Authenticity, social media and Malcolm Gladwell
In the past couple of weeks, I haven’t had the time to articulate all the reasons why I disagree with Malcolm Gladwell’s views posed on the keynote he delivered at F5Expo (thanks Nels Agerbo and Lindsay Smith for inviting me to attend). Many of you who were there know the context. Gladwell was closing his provocative keynote, and I asked Lindsay to let me ask a question. Very kindly, Lindsay mentioned that I was a big Twitter/blogger/social media dude with thousands of followers.
But when I took the microphone, I told Gladwell that instead of seeing me as a social media guy, I was speaking as an academic who has studied transnational networks of environmental activists for over a decade. I told Gladwell that my research contradicted what he had just told the audience (about how revolutions aren’t created through online tools – he really misinterpreted Granovetter’s findings). And it’s true. In my research, I have found that transnational networks of activists are strengthened by the use of online tools. So, the ‘weak ties’ become with time, ‘strong ties’. Gladwell said that my research showcased people who were using online tools the right way and that we should learn from those cases.
I found it kind of ironic that one of the points that Gladwell made (that anonymity hinders trust) is actually very true, and highlighted by a curious gaffe that occurred during this event and the follow up. I met Gladwell and had a chance to have a very brief conversation where he told me he wasn’t even on Twitter, and that whoever was behind the @Gladwell account wasn’t him. Funny enough, during F5Expo, another fake Malcolm Gladwell account was created. See screenshots below.
So, ironically, Gladwell was simultaneously right and wrong. Right in that online tools foster anonymity and anonymity precludes trust. Wrong in that social media and online tools can’t create revolutions. You have the case of Iran, you have the case of RETC activists (ask me in person about my research on these transnational networks). More importantly, I can easily say that my own life has been revolutionized thanks to social media.
I know that Nels and Lindsay are doing a follow-up event on Wednesday (and I can’t make it, unfortunately, as I teach right at that time), but I do hope that the issues I present here are raised. And if they know who is behind the fake Gladwell accounts, I’d LOVE to knwo.
Related posts:
- Exploring the use of social media by politicians and government
- Measuring influence in social media (the Klout score)
- On authenticity in social media
- My recent Social Media Club Victoria talk: “Towards an Action-Focused Agenda for Social Change Using Social Media” (#smcvictoria) @smcvictoria
- Social media tools and academia
Great blog post, Raul!
Gladwell shouldn’t generalize while interpreting what happens in the social media world. Things are changing so fast that it’s almost impossible to predict what is actually going to happen next.
Exceptions are the most beautiful and interesting asset of this connected reality. Too bad his research is not covering that (and I know… I also don’t consider his findings academic material at all…).
xoxo
Great follow-up on the Granovetter interpretations, Raul! I spotted the @malcgladwell account posts while he was speaking, and tweeted about it shortly after to people I know and follow who where there (you were one); and find it all very strange.
There is a strong counter-intuitive effect from Twitter; only by using it “properly” can anyone really see the power and the humanness of this type of connection. My gut feeling is that social media magnifies the vision or intent of the participant—if you’re a hard-nosed, no-nonsense marketer looking to make as much “face room” as you can for minimal effort, then that aspect of your personality will definitely be magnified, as if with a fish-eye lens. If you are a naturally curious, helpful person, then I think that side of your personality will come into sharp focus. This is the overall effect I experience; very subjective, and without any real qualitative testing, but such is my hunch.