The world really doesn’t need another response to Malcolm Gladwell’s article on Twitter and social revolutions so instead of offering my full thoughts, I’ll just make one point. Gladwell:
Facebook and the like are tools for building networks, which are the opposite, in structure and character, of hierarchies…
There are many things, though, that networks don’t do well. Car companies sensibly use a network to organize their hundreds of suppliers, but not to design their cars...
Because networks don’t have a centralized leadership structure and clear lines of authority, they have real difficulty reaching consensus and setting goals. They can’t think strategically; they are chronically prone to conflict and error.
This brought to mind a similar point from a recent National Journal piece, How Tea Party Organizes Without Leaders:
Headless organizations have other problems. They are much better at mobilizing to stop a proposal or person they dislike than at agreeing on an alternative. They are bad at negotiating and compromising, because no one can speak for them, and many of their members regard compromising as selling out.
Successful open source projects clearly utilize networks effectively. But that doesn’t mean that they are paralyzed in the face of decisions. That’s because they employ alternative decision-making structures – including hierarchies – to tackle tasks for which networks are ill-suited. Take Linux, for instance. While a global network of programmers contributes to the project, the community employs a hierarchical decision-making structure to handle changes. (For more on how that works, I recommend this book.)
When considering the implications of networked political movements, it’s worth remembering that this in no way precludes the use of hierarchies for certain tasks. Gladwell’s own example of car companies demonstrates the viability of a blended approach. But he somehow chooses to ignore it when criticizing the usefulness of networks in political change. Successful political movements will increasingly utilize a blend of the two as we’ve seen in the context of open source software.
(If you’re looking for other reactions here’s Tyler Cowen, Henry Farrell, and a bunch more at Nieman Lab.)
beyond the times 