And, yes, smartphones don’t break down neatly by income. For instance, in the US, Latinos are more likely to own a smartphone than other groups. However, please notice the first finding in Pew’s analysis:

“Smartphone adoption is highest among the affluent and well-educated, the (relatively) young, and non-whites” [1]

If you have data that suggests otherwise, please share.

[1] http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2011/Smartphones/Summary.aspx?view=all

It strikes me that although the revolutions are far more interesting, the way that the internet is going to overthrow old systems of governance is far more subtle. Anyway, we all know what happens when you overthrow the king–you end up with Emperor Napoleon.

Instead, I believe we are now engaged in the work of creating systems of intelligent cooperation that are more sophisticated than the efficiency of hierarchical governance. A revolution is caused by the dissonance between the wisdom of the status quo (aka dogmatic assumptions) and the yearning of many people for something that could be so much better. Democracy was a major innovation in the dissonance/yearning cycle because it meant overthrowing the king had a far smaller impact on the losing side. What we need is a system of governance more adept at incorporating feedback from the governed. We have the means, but not yet the complete roadmap, to enabling more intelligent self-governance. But its clear to many, I think, that in the face of fluid democracy enabled by direct communication and peer-to-peer decision making, hierarchy is showing its weakness.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Victor+Vasarely&hl=en&prmd=imvnso&source=lnms&tbm=isch&ei=4rUET4_6LYKNgweT34SbAg&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=2&ved=0CAwQ_AUoAQ&biw=1436&bih=762