An associate forwarded a link to this AOL feature that lets you measure your social network against anyone else on the system…and determine the ”winner.” Says the FAQ:
Using a complicated algorithm, AIM Fight crawls through the depths of the Internet to answer the all-important question that plagues us all: How popular am I right this second?…. Your score is the sum of the current number of people online who have you listed as a buddy, out to three degrees. This means the score is constantly changing, and the winner of the battle will constantly change with it.
Admittedly, the AOL feature is more for smirks than for smack-downs, but it exposes a bit of the desperation or narcissism that’s enabled by a global bucket of isolated individuals. (Okay, I’ll admit that I check my Technorati profile frequently to see who’s talking about me.) Where status was once determined by who your ancestors were or how many expensive possessions you accrued, a new measure has become how connected you are at any given moment of your day.
Asks my associate:
”How are cultural organizations supposed to provide meaning and/or entertainment to people who:
- Care about these kinds of questions, and
- Expect to get instantaneous and constantly-changing feedback in response…
- For free?”
To which I answered, ”I have no idea.” Can someone out there help us out? If so, post a comment.
Why not play the same game, at least a little? There is tremendous ”self-branding” potential with cultural organizations. People love to buy sophistication and cultural cache (Bravo Television, Salon.com and Godiva Chocolates base their entire business model on this). Why don’t cultural institutions use the same technology to their benefit? Why not a friendster or myspace network for symphony buffs? Why not a dating service for young opera fans? The technology is out there and available. It doesn’t just belong to the AOLs of the world. Nor does it diminish the aesthetic weight of cultural. But you know as well as I do that, with these sorts of distractions, cultural institutions need to offer more than ”It’s important” to get folks in the door.
Always try to ask the “next question,” provide answers that represent a world-class perspective, and charge for it through subscriptions or partnerships with sponsors aligned with your mission. To be effective, a greater mission must exist than merely the role of entertainer. Cultural progress is a far-sighted aspiration.
Just because it became fast and immediate doesn’t mean we haven’t always cared about such things. The Greeks pitted play against play way back in 5th century BC; today we can watch American Idol. Social networks have been sending patrons to cultural institutions for ages. Word of mouth is the best marketing money can’t buy. (And if your associate got his computer, cell phone, wireless service and high-speed internet for free, let me know where I can sign up.)
That’s just taking quantitative psychologism far too seriously.