘African Ancestryhereby certifies that Johnson Martin shares maternal genetic ancestry with theMafa, Hide and Tikar people living in Cameroon.’ And it’s signed by theperson who did this thing.” Holding up this document and looking into thecamera, KILLcolorstruck continued, declaring somberly, “This is my African-ness.” Root-seekers clearly placed high value on documentation of their geneticancestry results. One person regarded her certificate not only as a mark ofidentity but furthermore as analogous to an official vital record. During herroots revelation, Jasmynecannick exclaimed, “I have a new birth certificate! . . .Now, when people ask me where I’m from, I can say, ‘[Do you mean] pre- orpost- Middle Passage?’”33 Reacting to this roots revelation, YouTube viewerxbkzfineztx wrote,

Congratulations on finally knowing YOU. I did [my genetic ancestrytesting] recently, which prompted me to look at [your video] . . . I wantto take one more test by a different company, which will be AfricanAncestry. I want my birth certificate too, shoot!34

Results kit artifacts become props in roots revelation videos. Indexical to theroot-seeker’s own DNA, this documentation also stands in for YouTubegenealogists’ “true” origins.

Roots Commentariat

Tell me what you guys think.(cocopuff236)35

As the above dialogue between Jasmynecannick and xbkzfineztx suggests,interactions between root-seekers and their audience are a key facet of rootsrevelations. Transmission of these videos on YouTube enable geneticgenealogists’ association with an expansive network of persons, both unknownand known. On the one hand, like genealogy-themed television shows, theaudience for these videos may be amorphous and wide-ranging. On the other,the SNS’s features allow video-makers to prescribe their viewership or tocategorize their videos in ways that will attract the most desired audience.36

In turn, the social network audience, which may be strategically cultivated,offers root-seekers feedback about their reveals. Each of the videos we analyzedelicited audience commentary. Recall from this chapter’s epigram that

11112345111678910111231114567811192011112345678930111123435678940111123111

Roots and Revelation • 281

root-seeker yeamie hoped for “positive” reactions to his reveal broadcast.Expressions of affirmation and support were the overwhelming reaction toyeamie’s two videos. Positive observations were additionally the most commonresponse to the other roots revelations we considered.

However, as yeamie’s case also exemplifies, the audience had a wider range of reactions too. Acknowledging that yeamie seemed visibly shocked by his genetic ancestry results despite assertions to the contrary, his viewersalso extended commiseration. TevyeWill replied, “Yeah, Id’ve [sic] beendisappointed . . . very interesting my Black European friend, just goes to showhow little DNA matters/relates to our physical differences.” Similarly, a viewernamed skylabx2000 offered, “I salute your bravery brother, don’t let it bug you.”Another with the moniker CVGodfather remarked, “It[’]s not really bad newscuz I know you were kind of expecting this. It’s obvious that your African traitsdominate your [E]uropean traits. lol.” lerinhar, who was both a root-seeker anda commenter in our sample, replied: “interesting video bro! I[’]m sorry you gotthose results but at least you know your paternal ancestry.”37

Audience and Diaspora

SNSs encourage a sense of proximity between broadcasters and commenters,in spite of the temporal and spatial distance characteristic of virtual exchange.On YouTube this familiarity is partly achieved through filming technique andstyle: Close-angle views and sotto voce tones are employed on roots revelationsthat approximate the “confessional” interludes on reality TV shows such as TheReal World and Survivor. These videos create intimacy despite the fact that theycan be grainy and poorly lit. Media scholar Patricia Lange explains that onYouTube interaction may be privileged over aesthetics. She suggests that“quality is not necessarily the determining factor in terms of how videos affectsocial networks.”38 Rather, Lange suggests, broadcasters “creat[e] and circulat[e]video” in order to “enact social relationships between those who make [them]and those who view” them.39

Building from Lange’s observation, in addition, the SNS-enabled socialinteractions we observed could have a specifically diasporic valence because theaudience for black American root-seekers’ videos was comprised in part ofviewers who professed African nationality (and residence on the continent orabroad). Audience members claiming affiliation with the group, ethnicity ornation to which a root-seeker was matched by DNA often celebrated theidentities unfurled on the videos. After viewing Jasmynecannick’s reveal, in whichthe genealogist learned that her matrilineage traced to contemporary WestAfrica, commenter Crisjones77 replied, “BE PROUD OF UR HERITAGE ANDDON’T FORGET TO GO TO CAMEROON[.] I[’]m from Congo[,] by theway[.]”40 lerinhar received a similarly agreeable response to his roots revelationfrom Akok98, who wrote, “Although I’m not American[,] I understand thestruggles of all African diaspora nations. I’m from Sudan. But nonetheless I see

282 • Alondra Nelson and Jeong Won Hwang

how that bridge . . . with ancestry was broken during slavery . . . I’m proud ofyou and others.”41

Members of the social network audience claiming African ethnicity ornationality also warmly received root-seekers into motherland identities andcommunities. vegasview77’s genetic ancestry results suggested a link to the Akangroup. In reply to this video, viewer termanology85 wrote: “my mother is Akan(Guan ppl.). big ups and welcome.” In response to CameroonStar’s reveal thatmade public her genetic assignment to Cameroon, Estorpai noted, “Welcomehome. You are from a great country,” while LeClubMJJ similarly greeted herby writing, “I’m from Cameroon, from the Bamileke tribe. I live in California. . . Congratulations to Afro-Americans interested in their roots. WelcomeHOME sisters and brothers.”

In a recent meditation on heritage tourism in Ghana, cultural theoristSaidiya Hartman proposes that salutations and familial invocations betweenWest Africans and black Americans—underpinned as they are by “redemptivenarratives,” “promises of filiation,” “fantasies of origin” and even economicinterests—may be instrumental or insincere.42 Unlike the case of Ghanaiantourism, exchanges that take place around roots revelations many not producetangible benefits for “African” commenters. Affective benefits can accrue togenealogists, however, through social network interactions with viewers whosanction their genetic ancestry results from a privileged “African” vantagepoint.43 In this way, roots revelations may condition “affiliative self-fashioning,”constituting genetic genealogists’ identities through technology, sentiment andsociality.44

On the other hand, “African” audience members also challenged root-seekers’ claims of affiliation—ancestry certificates and performative revealsnotwithstanding. In the comments that accompanied Jasmynecannick’s rootsrevelation, a debate ensued about African American root-seeking. A viewer usingthe Nguni name bongiwe expressed deep skepticism of black Americans’genealogical aspirations and was dismissive of the measures to which they werewilling to go in pursuit of African ancestry. bongiwe complained,

[a]s an African I find it sad and forever tragic the legacy of slavery andthe impact it has left on Black Americans. Constantly in search of anidentity. There are endless salesmen and business [sic] willing to sell youan identity if you are desperate enough and willing to buy it.45

Another commenter argued that affiliation with Africa had to be establishedthrough action, rather than inferred through DNA analysis. Shoshaloza1, whosemoniker described a genre of South African call-and-response folksongs andwas thus especially fitting for this debate, retorted:

African American? No, no, no, no, no, no. It’s American black! The onlyAfricans in America are the ones who were born in Africa! If theyconsider themselves so African, they should come to Africa and use their

11112345111678910111231114567811192011112345678930111123435678940111123111

Roots and Revelation • 283

talents here to strengthen the reputation of Africa! Instead, they . . .strengthen the reputation of America! . . . Now it is time for Americanblacks to come back to help Africa. Otherwise, they shouldn’t even callthemselves African!46

Somewhat in agreement, 9revolta contended that an “African American issomeone who has come from Africa, and has gained citizenship in America.”47

On the surface, the discussion that transpired in reaction to this video appearedto be a dispute over nomenclature. Yet it was also a contest over the stakes ofblack Americans’ claims to African identity. For Shoshaloza1, in particular, therewas recognition that genetic genealogy testing, for all its feel-good potential forU.S. blacks, was an asymmetrical exchange, offering little material gain for thisviewer and other self-declared “Africans” in the social network.

Other doubts conveyed by viewers about roots revelations were related tothe accuracy of genetic analysis. cocopuff236’s reservations paradoxically led himto consider additional testing. This root-seeker received results that associatedhim with Northern Europe. But cocopuff236 “was not happy about” this becausehe had hoped that the test would reveal his “African tribe.”48 In the commentssection below his video, he wrote that he planned to get “another test from adifferent company to see if my haplogroup is African.”49 cocopuff236 was notdistrustful of genetic genealogy technology; rather, he was dissatisfied becausethe genealogical aspiration that prompted his purchase of a DNA test—i.e.evidence of his African ancestry—remained unfulfilled. However, some com -menters did highlight the potential limitations of genetic genealogy. philgdevrecommended to cocopuff236 that he should not regard his results as conclusivebecause “just one branch of your family” was tested.50 TRUTHTEACHER2007had little faith in DTC testing purveyors. In response to yeamie’s rootsrevelation, this viewer carped, “I have a big problem with these companiesbecause they are not telling the truth. DNA can’t tell you your total lineage.”51

Skepticism about genetic genealogy was sometimes couched in a discourseof value. Responding to roots revelations, viewers frequently asked our root-seekers about the cost of the tests. In reply to one such query, vegasview77 wrotethat “the cost is about $350[,] but the database is HUGE.” The genealogist clearlyintended to communicate that the expense he incurred was justified by theaccuracy of the results demonstrated by the company’s extensive referencedatabase of DNA samples. Given that price information about genetic genealogytesting is readily available to internet-savvy YouTube viewers via a basic searchengine inquiry, the persistence of the question “How much did it cost?” shouldalso be regarded as a question of value beyond strictly economic concerns. “Howmuch does it cost?” might be understood to also mean “Is it worth it?” This latterquestion exceeds a cost–benefit analysis and points to consideration of theemotional or moral value of the pursuit of roots through consumption. Thisquestion about price could also suggest that acquiescence to a genetic view ofkinship brought with it both benefits and sacrifices (that is, “costs” of another type).

284 • Alondra Nelson and Jeong Won Hwang

This second sense of the potential costs of genetic genealogy was on displayduring a poignant episode in Jasmynecannick’s roots revelation. Immediatelyfollowing her reveal, she is filmed excitedly calling her grandmother to shareher results. In response to the news that their family may have West Africanancestry, Jasmynecannick’s grandmother intoned, “We’re from South Carolina.”The granddaughter root-seeker countered,

Our family is from Equatorial Guinea and Cameroon . . . and not SouthCarolina! [She faces her friend who is videotaping her reveal.] Grandmais saying that she has “been fine” for 87 years not knowing where shecomes from and is saying that . . . “those genetic genealogy test companiescan tell people anything.”52

With notable exasperation and in the hopes that documentation of the resultsmight quell her grandmother’s suspicions, Jasmynecannick says, “I’ll show youthe certificate [of Ancestry] when I come over tomorrow.”

Broadcast Your (Racial) Self

Sincerity demands its performance.(John L. Jackson, Real Black)53

In 2008, Access DNA was founded.54 This internet-based company does notsell genetic testing; rather, it provides genetics education and genetic counselingto members of the public interested in better understanding the results theyhave received via DTC DNA testing services. A company offering suchinformation is only necessary—and potentially profitable—in a context inwhich there are few opportunities for consumers to get feedback about theirtest results, because federal regulations require such consultation only inmedical settings.

In part, roots revelations reflect and fill a similar need for comment andcounsel following “recreational” genetic testing. Using YouTube, genealogistsdisseminate videos and receive audience feedback about their experiences.Viewers’ responses range from emotional reaction to technical considerations.While the “positive” responses sought by yeamie and other root-seekers wereprevalent in our sample, such reactions are not guaranteed in the interactivespace of the social network site. Reception to the videos included celebration,endorsement, commiseration and outright skepticism. Although contention ischaracteristic of SNS (e.g. the “trolling” phenomenon), critical responses to rootsrevelations suggest that the veracity and significance of genetic genealogytesting may come under particular scrutiny, sometimes arising from bothbroadcasters’ and viewers’ evident discomfort with scientific analysis as thearbiter of identity. In other instances, reservations emerge from viewers’knowledge of the technological limitations of the analysis. Reveals may also be

11112345111678910111231114567811192011112345678930111123435678940111123111

Roots and Revelation • 285

contested by the putative symbolic communities in which these AfricanAmerican root-seekers seek membership.

Such critiques notwithstanding, affirming interactions with the socialnetwork audience may help these root-seekers to fulfill their genealogicalaspiration of establishing novel genetically derived, historically denied identities.Developments in computer science and molecular biology offer new avenuesfor the construction and performance of racial identity. Roots revelationsvideos suggest that African American genealogists’ identities can be drawn notonly from genetic ancestry results but also from the networked interaction thatoccurs between broadcasters and their audiences. Like heritage tourism,YouTube facilitated our root-seekers’ association with others from their newgenetic “family” or community.

These interactions might be regarded as enactments of what John Jacksondescribes as “racial sincerity.”55 “Racial authenticity,” its opposite, is a processof subjectification in which one’s identity is shaped from without by “socialphenotypes” and rigid expectations—including genetic determinism—that“delimit individuals’ social options.”56 The concept of racial sincerity, on thecontrary, captures a more dynamic process in which a subject is an agent in hisor her racial self-making, negotiating and evaluating external cues—including,for example, the identificatory call-and-response available via YouTube—instead of being shaped absolutely by them. As Jackson notes further, unlike thesubject–object relation of “authenticity” in which racialized persons are fastenedto and by stereotypes, sincerity is “a liaison between subjects,” between “socialinterlocutors.”57 Expanding a continuum of African diasporic cultural politics,roots revelations, we argue, are an instantiation of this type of racial sincerity,conveyed through the divulgence and performance of genetic ancestry resultsand subsequent interaction with a social network audience. Additionally,sincerity, in its most literal meaning, underscores the earnestness on display inmany of these YouTube broadcasts as these root-seekers search for answers toone of life’s most imperative questions—”Who am I?”58

AcknowledgmentsThe authors acknowledge research support from the Office of the Provost atYale University and the Office of the Provost at Columbia University in theCity of New York. Jessie Daniels, Catherine Lee, Ann Morning and Wendy Rothoffered thoughtful feedback that helped us to clarify the ideas presented here.Nelson thanks Valerie Idehen and Talibah Newman for their invaluableresearch assistance and Stephanie Greenlea, Alexis Hill, David Licata, C.A.Miranda, Joan H. Robinson, Ronald Gregg, Rebecca Herzig, and MichaelYarbrough for enlightening discussions in the course of writing this essay.

Notes1 www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpoygNwIEUQ&feature=video_response (accessed February 11,

2010).

286 • Alondra Nelson and Jeong Won Hwang

2 Some important examinations of the imbrication of SNS and genetics include Sandra Soo-JinLee and LaVera Crawley, “Research 2.0: Social Networking and Direct-to-Consumer (DTC)Genomics,” The American Journal of Bioethics 9 (2009): 35–44; Lynette Reid, “NetworkingGenetics, Populations, and Race,” The American Journal of Bioethics 9 (2009): 50–52; andAinsley J. Newsom, “Personal Genomics as an Interactive Web Broadcast,” The AmericanJournal of Bioethics 9 (2009): 27–29, as well as several other contributors to this recent, personalgenomics-focused issue of AJB. With the exception of Newsom, these authors do not addressthe subject of this chapter—the use of the SNS YouTube by consumers of DTC genetic testingservices.

3 www.23andme.com. See also Lee and Crawley, “Research 2.0.”4 For one example of the proliferation of blogs dedicated to ancestry tracing, see Maureen A.

Taylor, “Fab Forty: 40 Best Genealogy Blogs,” Family Tree Magazine, May (2010): 42–47.Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs or “snips”) are sites in the DNA where common

variations occur: that is, where the bases that comprise chromosomes may differ. SNPs are codedonto computer chips (SNP chips) to facilitate ready comparison of individual genomes.Haplotype groups are sets of SNPs on a region of a single chromosome that are typicallyinherited together; these groupings can be used to map population migration and, it is hoped,disease risk.

5 Troy Duster, Backdoor to Eugenics, second edition (New York: Routledge, 2003 [1990]), 156.6 Nelson thanks C.A. Miranda for bringing the presence of the AfricanAncestry.com channel

and root-seekers videos on YouTube to her attention. Although we focus on the broadcastsof African American root-seekers, this phenomenon is broadly common on the SNS.

7 Alex Haley, Roots: The Saga of an American Family (New York: Dell, 1976).8 The idea of “affiliative self-fashioning” is introduced in Alondra Nelson, “Bio Science: Genetic

Genealogy Testing and the Pursuit of African Ancestry,” Social Studies of Science 38 (2008):771–774 and Nelson, “The Factness of Diaspora: The Social Sources of Genetic Genealogy,”in B. Koenig, S. Lee, and S. Richardson, eds, Rethinking Race in a Genomic Era (NewBrunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press), 258–259.

9 John L. Jackson, Jr. Real Black: Adventures in Racial Sincerity (Chicago: University of ChicagoPress, 2005).

10 See, for example, Luigi Cavalli-Sforza, Paolo Menozzi and Alberto Piazza, The History andGeography of Human Genes (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994); Mark Joblingand Chris Tyler-Smith. “Fathers and Sons: The Y Chromosome and Human Evolution,” Trendsin Genetics 11.11: 449–55.

11 For a discussion of types of genetic genealogy testing from the perspective of what socialpossibilities they yield for consumers, see Nelson, “Bio Science,” 765–767.

12 Racio-ethnic composite testing involves analysis of one’s full nuclear DNA in order to makeclaims about ancestry. A subject’s genetic sample is compared with panels of proprietary,“ancestry informative” SNPs. The end result is an “admixture” of three of four statisticallyconstituted categories—African, Native American, East Asian, and European—based on thepresence of genetic markers said to be predominant among each of these “original”populations. Notably, these markers are present across the spectrum of human groups. Ahypothetical customer might learn his racio-ethnic composite to be 60 percent East Asian, 32percent African and 8 percent Native American. This form of analysis was developed by thenow defunct DNAPrint Genomics company. However, it is still in use by genetic genealogycompanies, including 23andMe.

13 https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/index.html (accessed March 20,2010).

14 See the Oxford Ancestors website on its “MatriLine DNA Service”: www.oxfordancestors.com/component/page,shop.product_details/flypage,flypage/product_id,17/category_id,6/option,com_virtuemart/Itemid,67/ (accessed March 19, 2010). On the African Ancestry company’s“African Lineage Database,” see: www.africanancestry.com/database.html (accessed March 19,2010). The ethnic lineage testing offered by Oxford Ancestors is popular among persons ofEuropean descent because this company guarantees customers who fit this profile a match toone of the mitochondrial “daughters of Eve” with 95 percent certainty. Similarly, AfricanAncestry is popular among persons of African descent, in part because this black-ownedcompany boasts the largest reference database of African DNA.

15 The Motherland series also aired on cable television in the U.S on the Sundance Channel.

11112345111678910111231114567811192011112345678930111123435678940111123111

Roots and Revelation • 287

16 June Deery, “Interior Design: Commodifying Self and Place in ‘Extreme Makeover,’ ‘ExtremeMakeover: Home Edition,’ and ‘The Swan,’” in Dana Alice Heller, ed., The Great AmericanMakeover: Television, History, Nation (New York: Macmillan, 2006), 169. On the history andaffective significance of “the reveal” in television, see Anna McCarthy, “‘Stanley Milgram, AllenFunt, and Me’: Postwar Social Science and the ‘First Wave’ of Reality TV,” in Laurie Ouelletteand Susan Murray, eds, Reality TV: Remaking Television Culture (New York: New YorkUniversity Press, 2004) 19–39.

17 Lawrence-Lightfoot and Jemison appear in African American Lives, producers Henry LouisGates, Jr, Williams R. Grant, and Peter W. Kunhardt. DVD. Public Broadcasting Service, 2005.Chris Rock’s family genealogy is featured in African American Lives II, producers Henry LouisGates, Jr, Williams R. Grant, Peter W. Kunhardt, and Dyllan McGee. DVD. PublicBroadcasting Service, 2007.

18 Nelson is presently at work on a book about the circulation of genetic ancestry testing in Africandiasporic culture.

19 Michael Patton, Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, third edition (Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage, 2002), 238–239.

20 In analyzing the data, we decided to discard the data for one of the video clips we gathered,which was an interview of a male root-seeker posted by AfricanAncestry.com on YouTube.We have come to a consensus that the formation of the video clip could have been controlledto a great extent as it may serve an indirect advertisement purpose to encourage a specific groupof viewers to take the genetic genealogy test from African Ancestry.com. Therefore, it wasconcluded that the specific video clip might impede an accurate assessment of the YouTubevideo’s impact on the responses to genetic genealogy tests. Indeed, AfricanAncestry.com hasits own YouTube channel; this suggests that roots revelation videos might also endeavor tore-create the narrative arc of the “testimonials” about genetic genealogy constructed by thecompany.

21 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYf4J9Ga—U (accessed February 11, 2010).22 Patricia G. Lange, “Publicly Private and Privately Public: Social Networking on YouTube,”

Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13.1 (2007): article 18. Available at: http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/lange.html (accessed November 12, 2009).

23 www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-4TPC5NMQ424 www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpoygNwIEUQ&feature=video_response (accessed February 11,

2010).25 www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OiiNdlxxvo.26 www.youtube.com/watch?v=putwL69UNpY&feature=related.27 www.youtube.com/watch?v=putwL69UNpY&feature=related.28 www.youtube.com/watch?v=putwL69UNpY&feature=related.29 www.youtube.com/watch?v=putwL69UNpY&feature=related.30 www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZzQU3dT9DA&feature=related.31 www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OiiNdlxxvo (emphasis added).32 www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZzQU3dT9DA&feature=related.33 www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZzQU3dT9DA&feature=related (emphasis added).34 Ibid. (emphasis added).35 www.youtube.com/watch?v=putwL69UNpY&feature=related.36 Patricia G. Lange, “Publicly Private and Privately Public: Social Networking on YouTube,”

Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13.1: article 18. Available at: http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/lange.html (accessed November 12, 2009).

37 All comments are in response to this video: www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OiiNdlxxvo. lerinharis both a root-seeker and a commentator.

38 Lange, “Publicly Private and Privately Public,” 11.39 Lange, “Publicly Private and Privately Public,” 11.40 www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZzQU3dT9DA&feature=related.41 www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OiiNdlxxvo.42 Saidiya Hartman, “The Time of Slavery,” South Atlantic Quarterly 101.4 (Fall 2002): 759.43 For a comprehensive, critical discussion of recent scholarship on race, racism and technology,

see Jessie Daniels, “Race and Racism in Internet Studies: A Review and Critique,” unpublishedmanuscript. The rich imbrication of diaspora and technology is explored in Emily NoelleIgnacio’s Building Diaspora: Filipino Cultural Community Formation on the Internet (NewBrunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2005). We follow her argument that new media and

288 • Alondra Nelson and Jeong Won Hwang

the internet can both solidify, create and reconstitute the definition and meaning of diasporiccommunity.

44 The idea of “affiliative self-fashioning” is discussed in Alondra Nelson, “Bio Science: GeneticGenealogy Testing and the Pursuit of African Ancestry,” Social Studies of Science 38 (2008):771–774 and Nelson, “The Factness of Diaspora,” 258–259.

45 www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZzQU3dT9DA&feature=related. Thanks to Michael Yarbroughfor helping to illuminate the meaning of the name “bongiwe.”

46 www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZzQU3dT9DA&feature=related.47 www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZzQU3dT9DA&feature=related.48 www.youtube.com/watch?v=putwL69UNpY&feature=related.49 www.youtube.com/watch?v=putwL69UNpY&feature=related.50 www.youtube.com/watch?v=putwL69UNpY&feature=related.51 www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpoygNwIEUQ&feature=video_response (accessed February 11,

2010).52 www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZzQU3dT9DA&feature=related.53 Jackson, Real Black, 14.54 www.accessdna.com/useraccount/default.aspx.55 Jackson, Real Black.56 Ibid. 13, 227.57 Ibid. 15 (emphasis added).58 Keith Wailoo, “Who Am I? Genetics and the Crisis of Historical Identity,” in Keith Wailoo,

Alondra Nelson, Catherine Lee, eds, Genetics and the Unsettled Past: The Collision of DNA,Race, and History (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2012).

ReferencesBoyd, David and Nicole Ellison. 2007. “Social Network Sites: Definition, History and Scholarship.”

Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13.1: article 11, p. 1.Cavalli-Sforza, Luigi, Paolo Menozzi and Alberto Piazza. 1994. The History and Geography of Human

Genes. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Daniels, Jessie. 2010. “Race and Racism in Internet Studies: A Review and Critique”. Unpublished

manuscript.Deery, June. 2006. “Interior Design: Commodifying Self and Place in ‘Extreme Makeover,’ ‘Extreme

Makeover: Home Edition,’ and ‘The Swan,’” in Dana Alice Heller, ed., The Great AmericanMakeover: Television, History, Nation. New York: Macmillan, 159–174.

Duster, Troy. 2003. Backdoor to Eugenics, second edition. New York: Routledge.Haley, Alex. 1976. Roots: The Saga of an American Family. New York: Dell.Hammer, Michael F. 1995. “A Recent Common Ancestry for Human Y Chromosomes.” Nature

378.6555: 376–378.Hartman, Saidiya. 2002. “The Time of Slavery.” South Atlantic Quarterly 101.4 (Fall 2002): 757–777.Ignacio, Emily Noelle. 2005. Building Diaspora: Filipino Cultural Community Formation on the

Internet. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Jackson, John L., Jr. 2005. Real Black: Adventures in Racial Sincerity. Chicago: University of

Chicago Press.Jobling, Mark A. and Chris Tyler-Smith. 1995. “Fathers and Sons: The Y Chromosome and Human

Evolution.” Trends in Genetics 11.11: 449–455.Lange, Patricia G. 2007. “Publicly Private and Privately Public: Social Networking on YouTube.”

Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13.1: article 18. Available at http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/lange.html (accessed November 12, 2009).

Lee, Sandra Soo-Jin Lee and LaVera Crawley. 2009. “Research 2.0: Social Networking and Direct-to-Consumer (DTC) Genomics.” The American Journal of Bioethics 9: 35–44.

McCarthy, Anna. 2004. “‘Stanley Milgram, Allen Funt, and Me’: Postwar Social Science and the ‘FirstWave’ of Reality TV,” in Laurie Ouellette and Susan Murray, eds, Reality TV: RemakingTelevision Culture. New York: New York University Press, 19–39.

Nelson, Alondra. 2008. “The Factness of Diaspora: The Social Sources of Genetic Genealogy,” inB. Koenig, S. Lee and S. Richardson, eds, Rethinking Race in a Genomic Era. New Brunswick,NJ: Rutgers University Press, 253–268.

——. 2008. “Bio Science: Genetic Genealogy Testing and the Pursuit of African Ancestry.” SocialStudies of Science 38.5: 759–783.

11112345111678910111231114567811192011112345678930111123435678940111123111

Roots and Revelation • 289

Newsom, Ainsley J. 2009. “Personal Genomics as an Interactive Web Broadcast.” The AmericanJournal of Bioethics 9: 27–29.

Patton, Michael Quinn. 2002. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, third edition. ThousandOaks, CA: Sage.

Reid, Lynette. 2009. “Networking Genetics, Populations, and Race.” The American Journal of Bioethics9: 50–52.

Taylor, Maureen A. 2010. “40 Best Genealogy Blogs.” Family Tree Magazine, March 1. Availableat www.familytreemagazine.com/article/fab-forty (accessed March 7, 2010).

290 • Alondra Nelson and Jeong Won Hwang