Influentials Revisited
Thanks to who Damien and Outside Damage who responded to my post yesterday with very interesting points. To be perfectly honest they articulated much more eloquently than I did a point I wanted to make but neglected to succeed in doing.
The point they made which I did not was the fact that it really does not take much to be considered an influential. An influential can be a guy who sits on his couch all day and does not have to be a Congressional intern.
What I was attempting to say but did a poor job of is the fact that despite the virtual ease of becoming an influential most people do not rise to the challenge. As my responders said, anyone can be an influential. So why don't more people take the miniscule effort to become one?
I was not trying to suggest that an influential should only be a political insider. Instead I wish more "normal Joes" would take it upon themselves to get themselves somewhat connected.
Again, thanks guys for responding and helping me collect my thoughts. :)
The point they made which I did not was the fact that it really does not take much to be considered an influential. An influential can be a guy who sits on his couch all day and does not have to be a Congressional intern.
What I was attempting to say but did a poor job of is the fact that despite the virtual ease of becoming an influential most people do not rise to the challenge. As my responders said, anyone can be an influential. So why don't more people take the miniscule effort to become one?
I was not trying to suggest that an influential should only be a political insider. Instead I wish more "normal Joes" would take it upon themselves to get themselves somewhat connected.
Again, thanks guys for responding and helping me collect my thoughts. :)
3 Comments:
Your welcome! When ever we talk about online influentials it is just scary to me that what we are still really saying is "wealthy white males with time on their hands."
The Online Political Fundraising Primer demonstrated sadly, just how true that statement is. The ones particiapting in online activism are educated white males...the same people who are condsidered influentials.
If the supposed power of the Internet can't even extend democracy to the groups most in need of it, then what ever will?
I'd like to see some in depth information about those who do participate in online political activities, as well as those who are considered 'influentials'--I know it is easiest to identify influentials within our own community, those we are accustomed to coming into contact with. So, who are the influentials who aren't online? How do we get them online? Would it be the best use of resources to get them online? Oh, lord.
Wait a minute -
The influentials in online politics are wealthy white males because online politics is filled with wealthy white males. Politics is filled with wealthy white males.
There are influentials everywhere, including circles of women and people of color and lower-income people.
I'm also not so sure about the question, "Why don't more people make themselves into influentials?" To some extent, I think that it is a personality thing. There are some people that are people-people, there are people who are better at maintaining networks over time, there are people who enjoy groups and expressing their opinions. There are other people who prefer to listen than talk, who prefer being members of small, reliable networks than larger ones, who like to relate to other people in different ways from influentials. It's not necessarily "better" to be an influential, it's just the way that some people are.
That said, I think that a person can become an influential. There are civic organizations out there that actively recruit and develop leaders, even those people who are shy.
But there is still an inherent quality, I think, a kind of passion that makes an influential want to know more about their particular topic, and want to teach others about it.
Post a Comment
<< Home