Recent media buzz over two new social networks, each challenging part of Facebook and Twitter’s model, raises questions about how people cultivate connections. Ello launched with a manifesto against corporate social media and drew a number of new users unhappy with Facebook’s “real name” policy. While their stance on selling data is still in question, another new network is proud to cash in. Netropolitan.club, billing itself as the next new elite social network, charges $9,000 for exclusive access to connect with everyone else who paid the admission fee. Their success hinges on a chicken and egg question: do we join new groups that give us what we want, or do our current networks shape what we want in the first place?
Classic network research argues that your ties shape what you want, and recent studies of political activism show how this works. People often join activist groups with personal motives and later learn their political stances through the group’s social ties.
- Bonnie H. Erikson. 1996. “Culture, Class, and Connections.” American Journal of Sociology 102:217-52
- Hahrie Han. 2009. Moved to Action: Motivation, Participation, and Inequality in American Politics. Stanford University Press.
On the other hand, tastes also shape the kinds of networks we form. Joining up can be a form of “conspicuous consumption” where members buy in to show insider status. “Highbrow” taste in culture also tends to form stronger, more exclusive ties with other members in the network, while “lowbrow” or popular tastes are associated with weaker, but broader ties.
- Thorstein Veblen. 1994[1899]. The Theory of the Leisure Class. Dover Publications
- Omar Lizardo. 2006. “How Cultural Tastes Shape Personal Networks.” American Sociological Review 71(5):778-807
Comments