#76449 - viral media
Posted: Thu Feb 27, 2014 3:29 pm
http://theboard.byu.edu/questions/76449/
Duncan Watts is a researcher who studies networks, particularly social networks. He's done some work on how trends and fads spread across networks. In particular, some of his work focused on Malcolm Gladwell's idea of "influencers," people who supposedly exert undue influence on others in terms of adopting trends. What Watts found was that influencers don't really exist, because for every trend that we pick up from them, there are a dozen trends that we don't pick up. Instead, the biggest factor in whether or not a trend is adopted is the receptiveness of the user, although broadcasting power is another important factor.
In terms of video virality, what makes a video popular is how well it meets the needs of a viewer. You could think of it as an equation looking like with something like "user satisfaction" on one side and "time/money/work invested" on the other side, if the satisfaction (or promise of satisfaction) outweighs the investment, a person has a greater likelihood of watching the video, and if the video is especially satisfying, he or she will also be more likely to share the video. Watching something like a YouTube video requires a very low investment of money or work, so it's easy for videos to go viral. In addition, many people like to be aware of trends or cultural references, so once a video gains popularity, you can also add "cultural awareness" to the positive side of the equation.
Also, this morning I heard a story on NPR about a study which set up parallel "worlds" to see how much of artistic success in innate and how much of it is due to chance. The researcher found that you can't artificially make bad art successful, but one you reach a certain degree of quality, what becomes successful and what doesn't is largely a matter of chance.
Duncan Watts is a researcher who studies networks, particularly social networks. He's done some work on how trends and fads spread across networks. In particular, some of his work focused on Malcolm Gladwell's idea of "influencers," people who supposedly exert undue influence on others in terms of adopting trends. What Watts found was that influencers don't really exist, because for every trend that we pick up from them, there are a dozen trends that we don't pick up. Instead, the biggest factor in whether or not a trend is adopted is the receptiveness of the user, although broadcasting power is another important factor.
In terms of video virality, what makes a video popular is how well it meets the needs of a viewer. You could think of it as an equation looking like with something like "user satisfaction" on one side and "time/money/work invested" on the other side, if the satisfaction (or promise of satisfaction) outweighs the investment, a person has a greater likelihood of watching the video, and if the video is especially satisfying, he or she will also be more likely to share the video. Watching something like a YouTube video requires a very low investment of money or work, so it's easy for videos to go viral. In addition, many people like to be aware of trends or cultural references, so once a video gains popularity, you can also add "cultural awareness" to the positive side of the equation.
Also, this morning I heard a story on NPR about a study which set up parallel "worlds" to see how much of artistic success in innate and how much of it is due to chance. The researcher found that you can't artificially make bad art successful, but one you reach a certain degree of quality, what becomes successful and what doesn't is largely a matter of chance.