Posts
A review from a video available on www.poptech.org
Oct 2, 2010, #dmingml
Can your social network make you fat? Affect your mood? Political scientist James H. Fowler reveals the dynamics of social networks, the invisible webs that connect each of us to the other. With Nicholas A. Christakis, Fowler recently coauthored, Connected: The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives. By way of introduction Fowler takes an historical look at the importance of our social networks prior to the Internet revolution, and their complex connections: How we choose our friends, whether to become a friend to someone or not, whether to date someone or not, choosing to marry someone or not, etc. We make choices every day about complex networks as they connect to us directly and indirectly as our network becomes connected to networks of our friends, their friends and other causes we become interested in. He explores some of the rules we follow that determine our social network. The first rule is that we each shape our own social network. We decide who to bring into our network or who to exclude, and whether or not we are willing to allow others to have access to our network. The second rule is, that our networks shape us. For example, in the context of trying to find Mr. or Mrs. Right, where do we start? How many dates do I go on? Where do I find those dates? Our network sometimes expanded to include our friends and their immediate networks can be used to bring these dates to us through a series of direct relationships and vast networks. Recent research indicates that approximately 2 out of 3 meet each other from within three degrees of separation. One thing is clear: that mutual friends, spouses and siblings have the greatest and sustainable influence in our lives in respect to our lifestyle choices. Surprisingly, the influence of our immediate neighbors was insignificant. The bottom line is, “every friend makes you happier and healthier.” The third rule is, friends affect us and influence us if we want to make positive lifestyle choices. Geographic distance and contact frequency were not significant variables, rather the importance of having the ability to transmit important messages that strengthen social connections. Our network of friends, and their network, and their network influences lifestyle choices in relation to obesity, smoking, drinking, happiness, loneliness, depression, altruism, piano teacher referrals, etc. Why? Primarily because there appears to be an evolutionary purpose – social networks are in our nature!
Not unexpectedly, our Facebook friends do not make a difference, unless they are part of our close social network. In this category, it is these relationships that matter the most. Fowler & Christakis are now conducting further research with a view to identifying online interventions in relation to lifestyle choices and improving health through the management of online social networks. There is an opportunity to utilize these social networks to not only take care of ourselves, but also to influence positive outcomes for our friends and their families, and their friends and families, and so on.
Analyzing some of Fowler & Christakis’ work through the lens of Hunter’s, To Change the World, there is no doubt there exist opportunities for individual’s to influence behavioral outcomes of their social network, and vice versa. The nature of that influence, whether positive or negative, will be determined by the choices each individual makes in regards to how their social network is managed, maintained and/or expanded, and more specifically who is allowed to join and participate within that network. If the nature of social networks is largely determined by individual’s selecting similar individuals, then there also exists the potential for these networks to reinforce destructive or unhealthy patterns of thinking and behavior. On a positive note, by expanding one’s social network and giving access to that network to the friends of a friend and their networks, there is also the opportunity for these networks to take on the shape of a community that seeks the welfare of everyone within that community, therefore giving power to individuals within that network to influence change for that community, and to expand the influence of that community to an even wider network of social relationships. I imagine Hunter might also raise a concern that a lot of power is being given to an organization (or institution) that is responsible for providing a framework in which social networks are maintained and developed in the online environment. The institution sets the parameters for these social interactions and influences how information can be shared, how much can be shared within the network and how much can be relayed effectively to the additional networks. The Christian Right would be concerned that there is no ability to control and censor content that is being shared, and therefore, opposing ideologies and ideas that have the potential to undermine a Christian Worldview could emerge and influence social networks in ways that the church currently does not leverage (Defensive Against). The Christian Left is more likely to utilize online social networks as a tool for educating and mobilizing communities of people with a cause focused on reducing poverty and attacking the fundamental structures of society that reinforce poverty and class (Relevance To). Whereas, I think the The Neo-Anabaptist who want to extricate themselves from the contaminating forces of the world, would tend to be wary of a tool that has so much power for good and for evil (Purity From). I think Hunter would conclude that in the context of our social networks – online or in person – we have the ability to meaningfully engage with our sphere of influence in a way where we can practice the faithful presence of God by how we interact and speak to the truth of God’s words and how they in turn can speak powerfully to the realities of the world in which we live, and the world in which our friends live in.
Oct 2, 2010, #dmingml
Can your social network make you fat? Affect your mood? Political scientist James H. Fowler reveals the dynamics of social networks, the invisible webs that connect each of us to the other. With Nicholas A. Christakis, Fowler recently coauthored, Connected: The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives. By way of introduction Fowler takes an historical look at the importance of our social networks prior to the Internet revolution, and their complex connections: How we choose our friends, whether to become a friend to someone or not, whether to date someone or not, choosing to marry someone or not, etc. We make choices every day about complex networks as they connect to us directly and indirectly as our network becomes connected to networks of our friends, their friends and other causes we become interested in. He explores some of the rules we follow that determine our social network. The first rule is that we each shape our own social network. We decide who to bring into our network or who to exclude, and whether or not we are willing to allow others to have access to our network. The second rule is, that our networks shape us. For example, in the context of trying to find Mr. or Mrs. Right, where do we start? How many dates do I go on? Where do I find those dates? Our network sometimes expanded to include our friends and their immediate networks can be used to bring these dates to us through a series of direct relationships and vast networks. Recent research indicates that approximately 2 out of 3 meet each other from within three degrees of separation. One thing is clear: that mutual friends, spouses and siblings have the greatest and sustainable influence in our lives in respect to our lifestyle choices. Surprisingly, the influence of our immediate neighbors was insignificant. The bottom line is, “every friend makes you happier and healthier.” The third rule is, friends affect us and influence us if we want to make positive lifestyle choices. Geographic distance and contact frequency were not significant variables, rather the importance of having the ability to transmit important messages that strengthen social connections. Our network of friends, and their network, and their network influences lifestyle choices in relation to obesity, smoking, drinking, happiness, loneliness, depression, altruism, piano teacher referrals, etc. Why? Primarily because there appears to be an evolutionary purpose – social networks are in our nature!
Not unexpectedly, our Facebook friends do not make a difference, unless they are part of our close social network. In this category, it is these relationships that matter the most. Fowler & Christakis are now conducting further research with a view to identifying online interventions in relation to lifestyle choices and improving health through the management of online social networks. There is an opportunity to utilize these social networks to not only take care of ourselves, but also to influence positive outcomes for our friends and their families, and their friends and families, and so on.
Analyzing some of Fowler & Christakis’ work through the lens of Hunter’s, To Change the World, there is no doubt there exist opportunities for individual’s to influence behavioral outcomes of their social network, and vice versa. The nature of that influence, whether positive or negative, will be determined by the choices each individual makes in regards to how their social network is managed, maintained and/or expanded, and more specifically who is allowed to join and participate within that network. If the nature of social networks is largely determined by individual’s selecting similar individuals, then there also exists the potential for these networks to reinforce destructive or unhealthy patterns of thinking and behavior. On a positive note, by expanding one’s social network and giving access to that network to the friends of a friend and their networks, there is also the opportunity for these networks to take on the shape of a community that seeks the welfare of everyone within that community, therefore giving power to individuals within that network to influence change for that community, and to expand the influence of that community to an even wider network of social relationships. I imagine Hunter might also raise a concern that a lot of power is being given to an organization (or institution) that is responsible for providing a framework in which social networks are maintained and developed in the online environment. The institution sets the parameters for these social interactions and influences how information can be shared, how much can be shared within the network and how much can be relayed effectively to the additional networks. The Christian Right would be concerned that there is no ability to control and censor content that is being shared, and therefore, opposing ideologies and ideas that have the potential to undermine a Christian Worldview could emerge and influence social networks in ways that the church currently does not leverage (Defensive Against). The Christian Left is more likely to utilize online social networks as a tool for educating and mobilizing communities of people with a cause focused on reducing poverty and attacking the fundamental structures of society that reinforce poverty and class (Relevance To). Whereas, I think the The Neo-Anabaptist who want to extricate themselves from the contaminating forces of the world, would tend to be wary of a tool that has so much power for good and for evil (Purity From). I think Hunter would conclude that in the context of our social networks – online or in person – we have the ability to meaningfully engage with our sphere of influence in a way where we can practice the faithful presence of God by how we interact and speak to the truth of God’s words and how they in turn can speak powerfully to the realities of the world in which we live, and the world in which our friends live in.
Glenn, I am currently in Belize. I have been reminded that social networking still is very much in the hands of the social/economic elite in most of the world. Two people in the village where I have been involved over the last eight years are on facebook - most people have no idea what it is. I did some video interviews for my other class and told them they could be seen on youtube and was met by blank looks.
ReplyDeleteHow does faithful presence translate to our responsibility as part of the elite to engage others in online relationships, or do you think it is necessary for a just, inclusive global community