The vision of seamlessly integrating virtual and physical environments—variously called spatial computing and the metaverse—has been around for decades. Recently, Big Tech companies, including Apple and Meta, have prioritized ushering in this computing paradigm. Despite hardware and interface inadequacies, how do these companies make such visions feel not only inevitable but also readily achievable? This paper analyzes performances of corporate vision-making as technological fictions, drawing attention to the genre and aesthetics that make a future seem like the future. By interweaving narratives illustrating the sociality of metaverse futures with presentations of technical capabilities, corporate visions purposely blur fiction and fact such that the former is mistaken for the latter. As scholars consider how to refuse Big Tech visions, excavating how inevitabilities are mere possibilities offers one critical strategy.
BlackmanT.HarleyD. (2024). Interpreting Apple’s visions: Examining the spatiality of the Apple Vision Pro. Platforms & Society, 1, 29768624241283913. https://doi.org/10.1177/29768624241283913
ChambersD. (2019). Media futurism: Time warps of future media homes in speculative films and corporate videos. In HartmannM.PrommerE.DecknerK.GörlandS. O. (Eds.), Mediated time: Perspectives on time in a digital age (pp. 149–171). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24950-2_8
7.
CornfeldL. (2018). Stages of technology: Performance and production in the tech industry. McGill University.
DunneA.RabyF. (2013). Speculative everything: Design, fiction, and social dreaming. MIT Press.
10.
EglistonB.CarterM. (2022a). Oculus imaginaries: The promises and perils of Facebook’s virtual reality. New Media & Society, 24(1), 70–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820960411
11.
EglistonB.CarterM. (2022b). The interface of the future: Mixed reality, intimate data and imagined temporalities. Big Data & Society, 9(1), 20539517211063689. https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517211063689
12.
EglistonB.CarterM. (2024). The metaverse and how we’ll build it: The political economy of Meta’s Reality Labs. New Media & Society, 26(8), 4336–4360. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221119785
13.
GreenwoldS. (2003). Spatial computing [MA thesis]. MIT Press.
HarleyD. (2024). This would be sweet in VR: On the discursive newness of virtual reality. New Media & Society, 26(4), 2151–2167. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221084655
16.
HaylesN. K. (1999). How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and. University of Chicago Press.
17.
HernanL.Ramirez-FigueroaC. (2023). A home with a future. Digital domesticity and the vague fictions of Silicon Valley. Architecture and Culture, 11(1–2), 74–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/20507828.2023.2170118
KinsleyS. (2010). Representing ‘things to come’: Feeling the visions of future technologies. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 42(11), 2771–2790. https://doi.org/10.1068/a42371
21.
KirbyD. (2010). The future is now: Diegetic prototypes and the role of popular films in generating real-world technological development. Social Studies of Science, 40(1), 41–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312709338325
MesseriL. (2024). In the land of the unreal: Virtual and other realities in Los Angeles. Duke University Press.
29.
MesseriL. (2025). Putting big tech in its place: A view of the virtual from Los Angeles. American Anthropologist, 127(1), 58–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/aman.28029
SuchmanL.TriggR.BlombergJ. (2002). Working artefacts: Ethnomethods of the prototype. The British Journal of Sociology, 53(2), 163–179. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071310220133287
35.
TanenbaumT. J.PufalM.TanenbaumK. (2016). The limits of our imagination: Design fiction as a strategy for engaging with dystopian futures. Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Computing Within Limits, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1145/2926676.2926687
