"Facebook activism succeeds not by motivating people to make a real sacrifice but by motivating them to do the things that people do when they are not motivated enough to make a real sacrifice. We are a long way from the lunch counters of Greensboro."


I thought Malcolm Gladwell was another Tom Friedman, an innovation-worshipping "common sense" purveyor for execs looking for something to read in the airport bookshop because they left their Economist in the cab, but this is decent. Gladwell argues that the potential of social networking for the service of radical change is weak--that it is strong ties that cause us to lay our lives on the line for change and hierarchy that makes us effective in achieving it, whereas Facebook and Twitter create weak ties and loose lateral or modular networks. Basically he says--*see above*--one big true thing that makes me remember teenage dreams and my readiness to gather up all my strength and cleverness and fight for revolutionary change. We were motivated, but directionless. Whereas now:


"What happens next is more of the same. A networked, weak-tie world is good at things like helping Wall Streeters get phones back from teen-age girls. Viva la revolución."

New Yorker ( )