Social Networks

Entries related to social networks, group psychology, anthropology, and really any of the social sciences.

Upcoming Events in Second Life

More and more, I’m getting invited to events in Second Life, and I thought I would highlight a few of them here. This afternoon, at 5 PM Eastern, Social Signal is opening their practice in Second Life at the TechSoup Space on Info Island. Friends have spoken highly to me about Social Signal, and so while the event sounds a little like the opening of a consulting firm, it seems like it is work checking out.

Then, tomorrow, at noon eastern time, Second Life Capital Hill will usher in the 110th congress. I hope to attend and perhaps blog and/or videoblog some of the event.

Later in the day, RootsCampSL will have their weekly meeting in SecondLife. I look forward to seeing several old friends there and talking about what progressives can do in SecondLife.

Political Homphily, monocultures and CLP

Over at Connecticut Local Politics Genghis has posted in interesting discussion about centrists and moderate in response to a piece by Jane Hamsher at Firedoglake. I wrote a comment on CLP, but it turned out to be pretty long, and I thought I’d post it here as well.

While I greatly respect Genghis for running this site and for his efforts to get people to interact across ideological borders, I end up here from a different perspective.

First, I think the quote, “People who are engaged political junkies tend to have strong opinions and they want to interact online with others who are like minded” is pretty accurate. I think it goes beyond left and right. It includes the center and people who might be better described as existing off a simple left-center-right continuum.

It also exists beyond the realm of politics. Sociologists talk about homophily, or the tendency of people to group with other people that are similar. For an interesting take on this, I would encourage you to read An Epidemic of Homophily

In its most virulent form, we see people from close-knit social networks personally attack anyone who criticizes a member of their network. It often feels to me as if that dynamic occurs here too often.

Many people are suggesting the political homophily leads to extremism. It seems to me that this is really just a particular form of the problem with monocultures. For those not acquainted with the problem of monocultures, I would encourage you to think about the Irish potato famine. The Irish potato crop lacked diversity, or hybrid vigor, making it susceptible to being wiped out by a virus. Personally, I think that political discourse that doesn’t promote a diversity of opinions runs into similar dangers.

This was, to me, an important part of I believe both Lamont and Schlesinger’s messages. We need a more vigorous political discourse. We need politicians that will engage in that discourse. I think if people are going to honor the contributions of Ned Lamont (or Alan Schlesinger), it should include being willing and eager to have an open discourse with people of differing opinions.

I also wanted to talk a little bit about bridging social capital and bonding social capital, which Robert Putnam does a great job of describing in his book Bowling Alone. However, this has turned into a much longer comment that it should be, so let me simply sum things up. People do tend to gather with others who are like-minded. It isn’t an issue of left-center-right; it is human nature. However, if we wish to make our country a better place, we need to rise about these simple tendencies and embrace a site like this where left, center and right, ideally, can interact respectfully and learn from one another.

(Categories: )

We think you’re stupid

(Cross posted at Greater Democracy)

Dang! I thought I was cutting edge encouraging people to move beyond blogs to online video. Last week, Zephyr Teachout and Tim Wu had this Op-Ed in the Washington Post: YouTube? It's So Yesterday. It is great food for thought, and I thought I’d share some of my thoughts with you.

Back in October, I wrote about The Political Palimpsest. I had been to the Action Coalition for Media Education Summit in Burlington, VT and had seen the movie The Ad and the Ego. This movie has really influenced my thinking about political messaging and I think applies very nicely to Zephyr and Tim’s Op-Ed.

One point from the movie is that despite claims by many people that they don’t pay attention to advertisements, and that the advertisements don’t affect them, the ads really do have an important effect. That effect is less about the overt message, “Buy this car”, and more about the underlying message, “you aren’t good enough if you don’t consume, if you don’t look like the people in the ads.”

So, what is the underlying message of all the political advertisements that you’ve seen over the past couple weeks? Behind all the negative ads and false information, it seems as if the key message of political ads over this past cycle is “We think you’re stupid”.

Rootscamp in Second Life

(Cross posted at Greater Democracy)



Media Advisory

For Immediate Release
Contact: Aldon Huffhines, Drew Frobozz, Ruby Glitter

secondlife://Better World/108/95/29
Even before all the votes have been counted from the 2006 midterm elections, progressive political activists gathered at RootsCamp on Better World Island in Second Life to debrief from the midterms and plan innovative strategies to use technology in the 2008 election cycle.

Over the next several days, activists will share ideas and experiences. People interested in actively participating are encouraged to join in. More information is available at http://www.RootsCampSL.org

###

Thinking about Social Capital

One idea that I’ve been focusing a lot on these days is Social Capital. It is one of those popular phrases that doesn’t get explored enough. Blogs and online social networks are a way of building social capital, and people wonder how to transform some of that social capital into economic capital; not an easy task.

In Bowling Alone, by Robert Putnam, he provides a little more insight into social capital. He divides it into bonding social capital and bridging social capital. Bonding social capital is what ties a community together. Members of a community share a common bond, they talk about it and it empowers them. Bridging social capital is how people reach out to other communities and connect them.

People often criticize the blogosphere as being high in bonding social capital and low in bridging social capital. The lefties bond with the lefties and the same thing happens on the right. I’ve always thought of it in terms of the second degree of friends in an online social network. A person focused on bridging social capital may have lots of friends, and one on bonding social capital may have a smaller number, but even if they have the same number, it becomes more apparent when you go to friends of friends. With bonding social capital, they are all friends of one another and the number of friends of friends isn’t substantially different from the number of friends. However, for bridging social capital the difference can be great.

However, this is based on an incomplete view of social networks. Two of the key components of a network are the nodes; people in the case of social networks, and links; relationships in the case of social networks. A third component of any network is the traffic over the network; the communications between people in a social network.

(Categories: )
Syndicate content