|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
issue no. 3: are you the center of the social universe or just a satellite? one sociometric issue is centrality (or, as we might have said in high school, popularity). degree centrality is simply the number of people you interact with. betweenness centrality is the contact you're making with people whose only connection is through you. prestige centrality, the most coveted, is the extent to which you interact with those who are most in demand.
"because gwen stefani was the official center of attention, she interacted with a lot of people, and thus had high-degree centrality," gibson observes. "if we set some minimum time requirement on an exchange before we call it interacting, her degree centrality would drop substantially, for while she exchanged kisses with a lot of people, she had time to speak meaningfully with perhaps none of them." try not to become a sociometric butterfly, flitting but not truly connected.
- william middleton, "popular mechanics," new york times november 2, 2003
[mark] granovetter argues that when it comes to finding out about new jobs—or, for that matter, gaining new information, or looking for new ideas—weak ties tend to be more important than strong ties. your friends, after all, occupy the same world that you do. they work with you, or live near you, and go to the same churches, schools, or parties. how much, then, do they know that you don't know? mere acquaintances, on the other hand, are much more likely to know something that you don't. to capture this apparent paradox, granovetter coined a marvellous phrase: "the strength of weak ties." the most important people in your life are, in certain critical realms, the people who aren't closest to you, and the more people you know who aren't close to you the stronger your position becomes.
- malcolm gladwell, "six degrees of lois weisberg," new yorker january 11, 1999
posted November 02, 2003 in crap, music, print. 20012000