Networks

Wellman looks at 'two developing areas' of the emerging network society: community networks and knowledge access.

Community networks are partial, in that people can 'cycle through different ones involving different people.' And they ramify through space, not being dependent on physical proximity. But he also notes that, while internet contact has had a great effect on long-distance contact (both family and friend), the highest rates of contact occur among people who live relatively close (within 50 miles). Online communication is a supplement to other forms of contact (telephone, F2F, etc.).

He also notes that fledgling internet users tend to experience a difficult six-month period in which they feel depressed and alienated. If they stick with it, however, these feelings give way to online contacts and membership in communities which will 'dispel' these feelings.

In his discussion of knowledge access, Wellman notes that organization theory is being rewritten as people try to find ways to use trusted relationships to find reliable information in networked communities.  The challenge is to establish contacts behind the first degree of separation, to find out what friends of friends know.

Critique

I shared lrickard's doubt that the rise of networked communities flattens traditional hierarchies, but Jina's reading of Wellman seems persuasive on that point. I was glad for her reading that Wellman is really talking about information flow, because my (admittedly anecdotal) impression is that corporations with traditional hierarchies remain far more common in America than the cubicle-free, open environments that tend to dominate SI discussions of the private sector.

Wellman's discussion of the six-month ordeal faced by internet newbies suggests that online communities who can find ways to reach out to these beginners might find them to be more grateful--and then loyal--than community designers realize.

Online communication as a supplement to RL contact is less surprising, but it nicely emphasizes the fluidity with which people can move between the two worlds.   

Wellman's discussion of the difference between groups and networks echoes Preece to some degree. One could possibly go farther than both of them by pointing out that not only do online communities bypass physical proximity, they may also flatten demographic distinctions (within limits), such as age or status.  Given one of Kim's 'topical' or 'activity-based' communities, this relative removal of demography may encourage knowledge access by lessening, at least somewhat, assumptions people may make about one another were they meeting in RL (for example, a shy but gifted carpenter).