Humans are innately biased, fact is we cannot help it, we simply prefer to be in situations where we do not feel like the odd one out, we seem programmed to flock to like-minded groups. This is not anything ground-breaking or new, it's a basic human trait.

Some typical examples of like-minded groups include:

• any religion
• football fan
• the mafia
• social media evangelists

I used that list in a presentation/session I led at MediaCampLondon and I'm sure you'll agree, before we dig deeper, that most "specialised" groups or niches do exhibit similar personalities, or group thinking. For a rugby team to excel there needs to be a team mission, a team work-ethic, a cluster of similarity, or a company philosophy, policy. For the police force to work the individual soldiers much share a common belief of law enforcement.

So what can we call the glue in these "packs", "tribes" "groups", "fan bases"? What term describes this commonality of behaviour, the mind-fuck of similarity? What is it then that Chris Brogan the Pied Piper of social media evangelises, what is it that Lloyd Davis the Tart of Tuttle encourages you to love, what is it that Will McInnes the Madman of Metrics and Measurement propagates, and what is it Chris Hambly the Don of the Social Media Mafia challenges you with? - Ideological Amplification is what.

Ideological Amplification is when a belief within a tribe (niche) becomes the "norm" or "accepted" and often "expected" and is then exponentially amplified among its members. - chris hambly

If you think for a moment, all tribes have leaders, this is age-old theory, and from that a vision or a broad ideology born. When loyal members join a particular tribe it is that vision that is then perpetuated, amplified and encouraged to the expense of a nearby tribe - to an extent. Chelsea fans are not in any way waving the ideology flag of Liverpool, for example. Or David Cameron's flock will always seek ammunition to unbalance the arguments of Gordon Brown. These frictional moments and engagements may be unstated, may even take place unwittingly as part of the ideology but they DO occur.

Marketing

Many years ago merchants would tout their business wares in the village market, typically to small groups, small tribes, the merchants could operate a very specific marketing message to a known demographic. When scaling was made possible through technological developments such as printed materials, and more recently radio and television, marketing moved into a more broad-based model where above the line blanket-bombing tactics become the norm, and still are, shear numbers became the model.

The Internet now affords the rapid establishment of tribal theories once again, marketing droids (I include myself in that definition) are once again taking an interest in niche tribes, the "power" of a niche ideology, or they SHOULD be.

You see, for a marketing person we want our products to be discussed, we want the goodness, the buzz, the positive aspects to be ideologically amplified by the tribe. Steve Jobs's gang do this for him daily. Steve's long-term brand (generational) has a fiercely loyal pack of dogs, whom will enthuse and die at the gates of computer heaven before switching brands.

But even new brands to the game can now take advantage of ideological amplification, because The Internet facilitates rapid tribal community building. Never before have we been able to seek and find like-minded people, never before have we been able to run shoulders with vast amounts of people who bolster own own perception of an ideology.

Let's look at more theory.

Thomas Schelling

1971, he published a widely cited article dealing with racial dynamics called "Dynamic Models of Segregation". In this paper he showed that a small preference for one's neighbours to be of the same colour could lead to total segregation. He used coins on graph paper to demonstrate his theory by placing pennies and nickels in different patterns on the "board" and then moving them one by one if they were in an "unhappy" situation.

The positive feedback cycle of segregation - prejudice - in-group preference can be found in most human populations, with great variation in what are regarded as meaningful differences -- gender, age, race, ethnicity, language, sexual preference, religion, etc. Once a cycle of separation-prejudice-discrimination-separation has begun, it has a self-sustaining momentum.

source: wikipedia.

Dangerous stuff…

"Once a cycle of separation-prejudice-discrimination-separation has begun, it has a self-sustaining momentum."

This is what some theorists might call "going viral", I actually prefer to call this pathological, I find it dangerous, sure for a marketing person it can be golden, but and what expense?

So what are we supporting here with social media adoption?

• Increase of niche gangs

- as I've stated, never before have we been able to seek out such vast extremes of ideology in one place. On the Internet there are no mechanical forces preventing us to segregate, we have no house to sell, we are free to indulge in our extremism.

• Disdain for “mainstream”which actually forces us to segregate, isn’t that good? - mainstream channels DO force us to listen, watch and be presented with multiple view points. Newspapers cover a variety of themes which may draw you, something which your niche may not, ever.
• Adoption of tribal mentalities, actually enthused, embraced, encouraged. - Leaders will evangelise, as the Don of Social Media Mafia I do want the members to critically analysis social media, rip it up, question it, find proof, examine it, uncover theory. Chris Brogan doesn't ask this of you, he enjoys the "magic" of it. Will McInnes will want you to find metrics, he wants an industry model, he wants something to bolster and give credibility to his products. Lloyd Davis want you to socialise in public spaces and sing his anthem of Tuttle. Makes no difference what the niche is, we are all selfish and pimping our own ideologies, and if you do not roughly come into line with that, you are marginally ostracised. Debatable, but I challenge you.
• Polarisation, amazon, knows what you like every time, you are profiled. - for each click we make on the internet we are then profiled into a category one step further, for each and every cookie and derivative of YOUR choices are made narrower. You will not be displayed products which you are never likely to buy.
• Additional views which support your views add to your perception of correct, or right. - If you sing hallelujah to the ideology of the group, the remaining participants will praise you, pat you on the back, thus further entrenching the ideology, thus further amplifying it.

Critical analysis skills are taught at 3rd year in the UK University system, and even then it is only the beginning, critical analysis and stepping out of your tribe takes balls, courage and a willingness to argue. This skill is not something we are born with, it takes practise and lots of it.

And that is where the problem lies for me, a serious lacking in critical skills within social media, a fundamental flaw in the system, cult-like blind faith is fucking dangerous, and there will be ferocious venomous spitting when opposing extremes come together.

Look at any war, it is no different... treat your tribe with caution, tread carefully before you preach for you may be amplifying an ideology which is in fact marginalising and segregating.

I will talk about "bridges" at a later date.

UPDATE: 13.07.08 - So what do YOU think, am I being harsh, do you not agree, or do you sense some of this in yourself, what's on your mind after reading this?

Technorati Tags: amplification analysis critial cycle discrimination diversity gangs groups ideology marketing markets mediacamplondon niche polarisation predudice profiled religion segregation shelling specialised theorists tribes univeristy viral segregation polarisation analysis critial ideology amplification marketing profiled univeristy diversity viral discrimin

I was again perusing my friends’ tweets on Twitter this fine Saturday morning and I became aware that a recent buzz word seems to be “Social Media Breakfast”. Social Media Breakfast I say, hmm … what does that mean to you?

I have an idea of the concept but I really want to know who coined the phrase, and why? Was it coined just randomly like “hey let’s have breakfast” by a few people who use social media, or was it more thought about than that?

Conceptually I don't think it is actually anything new, the premise being that you have a friends list in one of your social networks and you create an event, a social event where you all meet-up, in this case eat breakfast, if like me you are not a big breakfast eater, or like the Italians, stand up and have an expresso on the run, these sessions might not work for you.

However, these remind me an awful lot of the activity we at Audiocourses.com have been practising since 2000. So have we been having Social Media Meet-Ups unwittingly? And have we just not applied a buzz phrase to them? I think so, let me explain.

Running a distance learning school has meant that I have had to build a strong sense of virtual community around the members and within its operating structure. As no bricks and mortar exists for the school (no point considering all students are geographically dispersed) it really is paramount to use scaffolding that supports a strong sense of virtual identity, the school really must give a sense of institution, a sense of community and a sense of something big, something to feel a part of.

Over the years I have utilised various technologies to accomplish this sense of community ranging from ftp upload centres to internet radio, forums, blogs, telephone, email, synchronous chat, text messages and various other bits and bobs. Again all these help cement an organisational concept and mostly all are social technologies, social media.

In addition to those technologies we have since 2000 held weekly online synchronous chats, typically on Sundays. We have termed these Live Workshops. As a distance learning educationalist it is vital I can aid students move away from feelings of social isolation. Think about it, when you go to a traditional University or College you see your friends every day, you meet them in the pub after study and you are generally learning in a very social manner (which is vital in my mind). So the distance learning student needs, actually I would say it is essential, to have mechanisms in place which are for the “social” aspect of learning, and this is exactly what are Live Workshops are.

You can browse through passed Workshops from 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, (I’ve kept the dialogue) and if you do indeed read through these you will soon get the vibe of what is going on. Social friendly sessions, inclusion and openness, community building, cementing attachment, installing belonging.

Now back to my original point.

So we have this large virtual community, we have people who have never met each other personally, from all over the world, only digitally through our social media channels, so if we then have real-life get togethers I guess you could say we are having a Social Media Breakfast, Lunch, Dinner, Pint, whatever.

This is exactly what has happened over the years, we've had breakfasts, we've had lunches and we've had dinners, and meeting these people for the first time in the flesh (having built a deep relationship already online) has been awesome, really, a fantastic experience. But will I attached the buzz word to it, no probably not, should I do that? Would you, would you raise your hand and say “hang on a minute guys we’ve done this for years already, what’s so new”?

I’d love to have your views on it, should I care about new buzz-words for old concepts?

UPDATE: Bryper is said to be the guy who coined the phrase see here, thanks to @mdy

Technorati Tags: audiocourses breakfast buzz college dinner live lunch media meet-up social students twitter univeristy words workshops buzz words social media live workshops audiocourses twitter breakfast lunch dinner meet-up students college univeristy