PUR3801's Take of Here Comes Everybody

Networking

Small World networks have two characteristics that, when balanced properly, let messages move through the network effectively. The first is that small groups are densely populated… The second… is that large groups are sparsely connected. (page 215)

Shirky explains that networking is the relationship between a group of people, how it grows and how connections are maintained. It takes a significant effort to maintain a connection between two people and as groups grow it become increasingly difficult to maintain connections with everyone.

Shirky gives the example of clinking glasses after a toast (page 29). In a small group everyone clinks glasses with each other. However, in a larger group people only clink with those near them. This concept is directly applicable to communicating messages among groups of various sizes.

The structure and use of networks drastically changes the possibilities for sharing Shirky explains by using the photo sharing website [[1]]. This was one of the first websites to allow users to socially share the pictures they take. Users were able to “tag” photos under relevant terms i.e. event title, location, date etc. The possibilities for tags were limited only to what the users could think of.

A more common tool today to demonstrate this would be Instagram. An example of this is using a certain hashtag on Instagram pictures that way any picture taken by anyone can be agglomerated within the hashtag. For example at a wedding guests using #BillandSallysWedding on Instagram would allow any user to search and view all photos with that hashtag on one page.

The photographers that utilize [[2]] or Instagram are able to move from a latent group to a real group because they were given the tools to expand and better utilize their social network.

Open-Sourcing

Open sourcing refers to the source code of a computer operating system. It is "[t]he set of computer instructions written by programmers that then gets turned into software. Because software exists as source code first, anyone distributing software has to decide whether to distribute the source code as well, in order to allow users to read and modify it. The alternate choice, of course, is to distribute only the software itself, without the source code, thus keeping the ability to read and modify the code with the original creators" (Shirky 240).

Shirky discusses open sourcing because:

1) It demonstrates how collective action can be achieved without the traditional managerial structure.

2) It illustrates the benefit of operating below the Coasean floor.

3) It demonstrates how opportunities to create social capital are not vanishing in the information age, but how they are instead shifting from older opportunities to newer ones, while preserving the norms that constitute "social capital".

4) It operates according to "publish then filter," allowing ALL ideas to be published and ALL good ideas to filtered out and nurtured. By operating this way, open source maximizes the potential of good ideas, instead of optimizing it, like the traditional managerial model.

Shirky introduces open sourcing by talking about Linux, an alternative computer operating system proposed by a Finnish programmer, Linus Torvaldus, in 1991. Instead of pitching Linux as a commercial business concept, which would only be viable if Torvalds retained the source code, he pitched it as a collaborative project with other programmers around the world. To guarantee his integrity, Torvalds licensed Linux under a public license that disinvested himself from the software. This way, the software could be adapted by anyone and they would be given credit, and such adaptation could continue indefinitely without Torvalds consent.

Because Linux is not designed to make money, and because it does not depend on a start-up investment, it can pass through indefinite failures on its way to its highest achievable quality. Shirky hails this property because it means that Linux does not have to limit itself to "the predictable [i.e. guaranteed return-on-investment] but substandard outcomes" that traditional organizations fall back on.

HOW THIS RELATES TO NEW TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIAL MEDIA

Wikipedia is the best example of open sourcing available. While it is not centrally controlled and monitored, its content creators generate knowledge that is most likely more popular and just as reliable as that of a published encyclopedia.

HOW THIS AFFECTS US

This example shows how we can use open sourcing to transform a latent public into an active one: that is, we do not actually transform them, but provide them with the opportunity and tools to transform themselves, and eliminate the transactions costs of doing so.

Coasean Floor/Ceiling

By Sarah Frick and Mallory Thompson

The main idea of Coasean philosophy is that an organization will tend to grow only when the advantages that can be gotten from directing the work of additional employees are less than the transaction costs of managing them. (Shirky, p.43)

The Coasean floor describes the situations when activities are too expensive for an institution to justify taking on. Rather, unmanaged groups of people can take these activities on because they work under lower transaction costs and outside of the profit motive. (Shirky, p.45)

Shirky discusses Flickr as an example of working under the Coasean floor because it acts as a platform for users to upload and group their original photos at their own will. If Flickr tried to pay photographers to produce the same amount of work, they would go out of business very quickly. Rather, Flickr allows users to find similar pictures and like-minded photographers via tags on their photos, creating a smaller network of people within the larger population of users.

The Coasean ceiling is the point at which an institution has grown too large to the extent that the cost of managing the business destroy any profit margin. (Shirky, p.44)

Basically, one needs to strike a balance between growing a company profitably but not growing the company too large for efficient management functioning. If at any point, the revenue being brought in by a product or service is less than the overhead costs, a company will not survive.

Mass Amateurization

By Alex Bernstein and Yamila Gottig

Mass Amateurization is a phenomenon where people with no background in journalism or photography become amateur journalists/photographers via the ease and greater ability to distribute and publish information pertaining to events in a way that was previously reserved for professionals. The invention and growth of the internet has allowed messages by random publics to have greater permeation and reach. Hence, in a growing age of social media platforms and message distribution services, this phenomenon is increasingly prevalent.

During the terrorist attacks on July 7th, 2005, on the London Underground, nonprofessionals in the vicinity of the attacks were able to send pictures of debris and damage before many acclaimed and professional news outlets had a chance to react. In addition to pictures showing damage, pictures showing underground outages, school schedules and other important information were shared. Because there were regular people at the site of the event with publishing capabilities, rather than in a news bureau miles away, information was disseminated quickly and efficiently. As Clay Shirky said in Here Comes Everybody, "Having cameras in the hands of amateurs on the scene was better than having cameras in the hands of professionals who had to travel." This capability allows anybody with internet access to be an amateur journalist or photographer.

Social media outlets and electronic devices have evolved so greatly and so quickly that only five years later, new opportunities are available. With the growth of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and similar services, mass amateurization presently is even more widespread. An overwhelming amount of people own smart phones and other devices that transmit information wirelessly, and these devices are doing so more quickly and more efficiently than previously. According to Shirky, "An individual with a camera or a keyboard is now a non-profit of one, and self-publishing is now the normal case." Twitter has become a legitimate source for breaking news situations, an idea that would sound absurd a decade ago. With so many sources reporting on the same things, and filtering them with hashtags, it is easy for any person to aggregate information from amateur sources.

In 2006, during a military coup in Thailand, restrictions were place on reporting by the media. These restrictions did not, or could not, apply to the entire population. Alisara Chirapongse, a young woman in the country who used the name "gnarlykitty" was able to post pictures online of tanks in the city's square and information about what was going on in the country. Without the ability of modern technology and social media platforms, this valuable information would not have been possible to be spread.

Promise, Tool, Bargain

In order for a social tool to be successful, it must be attractive to a potential user. This success is achieved by making a plausible promise, providing the effective tool and offering an acceptable bargain (Shirky 260).

“The promise is the basic ‘why’ for anyone to join or contribute to a group. The tool helps the ‘how’ – how will the difficulties of coordination be overcome, or at least be held to manageable levels? And the bargain sets the rules for the road: if you are interested in the promise and adopt the tools, what can you expect, and what will be expected of you?” (Shirky 260)

Why it’s useful to PR: As a public relations professional, the best way to successfully reach our target audience will combine a promise that answers why it’s worth it for them to engage in this particular group or PR effort, a tool that helps them overcome the obstacles of participating and a bargain, meaning, “what’s in it for them to join?” The benefit lies not within the tools themselves, but with the interactions among them.

Promise

For a PR strategist, the promise is what gets our audience involved or at least interested in what we’re offering. The appeal of what we are offering must be greater than the activity the audience is already engaging in. The problem with the promise is that unlike marketing, where a product is being made for the group, we are asking the group to make the product. To overcome this challenge, Shirky recommends making joining the group easy, create personal value for your target public (meaning, they will feel the group is satisfying and effective for both themselves and others in the group) and subdivide the community into smaller, more tightly knit networks.

Tool

The tool is the social medium that is used. There is no such thing as a good or bad tool; tools can only be good at the job they are intended to perform. There are a large number of tools available, including Facebook, Twitter, text messaging and flash mobs. The job of the PR strategies would be to choose the social media tool that offers the most effective use of the tool for the group’s purpose. For example, using a Facebook page to rally a flash mob would be effective because Facebook can reach a large number of people within a target audience.

Bargain

This comes last because it is only relevant if a promise and tools are working together. The bargain is what will be expected of the member once they join the group. Shirky claims that this is the most complex step because it’s the least explicit aspect and it’s the one that the users have the biggest hand in creating; this means that it cannot be completely determined in advance. This refers back to the Coasean floor and transaction costs associated with it. This step is a challenge for PR strategists because the audience has to agree to use it. There cannot be contractual rules; it has to be part of the lived experience of interaction among users.

Interaction of Promise, Tool and Bargain

The interaction is complex but has a flow. Once a promise is established for potential users, you can determine the right tool to get group members engaged. Once the tool and promise are in place, a bargain is presented. If all three work in harmony, the group has potential to succeed. As a PR strategist, you could present a plausible promise, but without an effective tool the group will fail. The promise and the tool could be effective, but if the bargain lacks in appeal the group can also fail. If the audience does not like what is offered as the bargain, they will not be motivated to act or care.

Example

The popular TV show Buffy the Vampire Slayer had an online network called Bronze. The TV threatened to no longer support the group. The members of Bronze didn’t like that, so they raised money to commission a new software and a new location under the condition that the tools for use remained the same. As a result of their efforts, Bronze Beta opened (Shirky 269-270).

Social Capital

By Meg Regan, Rachel Morse's, Lisa Ruderman and Jacki Lacayo

According to Shirky, social capital is the norms and behaviors that facilitate cooperation within or among groups. More simply, it is the behavior (or non-behavior) that results based on the amount of face-to-face individual and group interaction individuals involve themselves in. People who involve themselves more with social capital are more likely to have certain habits of cooperation, trust and generosity.

Social capital is not just beneficial for individuals, but actually functions best in a society. Societies with high social capital do better than those that have a lack of social capital by factors such from decreased crime rate to economic growth (Shirky, 2008).

The reciprocity the results from social capital can be direct or indirect, meaning that it ranges from impersonal to personal. People can have direct social capital, which is commonly individualized and specific to a person. On the contrary, indirect social capital is impersonal. Indirect social capital is a phenomenon that has people creating social capital within something such as a community. Rather than expecting a direct return, indirect social capital is trusting that if you do something for someone in your community, someone else in your community will one day return the favor.

Shirky argues that social capital has been declining in the United States, mainly due to the decline in the participation in group activities. Not because people do not want to get together, but rather it has become more difficult for people to come together due to factors Shirky refers to as “increased costs”. These costs may be suburbanization, smaller households, and etc. The solution to this problem would be to connect the separate world of cyberspace to the real world.

How social tools/social media helps us (public relations students) engage in social capital to find a job upon graduation:

The book described social media sites such as Flickr, MySpace and Livejournal (Shirky, 2008). Today, those sites have slowly dissipated and we now engage on sites such as Facebook and LinkedIn. In order to network and meet other professionals or up-and-coming professionals in public relations, we (the students in our class) create social media accounts on Facebook and LinkedIn. On those sites, we acquire friends and connections. We hope to connect or accept friend request from those who share the same interests and career paths as we do, with hopes that we can get to know these people enough to eventually meet up with them in person. Through the social media sites, we can create connections and interact with those similar to us; we can gather enough background and information on the friends and connections to eventually trust the person enough to meet up in person. We figure out whether we would like to engage in social capital with the friend or connection by scoping out their profile and finding their credibility (what makes them credible enough to share valuable information with me?). We may look at their friends and connections, how many they have, their location, their job history and their interests. From there, we use messaging, posts and groups to interact and develop these connections and shared interests, and eventually meet up and engage in face-to-face social capital. We are using social media sites to make connections and interact with people whom share our interests. We are slowly building up our trust in them so that one day, we can have face-to-face interaction and engage in social capital. The social capital that takes place (from the help of the social media sites) will further our knowledge of our career path and help us gain connections for our future careers in PR. To sum it up, we are using social media to engage in social capital to build valuable and trustworthy relationships with PR professionals whom share our passion.

Personal Example:

We see each other in class every day. The book describes that one of the most common places to engage in social capital today is the work place (Shirky, 2008). We are college students, so our version of social capital is interacting with each other every week in class. We’ve built up trust and valuable relationships with each other because we see each other twice a week and interact on a group, sometimes person-to-person, basis. Therefore, one of my classmates may ask me to watch her/his’ cat one day, and I will, because we invest in social capital multiple times a week, so I am willing to work with her and she trusts me as well.

By Alyssa Fagien and Sean Quinn

Describes group undertaking in form of a ladder.

In his book Here Comes Everybody, Clay Shirky describes the sharing process in terms of photosharing website Flickr. Since Flickr has decreased in popularity since its acquisition by Yahoo, other social networking services have come to increase to void.

This is most true in the major social networks Facebook and Twitter. Facebook allows users to share posts from others' news feeds, profiles and pages, while Twitter pioneered sharing with the creation of the retweet which allows users to broadcast another tweet as their own, while giving accreditation to the user.

The reason sharing is the first step of the ladder is because it gives participants complete freedom on participation or the lack thereof. This is why users can share posts on Facebook with "Everyone" or "Only Me", for example.

The sharing process allows you to self-report news and other happenings that the traditional mainstream media might have either censored or ignored in the past.

Cooperation

Cooperation occupies the next rung on Shirky's group undertaking ladder. This demands a bit more from a user, but it allows more of a community between each individual participant.

The evolution of Twitter as a social network embodies cooperation. The microblogging site originally existed solely to share status updates, but as the community grew, the hashtag was developed and users changed their behavior towards Twitter from that of status updates to that of a community.

This is also true with Shirky's example of Flickr, which has been emulated onto what can be called the photogenic version of Twitter: Instagram. The ability for users to hashtag photos and tag them allow users who are not directly connected with each other to collaborate. Facebook has also recently been interested in developing their own hashtag, and hashtags have moved frmo a fringe feature of Twitter to the bottom left corner of every major television show, from The Walking Dead to The Simpsons.

Shirky describes the difference between cooperation and sharing that cooperation requires "at least some collective decisions have to be made."

In fact, the existence of this Wiki page is an example of cooperation between PUR classmates! Shirky mentions that the litmus test for cooperation indicates that no one person can take credit for what gets created: this is relevant now as all students will be taking joint credit for this page and the resulting grade.

Cooperation used to occur in standardized groups and forms, but with the emergence of social media, cooperation has become easier than ever.

Collective Action

Collective action is the hardest and final step of the ladder. It takes conversation to the next step: action by participants.

Collective action requires work from each individual participants and relies on their efforts to succeed. The group must have a shared vision strong enough to bind the group together, according to Shirky on p.53.

Collective action has resulted in problems before, most specifically in the tragedy of the commons as described further below. However, social networks and the spread of organizing without organizations have allowed users to form for meaningful collective action.

The most notable example of collective action in recent history is the Arab spring. This was an uprising, inspired by social media posts on Facebook and Twitter, where proponents for democracy in the Middle East were able to organize when traditional methods were censored or banned. On a smaller scale, companies and brands are able to generate campaigns for charities and other nonprofits through social media in ways that might not have been previously feasible.

The emergence of the Internet allows collective action to occur quickly and easily as large numbers of people can be reached in ways they were not before.

More is Different

By Kaitlyn Kramer and Andrea Rinaldi
According to the book Here Comes Everybody by Clay Shirky, more is different. As an organization, network or management function grows, the challenges faced grow at a faster rate than the growth of the organization. This concept refers to complexity. It is hard for everyone in a group, whether formally organized or not to come to an agreement. There are more preferences and decisions to make, which means that groups are harder to sustain because more is different. As the group grows, it is harder for everyone else to interact, therefore the organization is needed to lower to complexity within the group.

One example that Shirky gives in his book is the Coney Island Mermaid Parade that takes place on the last Saturday in June. Hundreds come dressed as mermaids and other sea creatures that fit the theme of the parade. While thousands attend and take pictures of the event, very few pictures are seen in the media or are viewed only by those who had taken the picture. There needed to be a way to aggregate the pictures, whether taken simply with a phone or a high quality professional camera. Without a middle-man to expose the photos to the public, the network was too complex to organize. In 2005, about a hundred attendants pooled their pictures together on the social networking site Flickr. These pictures were uploaded by casual users who had a dozen or so pictures from the event, although there were some especially dedicated contributors. All pictures were tagged with "mermaidparade" which allowed everyone on the site to view the pictures together, rather than finding pictures posted by specific users. This created an easy to follow chain of events. People took pictures, posted them then the public viewed them. This greatly lowered the complexity of a situation in which thousands of people who did not necessarily know each other, but had the fact that they attended the same event in common, could share their experience with each other as well as thousands of others who did not attend the event. The tag linked the users despite the fact that they may not have event met in the event. A need was easily met with little complexity and the solution came from users within a community.

While more is different, communities and informal organizations find a way to navigate the complexities of larger management problems under the Cosean floor.

Within social media today, tagging and connection is the bond between users around the world and those with interests in the same subject. While Flickr has since become more obsolete, mobile applications like Instagram, offer a faster and even less complex way to connect with other users. A picture is taken with a phone, which makes the use of mobile applications much easier because there is no additional technology needed, posted to the user's Instagram account, tagged with a subject and now visible to the user's followers as well as anyone who searches the tag. This creates a networking effect between users who do not necessarily know each other but share a common interest. Twitter also follows this tagging model so that a simple search provides hundreds of tweets from users on the same topic, creating a discussion between users who would not have been connected otherwise. While Facebook does not have a tagging feature, pictures of users can be tagged and aggregated under one users page. When a user "likes" a page, Facebook can share that information with Facebook "friends" and show the original user similar pages that they may like as well, creating an informal community of those who share similar interests.

This concept can be applied to how public relations professionals can relate to and research their audience. By using tagging, PR professionals can share valuable content to target audiences and informal communities that have developed within these networks of aware and active audiences. PR professionals can use this social media tactic for research as well by discovering what audiences have similar interests, who is on what side of different discussions, what other things the target audience may be interested in and how to tailor goals and objectives to what the target audience wants. In a world that is complex because more is different, this allows gives the PR professional access to new audiences and can develop tactics that move audiences from aware to active within an issue, revolution or campaign that they have in common.

Birthday Paradox

The Birthday Paradox describes the phenomenon of group complexity. As a group increases in size, the number of connections within the group naturally increases. Instead of focusing on the number of people in a group, you focus on the number of connections or links between people in a given group.

The more people in a group, the more connections exist.

People think that they have less in common with other members of a group than they actually do. As a group increases in size, people assume that they have less and less in common with others, when really the commonalities increase with group size.

In terms of practical application to public relations, when analyzing the characteristics of a public, we should focus on the similarities and connections between different members of the group, rather than seeing each member as a distinct individual with unique characteristics.

Also, as public relations professionals who need to disseminate messages, the Birthday Paradox can help us form communication strategies. Instead of trying to reach each individual in a given public, we can instead identify links between individuals that form segments and then reach one individual in each segment. That individual will then spread the message to others that he or she is connected to (friends, family, etc.).

If we needed to deliver a message on a social media site like Facebook, it would be a daunting task to try to reach each individual member of a group, public or market segment. Instead, we can focus on reaching certain individuals (opinion leaders) within a given group who will then disseminate the message to all of his or her connections.

For example, Morgan Wasserman has 436 Facebook friends. It would be difficult for me to target my message to each of her friends. However, if I deliver my message to Morgan, she has the ability to pass it along to any and all of her 436 friends. Those friends will inevitably share connections between them which gives the message more and more opportunities to be shared and repeated.

Power law distribution

The Power Law Distribution is the phenomenon in which the majority of work is done by only a few. This creates an imbalance in communication that exists in today's society. It can be beneficial because, now, people who want to do a lot can do so without worrying as much about people who only want to do a little. It also allows people who only want to do a little to do without feeling pressured to do more than they can or want.

This affects the future of public relations because, while people haven't changed, the tools with which people communicate and take action have. Using these new tools, PR professionals can inspire people to create change at the level of action with which they're comfortable. Before we had these social media tools, campaigns were focused on getting people who were only doing a little to do a lot more. Now, people can continue operating at their own comfort level and still take part in campaigns for change.

Mermaid Parade

The Mermaid Parade, which takes in Coney Island during the summer, is a popular event among New York City hipsters. Hipsters, wearing extravagant and gaudy costumes, gather at the historic carnival site to see this amazing site. As one would expect, many pictures are taken from this event. However, the problem was bringing all these pictures together to be viewed by all. A decade ago, this would have only been possible through massive, costly coordination. In 2005, Flickr was used to accomplish this goal with little cost to anyone involved. Flickr, a photo aggregating site, was used to bring all the Mermaid Parade pictures together. Under the common tag “mermaidparade,” hundreds of photographers were able to pool thousands of photos together for the world to view, especially fellow members of the Mermaid Parade community. Flickr allowed a community to easily develop around this event and enabled these individuals to comment and converse about each other’s photos.

What’s surprising about this event is that, although there are thousands of photos, most were posted by only a few devoted individuals who took a hundreds of more photos. Most people posted very few photos. However, despite this, the site still flourishes. Even a parade-goer who only takes one photo is able to contribute. Many people posts a few photos makes a difference and plays a large role in keeping this Flickr community going.

Tragedy of the commons

The Tragedy of the Commons occurs when everyone acts according to their own self-interests because they assume other members of society will contribute to the good of the whole. For example, the government makes taxes mandatory because no one would pay taxes on their own. They would instead assume everyone else would pay taxes, so they wouldn't have to do so.

Social media tools now allow people to take part in more collaborative effort and have more stake in community goals. Everyone can see what everyone else is contributing towards an effort, so they will notice when someone is acting in their own self-interest. This means that PR practitioners will be able help diminish the Tragedy of the Commons if they correctly use these tools for the benefit of the collective good.

Failure for Free

By Jayne Elizabeth Alex Annan

Failure for free means that failing is the majority and success is the rarity.

Because failure is the majority it also comes at no cost - somebody may be exerting energy into a project, but failing for them comes at no cost. In a way failure for free benefits people because it shows what works and what doesn’t – it shows future endeavors what to do and what not to do. One example could be applied to the music industry – thousands of garage bands fail, while some singers and bands experience moderate success. However, you’ll also have the exception of extreme success in the likes of Taylor Swift or Justin Timberlake.

Failure for free is also applicable to the field of public relations. In public relations, the use of social tools and two-way communication targeting audiences is extremely important. One can lower the cost of failure with feedback and evaluation and that is a huge aspect of public relations. Overall, the effect of failure is its likelihood times cost.

If we were trying to launch a new innovative idea, we have to fit which idea would best fit the client. As a public relations practitioner you have to guess the likelihood of success or failure, but without the research of past failures (secondary research) it would be harder to reach success upon first try.