Gladwell writes well, and the article you referenced is definitely one of his better efforts, but it still feels like he's stopping short of finishing the work. Is social networking vs hierarchical organization necessarily an either/or thing? And if someone is touting social networking as "revolutionary" what does that actually tells us about them? And are there not certain problems with hierarchical organization -- as in, once you get the leaders, everything is toast.
The free speech movement managed to achieve its aims while rejecting this hierarchy, though admittedly the goals were far more delimited than fighting racism, and certainly Savio got radicalized in Mississippi.
...anyway. I'd say this is partly the New Yorker cocktail party chatter format, but Outliers was a book, and he could have raised the level above chatter, and he really ultimately doesn't go beyond saying something lightly dangerous.
Joanna
----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Pollak" <mpollak at panix.com> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org Sent: Saturday, October 2, 2010 6:06:44 PM Subject: [lbo-talk] Gladwell: The Difference Between Movements and Networks
For those who have only read his silly stuff and never his good essays, here's a good one:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/10/04/101004fa_fact_gladwell
Michael ___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk