The Reality of The Virtual: Looking For Jewish Leadership Online

The Reality of the Virtual: Looking for Jewish Leadership Online
The Reality of the

Virtual:
Looking for Jewish

Leadership Online
Ari Y Kelman
UC Davis
Research for this ar7cle was conducted under the
auspices of the Avi Chai Founda7on's project on
young Jewish leaders directed by Jack Wertheimer.
1
Introduc7on1

In September, 2009, MASA, a partnership between the Jewish Agency and American
communal organizaHons that provides a “gateway to long term Israel programs,” launched a PR
campaign on Israeli television and the internet. A central feature of the $800,000 effort was a
commercial, shot with a vague MTV aestheHc, that featured mocked‐up missing persons posters
of American Jews. The adverHsement’s female narrator urged her Israeli audience to connect
their American acquaintances with MASA in order to encourage them to travel to Israel and
save the “more than 50% of diaspora youth [who] assimilate and are lost to us.”2
Though intended for an Israeli audience, the adverHsement quickly caught the aXenHon
of Jewish bloggers and journalists in the United States, many of whom objected vociferously to
the commercial and the implicaHons of its message. Most expressed a sense of outrage at the
1 The author would like to extend his deep graHtude and appreciaHon for the insight and assistance of the following
people: Steven M. Cohen, Sarah Bunin Benor, Shaul Kelner, Sylvia Barack Fishman, and Jack Wertheimer, who are
some of the finest collaborators, thinkers, colleagues and friends that I’ve had the pleasure to work with. At
various points Riv Ellen Prell, Jack Ukeles and J. Shawn Landres provided valuable insight into some of the issues
discussed here. Ted Sasson and Charles Kadushin offered vital criHcism and assistance at exactly the right Hmes,
and without their help, this would have been a much impoverished project and a significantly less interesHng
paper. Robert Swirsky wrote the custom script used to gather the data for this project and he also mapped the
networks that appear here. Without Robert, this project could never have happened, and I’m deeply grateful to
him for his help, paHence, curiosity and interest in the project. Finally, I want to express my graHtude to the Avi
Chai FoundaHon who helped usher an idea into a research project and a research project into this paper.
2 The 35‐second commercial is sHll available online at <hXp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPYGdgIxIe4> [accessed
December 10, 2009]
2
use of the term “lost” and quesHoned an outreach strategy that insulted its target populaHon.3
Some bloggers quesHoned the cost of such an effort, while a handful of print publicaHons,
including the Jerusalem Post, published their own criHcal responses online.4 In response to the
the broad and loud chorus of blog‐based objecHons, MASA removed the commercial and issued
a public apology, explaining the event as a “misunderstanding.”5
The MASA incident highlights three criHcal ways in which the internet is changing the
landscape of Jewish life. First, the internet made the objecHons possible by bringing the
commercial to American viewers. Were it not for the internet and its ability to facilitate the
rapid sharing of informaHon, the commercial likely would have run its course on Israeli
television without incident. However, the “viral” nature of media on the internet, and the
ability of people to share informaHon quickly, cheaply, and transnaHonally meant that an Israeli
cultural product quickly became part of a global Jewish conversaHon.
3 Kung Fu Jew’s Jewschool post of September 3, 2009 is one of the most widely cited and circulated of these.
<hXp://jewschool.com/2009/09/03/17696/masa‐tv‐commercial‐intermarried‐jews‐are‐lost/> [accessed December
10, 2009]. Other objecHons came from bloggers like Esther Kustanowitz <hXp://estherkustanowitz.typepad.com/
myurbankvetch2005/2009/09/lost‐not‐the‐tv‐show‐the‐intermarried‐jews.html> [accessed December 10, 2009],
and Ed Case, who blogs at the website interfaithfamily.com <hXp://www.interfaithfamily.com/smf/index.php?
arHcle=3373> [accessed December 10, 2009]
4 JJ Goldberg, “‘Lost’ In Plain Sight: An Israeli Plan to Rescue American Jews.” Posted September 6, 2009. <hXp://
blogs.forward.com/jj‐goldberg/113535/> [accessed December 10, 2009]. It should also be noted that there is
some anecdotal evidence of conversaHons between American Jews and some leaders at the Jewish Agency which
also helped foment the organizaHon’s change of heart, but nevertheless, the conversaHon online helped evidence
the widespread concern over the adverHsement and its overtones.
5 The Jewish Agency posted its response on its websites (September 6, 2009) <hXp://www.jewishagency.org/
JewishAgency/English/About/Press+Room/Press+Releases/2009/sep06a.htm> [accessed, December 10, 2009).
The full text of the leXer explaining the response appeared in a number of blogs and on a host of online Jewish
news sources including ejewishphilanthropy.com (Posted September 8, 2009) <hXp://ejewishphilanthropy.com/
masa‐officially‐pulls‐the‐plug‐on‐lost‐campaign/> [accessed December 10, 2009] and the fundermentalist blog on
the JTA.org website (Posted September 8, 2009) <hXp://blogs.jta.org/philanthropy/arHcle/2009/09/08/1007698/
jewish‐agency‐changes‐course‐on‐masa‐ad> [Accessed December 10, 2009].
3
Second, it highlights the power of the internet as a new forum for debate and
conversaHon about contemporary Jewish issues. The vitality of this new forum means that the
very ways in which we share and encounter informaHon are changing. PosHng a television
commercial to YouTube does not change the content, but it does change the size and scope of
the audience while also fostering new ways for people to shape the meaning of that content.
The MASA incident clearly illustrated this, as the adverHsement quickly turned into debates
about Jewish idenHty and the relaHonship between Israeli and American Jews. The chorus of
voices raised in objecHon to the MASA commercial resulted in a short‐term change in the
organizaHon’s media strategy, but more importantly, the incident showed that the established,
mainstream Jewish organizaHons no longer have sole propriety over either the content of
communal Jewish debate, nor do they control the venues in which those debates take place.
Third, the MASA incident revealed the diversity of Jewish voices eager to parHcipate in
communal discussion. From the lev and the right, the religious and the secular, from
established newspapers to single‐authored blogs, the MASA commercial generated responses
from almost every imaginable corner of the Jewish world. One could read the variety of
responses as indicaHve of the fragmentaHon of the Jewish people. AlternaHvely, one could
understand it as a reflecHon of diversity within a single, unifying conversaHon. Either way, it is
clear that the internet enabled a great diversity of parHcipants from a variety of Jewish
communiHes to join the debate without having to channel their parHcipaHon through
established communal organizaHons, news sources, or congregaHons.
Episodes like this one are as mythical as they are myriad in the literature about the
internet. Both journalists and scholars have argued that the internet will radically reshape the
commercial marketplace, alter how we regard knowledge and educaHon, challenge our
4
understandings of markeHng, shiv our concepHons of power, and even change our relaHonship
to democracy.6 One need only look to the role of TwiXer in the social upheaval in Iran during
the summer of 2009 for one small example of how these changes are playing out globally. What
these changes mean, however, remains the subject of some debate.
Why Study the Internet?
Of course, the changes iniHated and enabled by the internet are affecHng Jews as they
are everyone else. Abundant anecdotal examples aside, we know almost nothing about how
the internet is changing the arrangements of power and order in Jewish communiHes
worldwide, or how it is informing concepHons of Jewish collecHvity, educaHon, and leadership.
What does it mean for Jewish communal organizaHons when individual bloggers can challenge
the Jewish Agency over its characterizaHons of diaspora Jews? How are the diversity of voices
now accessible changing the shape of Jewish communiHes? What do dynamics like these mean
for a global sense of Jewish communal membership? Are we seeing a new cadre of leaders
emerge, or new expressions of leadership? How is the internet challenging some of the
established structures of Jewish life, and how is it reenforcing others? Where are new loci of
power emerging in the Jewish community as it takes shape online? How does what happens
online inform what happens offline?
As a response to these quesHons, this paper will focus primarily on the internet as a
relaHvely independent sector of communal life. Neither purely a reflecHon nor strictly a driver
6 For examples of each see Chris Anderson, The Long Tail (Hyperion, 2008); James Surowiecki, The Wisdom of
Crowds (Anchor Books, 2005); Charlene Li and Josh Bernoff, Groundswell (Harvard Business Press, 2008); Clay
Shirkey, Here Comes Everybody (Penguin, 2009); Yochai Benkler, The Wealth of Networks (Yale University Press,
2007).
5
of Jewish life, the “virtual sector” is an increasingly important venue for Jews at all stages on the
broad spectrum of what we might call “engagement.” In one light, the internet might be most
important for those Jews who are least connected offline, as it becomes a first portal for
informaHon about holidays, history, or local Jewish life. AlternaHvely, it might address the
needs of Jews deeply enmeshed in Jewish life, who are looking for news or services that address
their parHcular needs and interests, as well. For some, it might be a portal into Jewish life,
while others might use it to voice opinions that might not be acceptable within own Hghtly‐knit
communiHes. As the parHcular moHvaHons of individual users indicate, internet use depends
on offline realiHes. Studying the Jewish virtual sector, then, can illuminate aspects of Jewish life
more broadly and it holds some important lessons about new arHculaHon of community,
influence, informaHon and leadership.
Understood as an integral sphere of Jewish life, the internet becomes an illuminaHng
case study for the changing dynamics of the American Jewish community. The internet has
made informaHon far more accessible, it has enabled new venues for communal debate,
discussion and engagement, and it has expanded the chorus of voices in the Jewish communal
conversaHon. The organizaHons and insHtuHons of the organized Jewish world, built primarily
in the thick of the 20th century, have found themselves working in a world where
communicaHon is much more mulHfarious, and in which informaHon (and the curaHon of that
informaHon) plays an ever‐increasingly important role. Jewish organizaHons are discovering
what record companies, television networks, adverHsers and PR firms are all learning: the old
broadcast model does not work as well as it used to. As a result, the ways in which
organizaHons imagine and engage their audiences have to change, as well. Just claiming to be
the “central address” no longer packs the punch it once did, especially because we can measure
6
whether or not a parHcular website’s address actually is central with a given network (Spoiler
Alert: JewishfederaHons.org is not the “central address” of the Jewish community. Not by a
long shot).
Online, the centrality of a url can be measured, in part, by documenHng its relaHonships
to other sites. The more sites with which it is connected, the more central the site. Consider an
offline analog. Jewish insHtuHons like synagogues, museums, and federaHons are typically
housed in free‐standing buildings, whose relaHonship to one another is not always clear. One
can belong to one or more organizaHons and have liXle or no contact with others, even within
one’s local Jewish community.
The internet is similarly built out of relaHvely free‐standing sites, but by contrast, it is
fueled by the relaHonships between sites. We call these relaHonships links. A site with no links
will, in all likelihood, not aXract a whole lot of traffic because people navigate the internet by
following links between sites. Without links, the internet would be almost impossible to
navigate and quite cumbersome to use. Links turn free‐standing websites into a network.
Usually, the more links a website has, the more it benefits from those links as the links drive
traffic to the site. Links make concrete relaHonships that can be quite murky offline, and they
represent some concrete ways in which sites interact and direct visitors. Mapping and
measuring those links will provide some important insights into the dynamics of community
organizaHon, leadership and influence within the Jewish virtual sector.
7
To be sure, much research and popular wisdom have shown that technology is
dominated by young people.7 So, one could conclude that the significance of sites like
Myjewishliearning and Jewcy ought not to be a surprise, and that their prominence in these
measures shows liXle more than the fact that young people remain more adept at using the
internet than their older counterparts. This is true, but it remains only part of the overall story.
Equally as important is the fact that the internet is not going to recede or disappear; in all
likelihood it will conHnue to play a significant role in our lives, our culture and communiHes.
Although it currently favors the young, its importance is not an effect of age; the current
generaHon of people in their 20s and 30s will not “age out” of using the internet, and the
following generaHon will not necessarily supersede the current one in this regard. Therefore,
the internet is crucial for examining current communal dynamics that are likely to inform the
future, because of the prevalence of young people in shaping it.
This paper takes a systemaHc look at the Jewish virtual sector, as comprised primarily by
blogs and websites. Approaching the websites as nodes in a network, we will assess the
significance of each, and the role it plays in the overall network. Using the tools of social
network analysis, we will produce a different set of measurements of communal influence and
engagement than more tradiHonal explicaHons could.8 With these measurements as a kind of
baseline, we will map the relaHonships between websites, creaHng a detailed depicHon of
7 The Pew Research Center’s Internet and American Life Project rouHnely releases data about the gaps
(generaHonal, class, race, region and otherwise) in internet use. The most recent data sHll shows a significant lag in
people aged 65 and older, when compared to their younger counterparts, although it also shows that 79% of all
adults 18 years old and older are online.
8 I’m thinking here of the American Jewish CommiXee’s 2008 Primer on The American Jewish Community, which is,
essenHally, a field guide to establishment Jewish organizaHons. Jerome Chanes, A Primer on the American Jewish
Community (AJC, 2008) Available online <hXp://www.ajc.org/site/apps/nlnet/content3.aspx?
c=ijITI2PHKoG&b=843137&ct=1044883>
8
Jewish communal relaHons within the Jewish virtual sector. First, we will apply this analysis to
the 148 most popular Jewish websites. Then we will recalculate and recalibrate our
measurements to account for nearly 300 Jewish blogs. Finally, we will turn our aXenHon to two
local communiHes, Los Angeles and San Francisco, in an effort to account for differences of scale
in the virtual sector.
Methodology and Social Network Analysis
Insofar as this paper is concerned first and foremost with relaHonships between blogs
and websites across the Jewish virtual sector, it does not focus on the content of parHcular sites,
nor will it focus on audience size, beyond some basic consideraHons. It is not an examinaHon of
“best pracHces,” nor foes it explore how to opHmize search engine capabiliHes or generate
adverHsing revenue. Similarly, it does not focus on facebook, myspace or twiXer, as they
represent social networking pla|orms which operate by a whole host of other rules and logics
that fall beyond the scope of this paper.9 Instead, this paper examines the dynamics that shape
the Jewish virtual sector as a way to highlight the emergence of new loci of influence and
leadership within discussions and performances of Jewish communal life.
For the purposes of this project, I define a “Jewish website” or a “Jewish blog” as any site
that regularly contains overt Jewish content, targets a Jewish audience, and self‐idenHfies as
9 Facebook, MySpace and TwiXer are all certainly interesHng, and they are part of the overall online landscape of
influence, communicaHon and social networking. However, they do not operate online in ways similar to other
websites, and while they do play important roles in sharing links and so on, as unique technological pla|orms, they
fall outside the purview of this paper, though I welcome new research on those phenomena.
9
Jewish. More broadly considered, Jewish websites and blogs engage in a larger, evolving
conversaHon about Jewish issues. According to this definiHon, websites like Haaretz, Jdate, and
Jewlicious all count as Jewish websites, but the wikipedia entry on “Jews” does not. Neither is
Jewwatch, an anH‐semiHc site dedicated to tracking Jews and their influence (both real and
ficHonal). For the purposes of this study, Shamash, the self‐proclaimed “Jewish search engine”
is a Jewish website, but Google, even though it can find the most sites with informaHon about
Jews, is not.10
I disHnguish between websites and blogs, so a word about that disHncHon is important
here, too. Included in the study of websites are those that either represent or have come to
represent either an offline organizaHon or collecHve editorial perspecHve. In some cases, these
insHtuHons have walls, buildings and a professional staff. This includes the websites of the
Orthodox Union and the AnH‐DefamaHon League, as well as that of J‐Dub Records or the Union
for Reform Judaism. These websites serve largely as portals for connecHng an organizaHon with
its audience or membership, and they are important sites for distribuHng informaHon or
engaging in online debate. News outlets like JTA and Ha’aretz are included here, as well, and
although they oven have blogs embedded in their websites, I treat them as elements of the
larger website, not as stand‐alone blogs. I also include in this category the handful of group‐
authored blogs like Jewschool, Jewlicious and Jcarrot. Although they may have begun as
individual or group‐authored blogs and typically do not pay their writers for content, they
maintain a robust and regular presence, which makes them funcHon much like online magazines
or newspapers with which they are in conversaHon (and compeHHon). Thus, the operaHonal
10 A note on nomenclature: When referring to websites, I will be excluding the .com or .org suffixes throughout the
body of this paper, for the sake of readability. A full list of all websites included in this study, complete with their
suffixes, is included in Appendix A and Appendix B.
10
definiHon is that a website represents an enHty of some kind, even when that enHty is a loosely
organized editorial board.
Blogs, by contrast, are solo‐authored websites that reflect or represent the voice of a
single author, and in the study that follows, I treat them as a different category than websites
because they represent a different kind of relaHonship between an individual and his or her
Jewish community. They are cheap to maintain, because of free blogging pla|orms like blogger
or wordpress, and although some blogs sell adverHsing and generate a liXle income, most do
not. Typically, blogs have much smaller audiences than websites and most do not reach more
than a few people (This does not necessarily mean that they are not influenHal ‐‐ if read by the
“right” 5 people, a blog with only 5 readers could be quite powerful). Because of their small
readerships, blogs are more interesHng in their aggregate impact on the overall network than
they are on account of their individual content. As we will see below, accounHng for blogs
within the larger social network of Jewish websites reorients the enHre map of the virtual sector
and illuminates a different dimension of how influence is exerted across the enHre Jewish online
world.
In point of fact, the disHncHons between blogs and websites are parHally illusory, but
only partly. Both JTA and the Forward have embedded blogs in their websites, and bloggers use
Facebook and TwiXer for both personal and professional purposes. Indeed, one of the
remarkable aspects of the virtual sector is the flexibility and interpenetraHon of communicaHon
streams, and the fact that anyone can employ a blog, a TwiXer account or a website for any
purpose. Yet their differences are important and they inform the measures we use to quanHfy
the significance or influence of a parHcular website or blog.
11
Within the industry that has developed around calculaHng the significance of websites,
there is general agreement that popularity (as measured by total number of visitors) and “links
in” (links from other websites) are two of the most important measures of a site’s significance.
Because of the way the internet works, it is difficult to imagine either a site with high traffic and
low links or a site with low traffic and a high number of links. More influenHal sites aXract large
numbers of visitors, but perhaps more importantly, they are also connected to other sites. Links
both direct traffic and serve as indicators of reliable content, much like references in an
academic paper or a news source. According to one ov‐recited saying “links are the currency of
the internet.”11
Therefore, we focused on how websites and blogs connect to one another and facilitate
exchanges of informaHon and audience. Audience measurement services cannot calculate what
percentage of visitors are Jewish, so the difference in traffic between Haaretz (which aXracted
over 300,000 unique visitors in January, 2010) and Myjewishlearning (which drew only 81,000
during that same month) indicates general popularity, but not necessarily definiHve popularity
among Jewish visitors.12 Insofar as we are examining the internet as a venue for Jewish
communal engagement, turning our aXenHon to relaHonships among Jewish websites instead
of looking plainly at popularity will produce a richer picture of the dynamics of community that
are being acted out online.
11 This aphorism is repeated countless Hmes around the net as a pithy summary of how sites interact. One of the
best explanaHons I’ve read recently belongs to Pete Cashmore, the editor and founder of the social networking site
Mashable.com. The definiHon is embedded in an arHcle he wrote for CNN.com explaining his objecHons to the
New York Times announcement of a fee‐for‐service model for accessing its online content. See Cashmore “Why
the NYTimes.com Fee is a Step Back.” Posted January 21, 2010 <hXp://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/01/21/
cashmore.Hmes.payment/index.html> [accessed February 8, 2010]
12 <www.compete.com> [accessed February 5, 2010]
12
In calculaHng links, then, we counted only mutual links, which indicate the strongest
possible connecHon between two sites. The presence of a mutual link, in which site A links to
site B, and site B links back, indicates a reciprocal relaHonship between two sites in which each
thinks of the other as reliable or worthy of linking to. If site A links to site B, but site B does not
link back, then this indicates a weaker relaHonship than if that link is reciprocated. Any site can
embed a nearly infinite number of links out (links to other sites) with a minimum of effort.
However, the presence of large lists of links do not indicate much beyond the industriousness of
the creator of the list. Trying to account for the sheer number of “links out” or “links in” would
have produced a preponderance of interesHng data, but it would not have shed a whole lot of
light on the ways in which the dynamics between Jewish websites help us to understand those
of Jewish communal life more broadly considered.
We collected data on 148 websites and 257 blogs between May and November of 2009,
using a combinaHon of readily‐available online services and and custom‐authored script. In
terms of audience, we found the 99 most popular Jewish websites, according to traffic, and the
49 most popular Jewish websites that aXracted audiences between the ages of 21 and 35. We
determined both popularity and demographics through an aggregate analysis of exisHng
rankings from four well‐known sources: SEOmoz.com, Compete.com, Google pagerank, and
Alexa.com. Although each of the four sources provided different assessments of a site’s
significance, they all basically agreed on which sites comprised the top 99. To asses the top 49
sites that catered to audiences between the ages of 21 and 35, we examined reports by
Compete.com, Alexa.com, and SEOmoz.com, each of which provided a breakdown of audience
by age. The calculaHon of age is, at best, approximate, and obviously there is a great deal of
crossover between which people visit which sites.
13
This baseline measurement of popularity generated the list of 148 websites which
comprise the primary data set of the analysis that follows [see Appendix A for the list of 99
sites, and Appendix B for the list of 49]. We followed this with a deeper analysis of each site’s
links, extending five pages deep within each site. This provided us with a profile of each site
and idenHfied mutual links between each site and the other 147.
In this way, we created a kind of “closed network,” because we counted only mutual
links among the primary set of 148 sites. Although this kind of assessment goes against much
convenHonal wisdom when people talk about the power of the internet (that it can connect
disparate communiHes and opinions), we found it necessary to do so in order to focus on the
parHcular dynamics among Jewish websites. The map of the Jewish virtual sector produced
here depicts a closed community when, in truth, the network is far more porous.
In addiHon to the list of 148 websites, we generated the list of 257 blogs by following the
lisHngs included on two major Jewish blog aggregators: Jrants and Jewishblogging. Of the over
800 blogs listed on the aggregators, we included only those that had been updated within three
months of our invesHgaHon.13 We also pursued a snowball sampling method, following links
from within the blogs themselves to other blogs. Because the majority of blogs have very small
readerships, the measurement for inclusion could not be traffic, so we included all of the acHve
Jewish blogs we found. Part of the story here is the prevalence of blogs (parHcularly among the
Orthodox), so their sheer number is, itself, of significance. Moreover, they are not easily
categorized according to topic or viewpoint, and they are not exclusively the domain of either
13 Jewish blogs, like other blogs have a very low survival rate. The vast majority of blogs have a lifespan of less than
one month. Because they are free to maintain, they are rarely taken down, and most are simply abandoned by
their authors aver a few posts.
14
the old or the young. Thus, they represent a powerful and unique forum for expression and
potenHal organizing that is only made possible because of the internet.
Once we generated these two lists, we began a detailed and systemaHc social network
analysis of the relaHonships between these sites, in an effort to beXer understand the
relaHonships that emerge, and how they inform our understanding of influence, Jewish
leadership and the Jewish virtual sector.
An Overview of the Jewish Virtual Sector
From the outset, two items bear repeaHng. First, our primary data set for this project is
not a comprehensive ranking of popular websites from top to boXom. Traffic only maXers as a
baseline for inclusion here. It is not the ulHmate measurement of a site’s significance. Second,
the internet is dynamic, which means that links are constantly updated, added, deleted and
changed. The data presented here provide a snapshot of the Jewish virtual sector during 2009.
The analysis that follows is instrucHve but not definiHve, and if we were to analyze this same set
of sites in a year or two, the data might reveal an enHrely different set of relaHonships. Thus,
the trends and relaHonships observed and discussed here should be understood within the
larger framework of the broader, well‐documented changes that are reshaping Jewish
communiHes at the outset of the 21st century. Indeed, the relaHvely independent virtual
sector is only relaCvely independent, and it is sHll tethered to conversaHons in the public and
private sectors, as well.
Before we begin our in‐depth examinaHon of the relaHonships between the sites in the
Jewish virtual sector, we should sketch out its general contours and provide a basic map. This
overview will provide some essenHal informaHon that will guide our deeper discussion about
15
the influence of certain websites within the Jewish virtual sector, and what these findings can
tell us about insHtuHons, organizaHons, community, and leadership. The 148 sites can be
broken down into nine different affinity areas that represent various segments of Jewish life.
[see Figure 1].
Breakdown by Affinity Area
11% 6%
11%
9%
8%
6%
18%
18%
11%
Singles Blogs, Magazines Commerce Media Reference

Orthodox Service Organizations Museums, Schools News
Three important facts emerge from this first level of analysis. [For a list‐based breakdown of
these nine interest areas, see Appendix C] First, given the vast number of Jewish service
organizaHons, it should be no surprise that they account for a significant proporHon of the most
popular Jewish websites. By that measure, one could conclude that the virtual sector is but a
reflecHon of the public sector. However, the equally significant presence of reference sites ‐‐
the majority of which do not represent offline organizaHons or insHtuHons ‐‐ affirms the
16
significance of informaHon online. The prevalence of reference sites indicates that even at this
most basic level of analysis, the Jewish virtual sector reflects a broad desire for informaHon
from a variety of sources that compete with establishment organizaHons for the aXenHon of
audiences.
The second notable aspect of the affinity area breakdown is the presence of sites that
cater to the interests and needs of Orthodox Jews. In fact, the percentage of such sites is even
larger than the 11% calculated here because daHng sites like Frumster or Sawyouatsinai are
counted as “singles” sites, above even though they cater to more observant Jews. Likewise, the
majority of the commerce sites also likely serve a predominantly Orthodox audience. What
emerges from this assessment, then, is the growing prominence of the internet in Orthodox life.
Far from technophobic, we see here (and we will see again, below), that Orthodox Jews are
acHvely involved in the Jewish virtual sector and as such play a disproporHonately large role not
only in Jewish expression online, but in the overall shape of the network of Jewish websites.
The third finding speaks directly to quesHons of leadership and influence. TradiHonal
news outlets and group blogs or online magazines account for equivalent percentages of the
total. More importantly than their parallel presence, however, is the fact that the blogs/
magazines Hlt heavily toward a younger demographic. This is not to say that blogs are as
popular or powerful as tradiHonal news outlets; generally speaking, the two most popular
Jewish websites by far belong to the Jerusalem Post and Ha’aretz (with Jdate holding steady in
third place). However, the prominence and popularity of blogs/magazines among younger
readers indicate that younger visitors are likely to be visiHng them instead of or in addiHon to
tradiHonal news sources. Thus, these blogs and magazines not only represent an opening up of
alternaHve sources of informaHon, but they do so by aXracHng younger audiences.
17
Moreover, the prevalence of blogs and online magazines that cater to a younger
audience suggests that among younger Jews, blogs and online magazines are among the most
popular vehicles for mass expression and communicaHon. The blogs/magazines represent a
variety of voices and perspecHves. Some focus on humor, others on popular culture, and sHll
others on providing alternaHve news or commentary within the Jewish community. Some of
the blogs/magazines see themselves as a kind of free‐form op‐ed addendum to tradiHonal news
sources either through alternaHve reporHng or through parody and humor. Most offer a liXle of
everything. Significantly, over the past few years, they have also played a significant role in
breaking and exploring some important news stories including the MASA incident, the
Rubashkin’s scandal and revelaHons of sexual misconduct at Brooklyn yeshivot.
Clay Shirkey, in his book Here Comes Everybody explains that the low cost of starHng and
maintaining a website (as opposed to the relaHvely high start up costs for a newspaper or print
magazine), has made it possible for anyone to seek an audience online. 14 Within the Jewish
virtual sector, this situaHon has created an environment where a handful of group‐authored
blogs have successfully moved into important posiHons within the world of Jewish informaHon
sharing, and have become valuable sites for news, culture, and community on their own merit
(consider Jewlicious, which began as a blog and now hosts a large annual fesHval of Jewish
culture in Southern California). The rise of blogs and magazines with younger editorial boards
and younger audiences than tradiHonal news outlets reinforces the prominent ways in which
the Jewish virtual sector is changing the structure of Jewish communiHes by altering not only
14 Clay Shirkey, Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing without OrganizaCons (Penguin, 2009)
18
what “counts” as news, but by engaging an audiences that might otherwise not find their way to
more tradiHonal news sites.
CounHng websites provides some introductory data, but in order to understand them as
a network, we must map them in relaHon to one another. To do this, we will need to move from
a list to a sociogram, or a graphic representaHon of the network that is capable of accounHng
for each site in relaHon to every other site and idenHfying which sites are linked to one another
and which are not. Sociograms map networks of relaHonships, with each “ego” or “node” in the
network represented by a dot, and each relaHonship, mutual link, or “edge” represented by a
line. In our map, each node will represent a website, and each edge represents the mutual
links they share.
Using an energy‐repulsion algorithm, we generated a map that highlights two aspects of
the Jewish virtual sector. First, the size of a node indicates the number of mutual links it
possesses; the larger the node, the more mutual links it has. Second, the locaHon of the node
within the sociogram indicates the presence of common links among neighboring sites. We
generated this sociogram using the Fruchterman‐Reingold ‘physics model’ algorithm, which
operates according to the following principle: Imagine a general force that is trying to move
each of the nodes in figure X away from each of the others, as in models of the expanding
universe following the Big Bang. But, a secondary force (like a spring) is acHng between nodes
that share links in common, which works to counteract the general force pushing them all apart.
The dynamic tension between the general force of repulsion among all nodes and the specific
force of aXracHon among parHcular nodes eventually serves to create an equilibrium in the
network as a whole.
19
In order to understand the figures that follow, it is important to remember that specific
pairs of linked nodes cannot reach equilibrium on their own within a complex network because
of the other forces working upon them. Instead, they only reach equilibrium through a
clustering of linked nodes, whose mutually aXracHve forces work in combinaHon to stabilize the
network as a whole. Thus, sites that share a lot of common links appear close to one another
on the map, even if they may not share a mutual link (note: In order to present the enHre
sociogram here, the names of the sites must be reproduced so small as to make them
impossible to read. Not to worry, they will be discussed and presented again in greater detail,
shortly).
20
Figure 2: Sociogram of the Jewish Virtual Sector
21
A few general observaHons. First, the network is fairly small and very well‐connected.
The longest distance between two sites is only 4 links, and the average distance between two
sites is 1.93 links. That means that it is possible to traverse the enHre network in only four
“clicks,” and that most sites are less than two clicks away from most other sites. By the “six
degrees of separaHon” rule of thumb, the Jewish virtual sector is quite densely populated and
easily traversed. AddiHonally, this measurement does not include linked adverHsements that
one site might purchase on another. So, for example, though Chabad might adverHse on
Jewlicious, and thus allow visitors to click through directly from the laXer to the former, this
measure does not account for such opHons. This means that if we account for the prevalence of
adverHsements for other Jewish websites, the network is likely even more easily traversed than
the current measures suggest.
Second, the largest node, indicaHng the site with the most links in the network, belongs
to Myjewishlearning, a “trans‐denominaHonal” resource for informaHon about Jewish life,
sponsored by a number of foundaHons and philanthropies. Three qualiHes of Myjewishlearning
are important to the present discussion. First, it is a reference site, meaning that it does not
represent a communal organizaHon, nor does it have consHtuents, as such. Second, aXracts a
significant audience of Jews between 21 and 35, and it is the second most popular site for Jews
in this demographic, behind Jdate. Third, Myjewishlearning only exists online. It does not have
a paper‐based distribuHon system or a membership‐based organizaHonal structure, nor does it
rely on events or programs. Its young editorial staff and youthful approach to materials,
subjects, and presentaHon has made it one of the most well‐linked and heavily trafficked sites in
the network.
22
The other large nodes represent Shamash, a “Jewish search engine,” the
Jewishvirtuallibrary, which is supported by the American‐Israeli CooperaHve Enterprise and
claims to be “the most comprehensive online Jewish encyclopedia in the word,” and the
Israelnewsagency, an Israeli online news source. Like Myjewishlearning, none of these have
offline components and they all trade in informaHon, in one way or another. AddiHonally, these
sites are also clustered closely together in the sociogram, indicaHng that they share a lot of links
in common, even if they are not necessarily linked to one another. The locaHon of these four
almost equally‐sized and similarly posiHoned nodes within network indicates that the
disappearance of any one of these nodes would not impact the overall stability or cohesion of
the network all that much, as each of the others plays a similar role in the network as a whole.
From the standpoint of overall “health” of the network, measured by the chance that a
network could be crippled should a single node disappear, it appears to be relaHvely healthy.
Healthier networks are characterized not by the presence of a single, strongly linked node, but
by the presence of many nodes, which distribute power throughout the network.15 This
network does not have a single, dominant, central node, although it does feature a few that
claim significantly more links than the rest. This is a healthy quality in social networks because
it shows that the network will not collapse or be significantly handicapped if a single node
disappears. Although some sites play more influenHal roles than others, the network, overall,
benefits from the more‐or‐less even distribuHon of links throughout it. By this measure, the
Jewish virtual sector appears to be rather healthy and capable of responding to shivs within the
network.
15 The distribuHon of links around a network as the sign of a healthy network is well‐documented. See Albert‐
Laszlo Barbasi, Linked (Plume, 2003); Mark Buchanan, Nexus (Norton, 2003); Duncan WaXs, Small Worlds
(Princeton University Press ,2003).
23
Healthy as the network appears to be, it is worth noHng the central importance of
reference sites in the network. The four sites discussed above play a powerful role in organizing
the network. By sharing a large number of links with other sites, these four sites appear as
trusted references and they, in turn, reciprocate. More importantly, because links provide
visitors with a virtual roadmap for traversing the network, these sites are more likely than many
others to turn up when people explore the Jewish virtual sector. In this way, they exert far more
influence over the Jewish virtual sector than any communal insHtuHon, any tradiHonal news
source, or any representaHon of a religious body or community. Online, informaHon plays a key
role in convening community and it indicates that both visitors and other sites are seeking
reliable sources of informaHon about Jewish life.
Accoun7ng for Links (Not Just Coun7ng Links)
This becomes even more apparent when we measure how certain sites facilitate the
movement of visitors through the network. In other words, it is possible for a node in a
network to have a lot of links but not play a parHcularly acHve brokering role between other
nodes. So, we want to measure not only how many links a node has, but how many
relaHonships it enables. In the language of social network analysis, this is called “betweenness
centrality,” which describes the “capacity to broker contacts among other actors ‐‐ to extract
‘service charges’ and to isolate actors or prevent contacts.”16 In other words, betweenness is
not a gross measurement of the number of links, but it is an aXempt to account for the acHve
parHcipaHon of a parHcular node within the overall network.
16 This definiHon of betweenness is provided in the online version of Robert A Hannemanand Mark Riddle’s
IntroducCon to Social Network Methods. The specific quote is from this page <hXp://www.faculty.ucr.edu/
~hanneman/neXext/C10_Centrality.html#Freeman> [accessed February 5, 2010]
24
This measurement is important because of how people typically traverse the net by
“clicking through” one site to the next. If links are the currency of the internet and people “click
through” sites to move from one to the next, a site with high betweenness centrality plays a
valuable role in facilitaHng movement through the overall network. The results of these
calculaHons are presented in Table 1, which presents the top 10 sites with the highest
betweenness centrality scores. To keep this in perspecHve, these measurements do not capture
actual “click‐throughs” of website visitors, but instead, they calculate the number of possible
relaHonships that this node helps to broker.
Table 1: Betweenness Centrality
Rank Betweenness Site Name

Centrality
1 1317.231 Myjewishlearning.com
2 328.1 Shamash.org
3 302.784 Jewishvirtuallibrary.org
4 237.196 Jpost.com
5 231.13 Jewcy.com
6 167.507 Urj.org
7 163.053 IsraelnaHonalnews.com
8 161.52 Israelnewsagency.com
9 152.396 Headcoverings‐by‐devorah.com
10 137.067 Juf.org
The four sites represented by the large nodes in the first sociogram are all represented
here, but Myjewishlearning has a betweenness centrality score of approximately four Hmes as
large as Shamash. Myjewishlearning is far more acHve in brokering relaHonships and direcHng
25
traffic than its closest counterparts. In fact, JPost, Jewcy, and URJ (the website of the Union for
Reform Judaism) all outscore IsraelnaHonalnews, indicaHng that while it claims a significant
number of links, it actually plays a rather marginal role in the overall network.
Although Jpost may have more traffic than Myjewishlearning, the laXer occupies a more
central role in the Jewish virtual sector than the former and can be said to exert more influence
over the network. Correlated with its younger audience, Myjewishlearning emerges as a
powerful and influenHal website both within the Jewish virtual sector, and within the more
general audience of Jewish internet users because it is so well‐connected to other sites. As
such, Myjewishlearning occupies a prominent and powerful locaHon from which it can influence
the circulaHon of both informaHon and visitors across and through the Jewish virtual sector. It is
just one example of an endeavor that is leveraging the internet to supersede the ability of more
tradiHonal outlets to influence visitors and shape Jewish experiences online.
Perhaps even more importantly for the larger discussion of leadership and communal
structures online, Jewcy has a higher degree of betweenness centrality than every other
established news source except Jpost. Even with a much smaller audience than its more‐
established compeHtors, Jewcy is nearly as successful as Jpost at brokering relaHonships within
the Jewish virtual sector and thus exerts even greater influence within the network. Jewcy’s
high betweenness centrality means that it is both strongly embedded within the network and
that it exerts influence over the experience of visitors to it.
Taken together, Myjewishlearning and Jewcy, which have editorial staffs largely between
the ages of 21 and 40, and which cater to an audience from that same demographic, are
leveraging the internet to become powerful players in the Jewish virtual sector. The influence
they exert may or may not translate to sheer numbers of unique visitors, but it certainly
26
evidences that they are among the most significant websites in the online Jewish world,
outpacing tradiHonal news sources and establishment Jewish organizaHons. The
correspondence of youth and technology here indicate some of the ways in which the internet
is enabling new loci of influence and leadership to emerge.
Again, betweenness centrality does not calculate how visitors actually move from site to
site, but rather it measures the relaHve value of each node within the network in terms of their
ability to let visitors move from site to site. Taking stock of these ten sites reveals the clear
significance of informaHon‐brokering sites, which account for seven of the ten sites on the list.
Clearly, Jewish people and websites share a desire for reliable informaHon and they rely on
these reference sites to provide corroboraHng data or longer explanaHons of aspects of Jewish
history, culture, and poliHcs. These sites play a key role in the ways in which Jewish internet
users from all backgrounds engage with informaHon about Jewish life and learn how to be
Jewish.
As important as informaHon is in the shape of Jewish communiHes online, Jewish
communal organizaHons appear significantly less important and are represented here by only
two websites, represenHng the URJ and the JUF (Jewish United Fund/Jewish FederaHon of
Metropolitan Chicago). The relaHve weak showing of communal organizaHons illustrates a great
disparity between their ability to convene community online and off. Compared to news and
reference sources, establishment communal organizaHons hold very weak posiHons within the
Jewish virtual sector and thus lack the investment in online networks from which to either
influence or lead. CalculaHng betweenness centrality reveals the Jewish virtual sector’s
emphasis on informaHon and highlights the emergence of new loci of leadership and influence.
27
Yet, measuring betweenness only tells us how many short paths a parHcular node sits
on. It does not tell us if those paths connect otherwise important sites. If a site connects other
sites that are unpopular, then we might say that even though it has high betweenness centrality,
it is less significant than a site that connects other sites with greater “presHge.” When we
account not only for betweenness but for the presHge of the sites to which each node connects
(according to what social network analysis calls the Bonacich centrality measure), we find slight
adjustments in the boXom four of the top ten. JTA appears and Headcoverings‐by‐devorah
disappears, but liXle else changes.
Table 2: Bonacich Centrality Measure
Rank Bonacich Site Name

Centrality Measure
1 88 Myjewishlearning.com
2 61 Shamash.org
3 59 Jewishvirtuallibrary.org
4 50 Jpost.com
5 49 Jewcy.com
6 49 Israelnewsagency.com
7 45 Forward.com
8 43 Urj.org
9 39 Juf.org
10 38 Jta.org
Viewed through the lens of betweenness, we find a few sites with younger audiences
and editorial staffs asserHng a significant amount of influence by virtue of their ability to
28
leverage their posiHon within the Jewish virtual sector and compete with established news
outlets for influence not only over the structure of Jewish conversaHons, but over its content, as
well. The ability of a site like Myjewishlearning or Jewcy to leverage its posiHon in the network
and amplify certain voices within the broader Jewish community makes them both significant
and influenHal, and it evidences the ways in which the Jewish virtual sector reveals new
paXerns in community organizing and leadership. ParHcularly when we take into account the
very real possibility that many visitors to these two sites are younger and thus rather unlikely to
belong to synagogues or JCCs, these sites are posiHoned to exert significant influence not only
within the network online, but among their visitors, as well, visitors who live largely outside the
Jewish insHtuHonal world.17
Having mapped the Jewish virtual sector, we can see an image of American Jewish
leadership begin to come into focus. It is an image that includes outlets and individuals who
have not, historically, been close to centers of Jewish communal power. It is an image that
emphasizes the importance of informaHon in the ongoing conversaHons about Jewish
communiHes and Jewish life. It is an image that features younger Jews who not only direct the
flow of informaHon but generate it, as well. Finally, it is an image that runs counter to the more
convenHonal image of “The Jewish Community” as represented primarily by establishment
organizaHons.18 What emerges is a very densely connected network of websites, the most
17 The literature on Jews ages 20‐40 is now fairly substanHal. For some examples, see Steven M. Cohen and Ari Y
Kelman, Uncoupled: How our Singles are Reshaping Jewish Engagement. (ACBP, 2008). See also Pearl Beck, Ron
Miller and Jack Ukeles. Young Jewish Adults in the United States Today (AJC, 2006); Leonard Saxe. Tourists,
Travelers, and CiCzens: Jewish Engagement of Young Adults in Four Centers of North American Jewish Life.
(Steinhardt Social Research InsHtute. 2009).
18 Jerome Chanes, A Primer on the American Jewish Community (AJC, 2008) Available online <hXp://www.ajc.org/
site/apps/nlnet/content3.aspx?c=ijITI2PHKoG&b=843137&ct=1044883>
29
valuable of which, from the perspecHve of social network analysis, are not establishment
communal organizaHons but rather sites that trade primarily in informaHon.
Given the prominence of informaHon over communal service organizaHons online, it is
clear that the internet is not simply a reflecHon of Jewish life offline. Instead, it is a relaHvely
independent sphere of Jewish communal engagement and involvement. The preceding analysis
revealed the growth and development of a network of Jewish websites in which younger voices
compete and oven outperform tradiHonal organizaHons, where newer voices occupy central
posiHons within the overall landscape of Jewish websites, and where influence manifests in the
ability to contribute to and shape the direcHon of Jewish communal conversaHon.
Neighborhood Networks
Having laid out this overview of the network and its emerging loci of influence, we will
now turn our aXenHon to the ways in which the network is organized. Therefore, it is
instrucHve here to return to a brief discussion of the algorithms employed to produce the
sociogram in order to reveal further insights into the nodes, the links between them, and what
they tell us about the Jewish virtual sector. Because the Fruchterman‐Reingold algorithm uses
the existence of common links to create equilibrium among all nodes in the sociogram, it
necessarily produces certain groupings or “clusters” of websites, according to the presence of
common links. In order to emphasize the appearance of clustering, we employed another
30
algorithm which produced an even more densely‐connected map featuring two, not terribly
disHnct clusters [See Figure 3].19
Figure 3: Network Map With Clustering
This remapping reveals two clusters: one, in the upper lev‐hand corner, that caters largely to
the Orthodox, and another, spanning the middle, that does not. This clustering reenforces the
19 To produce this sociogram, we used the LinLog energy model.
31
earlier finding about the significance of Orthodox Jews in the Jewish virtual sector, while also
reflecHng offline social disHncHons between Orthodox and non‐Orthodox Jews. However, the
proximity of the two clusters suggests that these differences are more easily transgressed online
than off.
The other cluster, comprised of the rest of the sites (with a few far‐flung excepHons)
amass to comprise a large, densely connected cluster with JWA (The Jewish Womens’ Archive)
si•ng just to the right of the main cluster and Jewishagency just to the lev. Slight openings
emerge between the large mass in the middle and the two clusters immediately below it, but
they are so closely located to the main cluster that it hardly qualifies as independent.20
The failure of the clustering algorithm produce significant disHncHons reenforces the
earlier observaHon that the Jewish virtual sector is relaHvely small and well‐connected. So, in
order to observe any clustering at all, we must return to Figure 2 and take a closer look at the
emergence of a few subtle but nevertheless significant groupings. Strictly speaking, these are
not clusters, so instead, I will refer to them as “neighborhood networks,” a term that suggests
some similariHes between the sites but is not held to the same mathemaHcal standard as
clustering.
Figure 4 presents the overall map again, highlighHng clusters that will be discussed
below. Reading the map for neighborhood networks, we find five relaHvely disHnct clusters,
highlighHng the emergence of common links and thus, common interests.
20 This paXern of clustering reproduced when run through two different algorithms.
32
Figure 4: Neighborhood Networks within the Jewish Online Network
33
At the center of the Figure are the four large nodes represenHng the Reference SecHon.
The large, relaHvely dispersed cluster across the top of the sociogram consHtutes the Orthodox
Archipelago. On the far right sit two clusters that comprise the Start‐Up Sector, both of which
primarily include sites by and for Jews between the ages of 21 and 40. The upper cluster
includes three sites that are acHvely engaged in a Zionist conversaHon, while the lower cluster
features sites for which Israel features among a broader array of other issues. Below those
clusters lies the Establishment Bloc, which includes most of the sites belonging to communal
service organizaHons.
Not surprisingly, the center of the sociogram features the largest and therefore best
connected node, discussed earlier [Figure 5].
Figure 5: The Reference Sec7on
34
It is worth noHng that within the Reference SecHon, Shamash sits slightly further toward
the top of the sociogram, which suggests that it shares slightly more links with those sites that
fall within the broadly dispersed neighborhood network of sites that cater primarily to Orthodox
communiHes. [Figure 6] The relaHve posiHon of Shamash with respect to the Orthodox
Archipelago suggests that it shares more links with sites that serve a more religiously observant
audience and who might be less inclined to use one of the more popular search engines. Less
religiously observant users might not even know that Shamash exists.
Figure 6: The Orthodox Archipelago
35
These sites, which include news sources alongside daHng sites, reference sites, and commercial
portals, all evidence strong expressions of Jewish religious life. Thus, the sites tend to link with
one another, as visitors who would be interested in Vosizneias, a news service dedicated to
meeHng “the demanding needs of the Orthodox Jewish community,” might also be interested in
Oukosher, or any of the number of Orthodox daHng sites. The Orthodox Archipelago is not,
however, exclusively Orthodox, and it includes a balance of sites of interest to Jews of all ages.
In fact, a handful of sites in this region, including FrumsaHre and Bangitout, which are both
informed by an insider’s perspecHve on the religious world, are wriXen by and cater to younger
Jews. In terms of the overall shape and relaHons of the Jewish virtual sector, this large
neighborhood network indicates that the internet has become an important aspect of
contemporary Orthodox Jewish life (an observaHon that will become even more apparent when
we look at blogs, below).
In terms of influence, the sheer number of sites that cater to the needs and interests of
Orthodox Jews is worth our aXenHon. Although there is not a single site that dominates the
Orthodox Archipelago, collecHvely, they represent a significant presence within the Jewish
online network, and they draw on pracHcally every one of the nine affinity areas. The diversity
of these sites reveals a fairly robust array of choices for Orthodox Jews as they engage in a
shared conversaHon about contemporary Jewish life.
As will become clearer, below, the internet has become an important site for the
expression and exploraHon of Jewish life for Orthodox Jews. Because Orthodox Jews tend to be
deeply embedded in Jewish social networks offline, the preponderance of online sources that
cater to Orthodox Jews makes sense; people most interested in Jewish issues are more likely to
seek out Jewish websites. The Orthodox Archipelago is made of sites ‐‐ like Headcoverings‐by‐
36
devorah ‐‐ that cater almost exclusively to Orthodox Jews, whose needs are parHcular to their
Jewish interests, pracHces, and communiHes. The relaHvely small size of most of these nodes is
not of much consequence, as none seem to seek a posiHon of broad communal prominence as
much as they do to serve the parHcular needs of their communal niche. Thus, the Orthodox
Archipelago illustrates the prevalence of Orthodox Jews who have expanded their search
horizons to include the internet, which has become a powerful alternaHve to offline sources and
a new venue for sharing and discussing communal concerns.
The same is not quite true of the Establishment Bloc, which sits almost directly opposite
the sociogram from the Orthodox Archipelago. [Figure 7]
Figure 7: The Establishment Bloc
37
The Establishment Bloc includes leading cultural and educaHonal organizaHons like the 92nd
Street Y and Hillel, as well as the sites of important communal organizaHons like the American
Jewish CommiXee (AJC) and the website of the United Jewish CommuniHes (UJC, now
JewishfederaHons). Unlike the diversity of nodes that comprise the Orthodox Archipelago, the
Establishment Bloc is consHtuted primarily by educaHonal and communal service organizaHons.
The generally small size of the nodes in the Establishment Bloc indicate that these sites do not
share many mutual links with other sites in the network. However, the emergence of this
neighborhood network indicates that the sites represented here likely do share similar links
with one another, which means that the establishment organizaHons are, in some measure,
talking to one another but they are failing to establish sustaining mutual relaHonships with
other sites.
In other words, the emergence of this neighborhood network reveals high bonding
social capital (as in the case of Nextbook (now Tabletmag), which appears close to the 92Y
because they oven co‐sponsor programs), but weak bridging social capital as they are generally
not successful in establishing mutual links with sites across the larger network.21 Again, since
this study emphasizes the presence of mutual links, a site might provide lists of links as a
reference, but unless those links are reciprocated, they do not consHtute strong relaHonships
and thus would not enter into our calculaHons. The Establishment Bloc reveals the failure of
most communal organizaHons to establish the mutual links necessary for them to connect with
21 Robert Putnam. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (Putnam, 2001)
38
other websites and either contribute to or influence Jewish conversaHons and relaHonships in
this arena.
By way of comparison, if MyJewishLearning were to be deleted, it would impact but not
cripple the overall network, but if UJC (now JewishFederaHons.org) were to be deleted, it would
have almost no impact at all because it does not occupy a central place within the network. As
the internet conHnues to shape the structure and content of Jewish life, it enables the
emergence of new loci of leadership and challenges establishment organizaHons to develop
new strategies for being more influenHal online.
By contrast, the final neighborhood network, the Start‐up Sector, consists of two
different clusters, which are both comprised of sites that largely cater to and are oven authored
by Jews between the ages of 21 and 40. Neither of the sites in these two sub‐neighborhoods
has proven parHcualrly adept at leveraging its role in the network, either, although they do tend
to be beXer connected than their establishment counterparts. The primary disHncHon between
the two sub‐neighborhoods corresponds to the centrality of Israel in each organizaHon. The
first sub‐neighborhood includes sites that foreground a connecHon to Israel, while the second
sub‐neighborhood addresses Israel alongside a host of other contemporary Jewish issues.
The first sub‐neighborhood consists of three nodes represenHng very different enHHes,
though each represents an viewpoint in a shared conversaHon about Israel and Zionism.
39
Figure 8: The Start‐up Sector (Part 1)
These three organizaHons ‐‐ one long‐standing insHtuHon and two others established within the
past 10 years ‐‐ represent three different approaches to contemporary conversaHons about
Zionism. Jewlicious began as a blog and now hosts annual Jewish cultural fesHvals, Presentense
is an incubator for Jewish social entrepreneurs and the Jewishagency oversees MASA and
coordinates thousands of Israel trips for young Americans annually. Of these three, two are run
by younger Jews but all three sites appeal to an audience aged 40 and younger. AddiHonally, all
three of these organizaHons arHculate a strong Zionist sensibility and a connecHon to Israel, and
thus end up sharing many similar links which correspond to the emergence of this
neighborhood network.
By contrast, the other sub‐neighborhood in the Start‐up Sector includes many non‐
establishment organizaHons for whom Israel and Zionism are not primary concerns. [Figure 9]
40
Figure 9: The Start‐up Sector (Part 2)
The sites included here generally cater to younger audiences and represent a variety of efforts
to reinvigorate Jewish culture, primarily for American Jews. Both BirthrighHsrael and
Roicommunity serve Jews roughly between the ages of 18‐35. Likewise, Jdubrecords and
Heebmagazine both cater to a similar audiences of young Jews who are seeking alternaHve
routes of connecHon to Jewish life, culture, and community.
BirthrighHsrael, much like Jewishagency, centers around trips to Israel, but unlike its
counterpart, Birthrighisrael does not necessarily advocate for aliya (emmigraHon to Israel), nor
does it raise money for Israeli causes. In this way, BirthrighHsrael is more dedicated to
deepening connecHons between American Jews and Israel, not with helping American Jews
41
become Israelis, which differenHates it from Jewishagency and parHally explains its appearance
in this neighborhood network. As is the case with their neighboring cluster, what accounts for
the parHcular grouping is less a maXer of explicit poliHcs and more a maXer of shared
sensibility and audience, as evidenced by the links they share in common.
In terms of leadership, the emergence of this neighborhood network within the larger
virtual sector suggests that these sites are playing a role in culHvaHng a disHnctly youthful
Jewish presence with an emphasis on American Jews. And, like their counterparts in the
Establishment Bloc, they are beXer at culHvaHng a conversaHon among themselves than they
are at leveraging mutual links across the network. Nevertheless, the presence of this
neighborhood illustrates that younger Jewish writers and organizers are involved in larger
Jewish conversaHons, even as their bonding social capital holds them together.
Before concluding this discussion of the neighborhood networks that comprise the
Jewish virtual sector, it is important to highlight the presence of a grouping that does not
properly qualify as a cluster or a neighborhood, but is significant nevertheless, within this larger
analysis. Falling just to the right of the reference sites and running from top‐to‐boXom within
the map is a line of news and magazine sites, including nodes represenHng the Jerusalem Post,
Ha’aretz, the Forward, the Los Angeles Jewish Journal and Jewcy. Insofar as news sites are
consistently among the most highly trafficked sites in the Jewish virtual sector, they represent
influenHal sources of informaHon. The presence of Jewcy among these other news sources, all
of which have significant offline followings, reinforces the contenHon that the internet has
opened up opportuniHes for engagement in public discourse in ways that significantly weaken
the posiHons of tradiHonal media outlets. Certainly, Jewcy’s relaHvely large number of links,
high betweenness score, and presence in the stretch of nodes belonging to tradiHonal news
42
sources indicates that the news arena is making room for voices and audiences that would have
likely been excluded from the conversaHon prior to the advent of the internet.
The internet is changing the structure and content of Jewish communal life in some
significant ways, and examining Jewish websites as a network helps to highlight precisely how.
First, we find a more level playing field between new and old, establishment and non‐
establishment organizaHons. The MASA example is but a small one of how an establishment
organizaHon changed its communicaHons strategy in response to a vocal chorus of criHcism.
But the fact that some of the most influenHal sites in the network do not represent offline
organizaHons and the most powerful offline organizaHons tend to take less influenHal posiHons
within the Jewish virtual sector indicate that the Jewish virtual sector is revealing a new array of
dynamics of Jewish life. The prominence of Myjewishlearning, the emergence of Jewcy, the
sheer size of the Orthodox Archipelago and the relaHve marginality of the UJC (now
JewishfederaHons) illustrate that any conversaHon about “the Jewish community” must begin to
account for these new virtual realiHes.
Second, we have observed the prominence of informaHon and the influence wielded by
sites that broker informaHon. Whether news or reference sources, we found that sites that
focus on informaHon are among the best connected and most valuable to the overall network.
Insofar as the web excels at making informaHon widely and readily accessible, it should come as
no surprise that the Jewish virtual sector follows this paXern. However, what is striking here is
that these sites both provide informaHon to their visitors and shape the ways in which people
navigate between and among Jewish websites. In this way, the reference sites inform the
experience of their visitors by both providing informaHon and by direcHng the ways in which
43
people traverse the network. InformaHon, then, is more than mere facts; it literally shapes how
people engage in Jewish life online and off.
Third, the sociogram reveals that the majority of establishment organizaHons exert only
a modest force upon the overall network. Significant neither in terms of centrality or
betweenness, the majority of these nodes, represenHng the majority of establishment
organizaHons, comprise a rather marginal presence online. Though well‐funded and quite
powerful in the public sector, these organizaHons are failing to meet most Jews where they
virtually are and show only modest success at establishing relaHonships with other websites. In
this way, they are neither acHvely contribuHng to nor directly shaping the online dimension of
Jewish life.
As a venue for invesHgaHng the exerHon of leadership in Jewish communal maXers, the
network of Jewish websites reveals some emerging dynamics in the structure of American
Jewry. InformaHon plays a crucial role in the network, and sites that are emerging as facilitators
of informaHon are beXer posiHoned to lead and influence the network. The leading sites in this
conversaHon do not come from establishment organizaHons, and the Orthodox represent a
significant minority of Jewish websites in general. As a representaHon of the American Jewish
community, the online network captures a very different image in which there is no central
address, and within which leadership and influence are more diffuse, derive from a greater
diversity of sources and, ulHmately, take very different forms than they have in the past.
44
Accoun7ng for Blogs
Expanding the Jewish virtual sector to include blogs, the picture becomes both clearer
and murkier. The network described above accounts for 148 of the most popular Jewish
websites. AccounHng for some 279 addiHonal blogs will reveal some more significant trends
with respect to quesHons of community, innovaHon and influence online. Blogging technology
has made entering the Jewish communal conversaHon easy and nearly free; Jewcy, Jewschool,
and Jewlicious all began as blogs authored by one person or small groups of people, and each
has since grown into a significant source of informaHon for younger Jews. Moreover,
Blogging pla|orms like Wordpress or Blogger provide all of the hosHng, search‐engine
placement, and widgets that one could need in order to create a fairly robust and
comprehensive web‐presence without having to learn one line of programming code. Indeed,
blogs are so easy to start and so many blogs are created that something like 95% of all blogs are
essenHally abandoned.22
Most blogs come stocked with a ready‐made funcHon called a “blogroll,” where you can
easily post links (again, with no programming skills required) to other blogs. Blogger protocol
also holds that if blog “A” links to blog “B,” then blog “B” ought to return the favor and link back.
This changes the nature the network of blogs because they add so many mutually linked sites
into the formula without necessarily increasing the number of visitors in significant ways.
Nevertheless, as an oven unfiltered, varied and popular vehicle for personal expression, blogs
represent the voices of individuals who are moHvated enough to put their own thoughts online
for anyone to read. SHll more importantly, they are not just independent journals, but linked to
22 Douglas Quenqua. “Blogs Falling in an Empty Forest” New York Times June 5, 2009. <hXp://www.nyHmes.com/
2009/06/07/fashion/07blogs.html?_r=1> [accessed September 4, 2009]
45
other blogs, they become a loosely affiliated cacophony of voices. Moreover, because of the
“comments” feature and the protocol that bloggers respond to comments lev for them, blogs
are more than virtual soapboxes (although they are that, too), but they are oven opportuniHes
for connecHon and conversaHon within a larger social network.
Indeed, what is so interesHng about blogs and why they are included here is not that
they aXract very large audiences. Rather, in terms of social network analysis, blogs are useful
because they rely so heavily on mutual links, on comments, and on the contribuHons of
individuals, not organizaHons. For this reason, blogs represent a crucial aspect of the Jewish
online network not because they exemplify leadership in any tradiHonal sense nor because any
one blog has the ear of the “right” readers, but because they represent a network of
individuals. Traffic, again, is less important than the presence and value of links between sites
because those links represent relaHonships and those relaHonships comprise and traverse a
broad and varied populaHon of Jews. In other words, for this paper, blogs are more interesHng
in aggregate than individually.
Although it would be impossible to categorize most blogs because of their varied
content, what becomes clear aver surveying nearly 800 Jewish blogs (some defunct, some
acHve), is that many many writers either idenHfy as Orthodox Jews or indicate that they were
raised in Orthodox families. Some idenHfy themselves as having lev that community, while
others regularly post lengthy exegeses about torah porHons or poliHcs, the lives of single people
looking for partners or the daily lives of young mothers. Given the sheer dominance of
Orthodox bloggers over non‐orthodox bloggers in this arena, it appears that for Orthodox Jews,
blogging has become both a popular past Hme and a powerful vehicle for expressing dissent or
46
differenHaHon within that community, and their presence shadows the large dispersed network
of websites that cater to those same communiHes.
There are any number of reasons for the preponderance of Orthodox blogs. One might
be that a non‐Orthodox Jewish blogger might not idenHfy her blog as “Jewish” and post about
any number of issues, only some of which might be easily idenHfied as Jewish. IdenHfying one’s
blog as Jewish, indeed, orients it and its readership toward conversaHons that deal, primarily,
with Jewish issues. So, Orthodox bloggers, given their relaHvely deep investment in Jewish
issues might be more prepared than their non‐Orthodox counterparts, to engage primarily in
those conversaHons. In other words, this project might idenHfy more Orthodox bloggers
because more Orthodox bloggers idenHfy themselves and their blogs as Jewish.
Another reason might be that blogs provide an outlet for sharing stories and informaHon
outside the grasp of tradiHonal communal authority. For those quesHoning their relaHonship to
Orthodoxy or, the web might provide a safer space for doing so than within their synagogues,
families, or schools. Similarly, those who have lev the Orthodox world may use blogs as a way
to remain in contact with friends and family, but from a distance. Finally, within the orthodox
world, blogs might provide venues for discussing issues of concern that would be difficult to
raise within Orthodox communiHes. 23
Nevertheless, the sheer number of Orthodox blogs is worth noHng and accounHng for
them all dramaHcally shivs the overall map of the Jewish online network. Figure 10 presents
the overall network, mapped out according to the same algorithm used to produce the previous
sociogram, so as to emphasize the pull of common links. In order to highlight a few important
23 These are speculaHons as to the preponderance of Orthodox bloggers and addiHonal research into the writers
and their blogs would be necessary to properly account for this phenomenon.
47
dynamics, we have omiXed the names of the sites represented here.24 Blogs are represented in
light green and the websites appear in purple.
Figure 10: Blogs and Websites
24 To include the names of all of the websites and blogs would have made the map enHrely unreadable.
48
Overall, accounHng for blogs increases to 6 the greatest number of links between nodes
(it had been 4, when calculated for websites), and it increases the average distance between
nodes to 2.622 links (it had been 1.93). Thus, the presence of 279 addiHonal websites expands
the bounds of the Jewish virtual sector, but only slightly, maintaining its earlier characterizaHon
as a fairly well‐connected, easily traversed network.
The sociogram, even without the names of the sites, shows clearly that despite the
pronounced number of Jewish blogs and the sizable links accrued by a handful of blogs, the
map divides fairly neatly in half with the majority of websites on one side and blogs on the
other. Most blogs, while plenHful and certainly capable of generaHng lots of links, do not
generally garner the reciprocal aXenHon of Jewish websites, which limits their ability to exert
influence over the network as a whole.
Therefore, what makes blogs interesHng in this context is not their individual readerships
as much as it is their aggregate relaHonships, and this is made evident by how they reconfigure
the Jewish virtual sector as a whole. In order to highlight precisely how they do this, we will
take a closer look at the core of the sociogram to highlight some interesHng shivs in the balance
of power within the network. Figure 11 is a close‐up view of center of Figure 10 that captures
the contact zone between blogs and websites and features only a handful of site names (for
legibility’s sake).
49
Figure 11: Core of Blogs ‐ Websites Sociogram
We find some of the usual suspects, including MyJewishLearning and Jewishvirtuallibrary (both
located in the upper right‐hand quadrant of this close‐up). But we also find the websites
50
FrumsaHre, Frumster, Aish, IsraelnaHonalnews, and Jewcy, each of whom relocate to the center
of the sociogram because of the links they share with both websites and blogs. The majority of
these are sites with younger audiences and, with the excepHon of Aish, and IsraelnaHonalnews,
a younger editorial voice, as well. The blogs that emerge in this encounter represent a variety
of viewpoints, but significantly, the majority represented here are wriXen by Orthodox Jews,
which might parHally explain why and how they emerge as strongly as they do in this
reconfiguraHon of the Jewish virtual sector.
AccounHng for blogs reveals a significant shiv in the sociogram. Orthodox bloggers and
sites that cater to younger audiences emerge as both the most central to the network and as
the most highly‐connected sites. Nextbook (now Tabletmag), basically did not change sizes
once we account for blogs although it moved closer to the center of the network because of the
similariHes of the links that it shares with those of other blogs and websites. Likewise, Jewcy
expanded and relocated, dwarfing IsraelnaHonalnews and emerging as a central source of
connecHon within this expanded Jewish virtual sector. Meanwhile, nodes represenHng few
other sites, like FrumsaHre, expand dramaHcally and emerge as parHcularly influenHal in the
overall network.
The shivs evidenced here ‐‐ toward the young and the Orthodox ‐‐ indicate new loci of
power in Jewish life online. An outlet like Jewcy or Jewlicious (accidentally appearing in green
here) might be more prepared to share links with an Orthodox blog than Haaretz or the UJC
(now JewishfederaHons) would be. This difference in approach to sharing and building links
between websites and blogs boosts the prominence of those more willing to share links, while
those unwilling to do so diminish their own influence over the Jewish virtual sector as a whole.
51
CalculaHng for betweenness centrality affirms this trend. Table 3 lists the ten blogs and
websites with the highest betweenness centrality.
Table 3: Betweenness Centrality for Blogs and Websites 25
Rank Betweenness Centrality Site Name
1 117 Myjewishlearning.com
2 112 Cj‐hereHc.blogspot.com
3 101 FrumsaHre.net
4 100 Jpost.com
5 91 Jewcy.com
6 89 Forward.com
7 88 Jewishvirtuallibrary.org
8 85 Jewishjournal.com
9 77 agmk.blogspot.com
10 76 Haaretz.com
AccounHng for blogs considerably alters the Jewish virtual landscape as it favors those
who are willing to share links broadly. Myjewishlearning and Jewishvirtuallibrary retain their
strong posiHons within the network, as do Jewcy, Jpost and Haaretz. Yet, we also see the
emergence of two single‐authored blogs and one website, FrumsaHre, that is, essenHally a blog,
as well. Thus, we see three blogs emerge among the most significant nodes in the network and
the virtual dominance of informaHon‐sharing sites in the network as a whole. In terms of
25 CalculaHng for Bonacich Power reproduced this list almost exactly. The only change was that in the new
calculaHon, Haaretz drops off and is replaced by JTA. Otherwise, the rankings remain exactly the same.
52
brokering links, sites that trade in informaHon play a crucial role in the experience of Jewish
internet users who are drawn to the network of Jewish websites.
Perhaps the most notable development in this recalculaHon is the extraordinary
prominence of FrumsaHre, the website of one Heshy Fried, which apparently receives no
funding beyond what it makes in adverHsing (which, according to Mr. Fried, is not much). In
terms of betweenness, Fried is more important than every other website save Jewishjournal,
and including Jpost, Jewcy and Haaretz, and he brokers far more relaHonships than the websites
of any of the establishment Jewish organizaHons. Fried owes his success to his mixture of
Jewish insider knowledge and his ironic, humorous a•tude which allows him to aXract
aXenHon (and links) from the Orthodox world while simultaneously transcending it. Fried’s
influence derives from his locaHon on the margins of the Orthodox world and his ability and
desire to engage in conversaHons about current Jewish issues that intenHonally transgress the
offline boundaries that structure Jewish communiHes.
In an interview with Fried, who is both young and Orthodox, he explained that his
efforts with FrumsaHre are intended to engage the very large Orthodox audience in
conversaHons and debates over contemporary Jewish life. “Blogger is sHll a dirty word in some
Orthodox communiHes,” he said, adding that sites like his and like Failedmessiah are aXempts
to foster dialogue and transparency. Fried aXributed his success to two things. First, he talks
about things that Orthodox people are not “supposed” to talk about. He talks openly about sex,
about daHng, and about interfaith relaHonships. Second, he aXributes his success to his regular
inclusion of opposing viewpoints on his blog. “And I mean really opposing. I push people’s
buXons.” He explained, “When you go to Myjewishlearning, people are expecHng to find
[opposing views]. When you go to Aish, you’re not going to find it.” This strategy enables him
53
to host a dialogue between the religious, the non‐religious, and the ultra‐Orthodox in ways that
are rare in the offline world.26 Further, he explained that he is not interested in the
“Manischewitz Judaism” that he sees Jewcy and Heebmagazine peddling. “There’s only so
many Hmes you can talk about the hole in the sheet,” he says.
Fried’s betweenness centrality score indicate that he pracHces what he preaches, and it
evidences both his prominence within the overall network and his ability to create and sustain
mutual links with bloggers and websites. Indeed, much of his cache derives from his
connecHons to other bloggers; recall that FrumsaHre did not appear terribly central within the
Orthodox Archipelago.
If leadership can be measured at least parHally on one’s ability to exert influence within
one’s communal sphere, then the Jewish virtual sector is clearly being led by a chorus of
younger voices from both the Orthodox and non‐Orthodox worlds who are leading from outside
the established bases of communal power. For the ways in which they are building
relaHonships between sites, occupying posiHons in every neighborhood network, and for their
ability to bridge the gap between blogs and websites that comprise the Jewish virtual sector,
younger voices are leading their older, more established counterparts by virtually every
measure. They are making acHve inroads into every sector of Jewish life online, they are more
adept at establishing mutual links between blogs and websites, and they are more devly
leveraging the potenHal for community organizing online. The Jewish virtual sector, as a
relaHvely independent arena of Jewish communal engagement, is clearly taking shape around a
26 Interview with Heshy Fried. February 10, 2009.
54
younger cadre of leaders who are both contribuHng to and reconfiguring Jewish communal
conversaHons.
Two Local Case Studies
The preceding analysis of the Jewish virtual sector is instrucHve for what it reveals about
the significance of informaHon‐sharing and relaHonship‐building as qualiHes of influenHal
websites and blogs. AddiHonally, it demonstrates the ways in which the Jewish virtual sector
has enabled the emergence of new loci of influence from well beyond the Jewish public sector.
Examining the Jewish virtual sector at this scale assumes that websites like Jpost,
Myjewishlearning, Jewcy, and FrumsaHre all parHcipate in and shape a global exchange of
informaHon that is by, for, and largely concerning Jews. Therefore, these media play important
roles in both creaHng and maintaining a sense of parHcipaHon in a common community by
creaHng shared, albeit virtual experiences as well as a kind of virtual commons for Jewish
debate, discourse and conversaHon. In this way, the preceding assessment of the Jewish virtual
sector primarily focuses on a large and oven abstract noHon of Jewish collecHvity, oven called
“peoplehood.”
Yet, Jewish life is always lived locally. Regardless of mobility and reseXlement paXerns,
people can only live in one place at a Hme, and while the above analysis of the Jewish virtual
sector reveals some important dynamics in terms of leadership and influence on the level of
Jewish peoplehood, we cannot neglect the ways in which people build and live Jewish lives
locally. Internet use reflects these two scales, as well. People search for answers to quesHons
or buy books from Amazon, but they also use it to find restaurants, local services, movie Hmes,
synagogues, schools and so on. So, in order to beXer understand the role of the internet in the
55
actual Jewish communiHes in which people live, we will turn to two case studies: the Jewish
communiHes of Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area.
These two communiHes exhibit a few important qualiHes that make them well‐suited for
analysis within this larger conversaHon about influence, innovaHon and leadership. San
Francisco is one of the largest Jewish communiHes in the United States, and it has one of the
highest rates of inter‐faith families and some of the lowest rates of synagogue membership in
the country. Moreover, because of the presence of Silicon Valley, the Bay Area has the
reptuaHon of being an innovaHve, risk‐taking community that is only loosely bound by tradiHon.
Los Angeles, as the second largest Jewish community in the United States, provides
another rich site for analysis. Sarah Benor’s essay in this volume provides a deep qualitaHve
portrait of its organizaHons and relaHonships, and this analysis offers a different perspecHve on
that community in order to understand the relaHonship between online and offline organizing,
influence, and leadership. Comparing offline and online efforts will provide an important
addiHonal perspecHve on Benor’s ethnographic analysis.
To examine our two local communiHes, we gathered lists of local websites and applied
the same algorithms and formulae as we did to the data in the earlier part of the paper. The
sociogram of the San Francisco Bay Area appears in figure 12.
56
Figure 12: The San Francisco Bay Area
57
Unlike the fairly well‐distributed sociogram of the Jewish virtual sector depicted in
Figure 2, the Bay Area’s map resembles the spokes of a wheel radiaHng out from a central hub
that is more or less paXerned on the geographic layout of the community. Nodes represenHng
organizaHons in the East Bay largely sit to the right of the map, and organizaHons based in San
Francisco and the Peninsula sit to the lev. The large node in the upper lev belongs to BayJews,
a kind of bulleHn board that promotes itself as “your portal to Bay Area Jewish Life.” The size of
its node indicates that it has many of mutual links, although its locaHon shows that it shares
many more common links with East Bay sites than with those focused on San Francisco or the
Peninsula. In other words, BayJews has high degree centrality (lots of links), but significantly
lower betweenness centrality, as it plays a less significant role in brokering relaHonships
between sites across the network.
At the center of the sociogram we find two, overlapping nodes: One represenHng the
San Francisco Jewish Community FoundaHon (SFJCF) and the other, Jewishsf (now Jweekly)
represenHng the “J,” the Jewish newspaper of Northern California. The node represenHng SFJCF
dwarfs that of Jewishsf, indicaHng a departure from the earlier paXern that emphasized
informaHon‐brokering sites in the network. This paXern reappears in the sociogram of Los
Angeles and suggests that the relaHonship between Jewish communiHes and informaHon
depends on the scale of the community in quesHon. Although sites that present informaHon
about holidays or the history prove influenHal in a general sense, they play a more marginal role
in the local funcHoning of a parHcular community.
The dominance of SFJCF in the network indicates another significant difference between
global and local mappings, as well. In this context, it appears that the SFJCF wields a powerful
place online, as the site with the greatest number of links, the highest degree centrality and the
58
highest betweenness centrality. Yet, in such a highly centralized network, the network itself is
actually weakened because it is too reliant on this single node to broker relaHonships. Indeed,
were we to remove this site from the sociogram, the network would be deeply compromised,
and the coordinaHon of informaHon within the network would become far more difficult.
Without the brokering role of SFJCF, links between the organizaHons of the East Bay, San
Francisco and the Peninsula would become quite strained. Though this speaks to the centrality
of the SFJCF website, it also indicates the overall weakness of the network as a whole.
Healthier, more balanced networks are typically more diffuse, featuring a number of well‐
connected sites which do not rely on a single hub to sustain the enHre network.
The sociogram of the San Francisco Bay Area therefore reveals a rather old‐fashioned
distribuHon of local power and leadership, one that is highly centralized among an otherwise
weakly connected populaHon. This raises significant quesHons about the nature and style of
leadership and influence exerted in this context. The SFJCF is poised to lead and lead strongly,
but there is liXle evidence that it is successful here in building coaliHons among consHtuents or
relaHonships among communiHes, as illustrated by the relaHve paucity of mutual links between
synagogues, JCCs, museums and other local agencies.
It is possible to read this sociogram as a funcHon of the Bay Area’s demographic profile,
which features a large but fairly disconnected Jewish populaHon.27 However, the sociogram
does not map individuals, but the websites of organizaHons who are, by definiHon, commiXed
to building Jewish life. If the most commiXed organizaHons are represented here, and they
appear as relaHvely weakly linked, then the actual offline populaHon of Jews might be even
27 Bruce Phillips. 2004 Jewish Community Study. (Jewish Community FederaHon of San Francisco, 2004)
59
more weakly connected to one another. In this way, the centrality of the SFJCF is not an
indicaHon of overall communal health, but rather, perhaps, just the opposite.
Los Angeles, by comparison, looks quite different. [Figure 13]
Figure 13: Los Angeles
60
The online network of Jewish Los Angeles appears to be more evenly distributed and not
dominated by a single node. Though, like San Francisco, the map is roughly radial, unlike its
neighbor to the north, Los Angeles is not dominated by a single node. Rather, the center is
occupied by a number of nodes, none of which can claim a majority of sites.
Before focusing on the center, though, we will turn to some clusters, which, owing to the
size of the overall map, emerge with some clarity. Across the upper right‐hand corner are a
string of nodes represenHng organizaHons that cater primarily, but not exclusively to Los
Angeles’ younger Persian Jewish community: Nessah, 30yearsaver, and Ledorvador. [Figure 12]
Figure 12: Cluster of Sites Catering to Persian Jews
It makes sense that the nodes represenHng organizaHons that cater to young Persian
Jews would all appear in a cluster, owing to the greater likelihood of their common interests and
the presence of other links in common. In addiHon, it is worth noHng the presence of
Jconnectla nearby, which is due, in part to a number of co‐sponsored events during the spring
of 2009 and the increased likelihood of common Hes.
61
The same dynamics of co‐sponsorship common interests informed the emergence of a
small cluster of nodes to the lower lev of the center, which represent organizaHons that feature,
as well, in Benor’s paper, highlighted in Figure 13.
Figure 13: Non‐Establishment Los Angeles
These clustered organizaHons share similar visions of their roles within the social and
generaHonal landscape of Los Angeles, and they represent some of the most acHve and
interesHng organizing efforts by and for younger Jews in the area. The largest node of these
four belongs to the Progressive Jewish Alliance, which, while not the oldest, is clearly the most
successful of these organizaHons at building relaHonships, as evidenced by the presence of
mutual links, between itself and other Los Angeles‐based organizaHons. The presence of the
110 year‐old Workman’s Circle (Circlesocal) in this group can be explained both by its generally
progressive poliHcal commitments, which ally it with PJA, and also by its relaHonship to the
shHbl minyan, an independent minyan that meets at the Workman’s Circle building. ShHbl’s
62
node lies lies further toward the margin of the sociogram, close to that of Ikar, another
“spiritual community” that aXracts some of the same demographic as PJA and Reboot.
Turning to the center of the sociogram, we find a diverse collecHon of sites, none of
which predominate either in terms of either centrality or links.
Figure 14: Los Angeles Central Sociogram
A quick look at the center of the sociogram reveals a few larger nodes belonging to one locally‐
based philanthropy (righteouspersons), Uclahillel, and JewishfoundaHonla, the city’s central
Jewish philanthropic organizaHon. Also present is Jewishjournal, which plays a central role in
the larger network of blogs and websites, but plays a much smaller role, here, suggesHng that
much of its local influence is exerted through its weekly published newspaper, and that the
newspaper focuses is online efforts at parHcipaHng in a much larger Jewish conversaHon.
63
In order to reveal differences among the roles these sites play, we can apply the same
measurements to this set of nodes as we did earlier [See Table 4].
Table 4: Betweenness Centrality in Los Angeles
Rank Betweenness Centrality Site Name
1 1015.25 jconnectla.com
2 806.234 30yearsaver.org
3 714.231 righteouspersons.org
4 712.231 laguardians.org
5 696.677 jdubrecords.org
6 686.779 jewlicious.com
7 668.992 jewishfoundaHonla.org
8 471.978 jewishla.org
9 469.024 16hazon.org
10 456.301 jcpsocal.org
CalculaHng for betweenness centrality reveals the centrality of jconnectla and
30yearsaver, who, despite their marginal presence in the sociogram, occupy important roles in
brokering relaHonships in the network. We also find Jewishla, the website of the Jewish
FederaHon of Greater Los Angeles, and Jewlicious, which emerged as an influenHal site in our
earlier discussion and also evidences a strong connecHon to Southern California. Jconnectla, a
relaHvely new organizaHon that caters mainly to Jews between 21 and 35 years old, echoes our
earlier findings that sites represenHng non‐establishment organizaHons have been much more
successful at leveraging their posiHon online than establishment organizaHons. Indeed, on its
64
website, Jconnectla expresses exactly this sensibility to community building. As the self‐
described “premier Jewish experience organizaHon for young professionals in Los Angeles,” the
organizaHon also emphasizes its independence, boasHng that it is “an independent, grass‐roots
organizaHon, not affiliated with any movement or parent organizaHons.”28 The absence of
affiliaHon or “parent organizaHons” seems to empower Jconnectla to establish relaHonships
across social differences, much like we observed earlier with respect to FrumsaHre and other,
similar sites.
However, if we look at Bonacich Centrality, we find a slightly different arrangement of
sites.
Figure 5: Bonacich Centrality
Rank Bonacich Centrality Site Name
1 19 righteouspersons.org
2 14 pjalliance.org
3 14 uclahillel.org
4 11 jconnectla.org
5 11 30yearsaver.org
6 10 birthrighHsrael.com
7 10 jdubrecords.org
8 8 jewishjusHce.org
9 8 jewlicious.com
10 8 yiddishkaytla.org
28 Site
65
When we calculate which sites are connected to others with high presHge, Righteouspersons
emerges as the most significant and influenHal site in Jewish Los Angeles. As the website of a
powerful foundaHon, it makes a certain amount of sense that Righteouspersons not only has
high betweenness, but that it is connected to other sites with high presHge. Though hardly a
start‐up, righteouspersons supports a few of the organizaHons represented in this sociogram,
including Jdubrecords and Reboot. More importantly for the quesHon of influence and
leadership, this recalculaHon finds both Jewishla and JewishfoundaHonla ‐‐ the nodes
represenHng the city’s most established communal organizaHons ‐‐ missing.
What appears is a lisHng of centrally influenHal sites that consists almost exclusively of
sites that represent organizaHons that are either run by or cater to Jews between the ages of 21
and 35.
This speaks volumes about the ways in which the internet is changing the definiHons,
dimensions and arHculaHons of influence in the larger Jewish world on the local level. The Los
Angeles sociogram reveals a diffuse and stable network that is being led by a handful of
organizaHons that are led by and cater to younger Jews. CalculaHng for centrality reveals the
powerful role of non‐establishment organizaHons in creaHng a well‐connected and stable
network that manages to cross social boundaries that oven divide ethnic and religious
communiHes from one another. In comparison to San Francisco, where the sociogram was
dominated by a single node represenHng an establishment organizaHon, Los Angeles reveals the
vital power of non‐establishment organizaHons to build healthier, more diverse Jewish
communiHes both online and off.
Taking a closer look at these two local community studies both reaffirms and refines
what we observed in the study of the Jewish virtual sector more generally. Most significantly,
66
we find that online, older models of leadership, such as that revealed by the San Francisco Bay
Area sociogram, are not effecHvely fostering healthy online networks. And as the analysis of Los
Angeles revealed, these new models of influence, leadership, and community building are being
driven in large measure by organizaHons that are led by or cater to younger Jews. As illustrated
by the difference between Myjewishlearning and UJC, or by the differnce between
Righteouspersons and Jewishla, this reenforces our earlier finding that non‐establishment
organizaHons are more devly able to mobilize mutual links on the internet than their
establishment counterparts.
Looking locally, we also find that news sources, like Jewishjournal and Jewishsf, play less
significant roles than they do at a larger scale. This may be due to the fact that many people
sHll subscribe to the paper versions of their local Jewish newspapers and thus render the
newspaper’s online presence somewhat redundant. AlternaHvely, this discrepancy may reveal
that people are looking for different things locally than they are naHonally. In fact, what we
might be observing here are the ways in which concepHons and pracHces of Jewish life differ
quite dramaHcally when accounHng for scale. Moreover, these differences point to the ways in
which Jewish life online is connected to Jewish life offline, and vice versa.
Conclusion
These differences notwithstanding, disHncHons between offline and online experience,
between “virtual” and “real” community, poliHcs, leadership, and influence is becoming
increasingly less and less clear. Even as “social networking” becomes entrenched in the
vocabulary and pracHce of communal organizaHons, the internet is not replacing buildings,
67
gatherings, or face‐to‐face interacHons. This paper is a first aXempt to assess the role of the
internet in Jewish life by paying parHcular aXenHon to the ways in which Jewish websites and
blogs capture the changing landscape of communal Jewish life, enable new organizaHons and
new dynamics of communicaHon to emerge, and chart the emergence of new loci of influence.
Yet, websites, blogs and sociograms only maXer if they help us understand shiving
landscape of contemporary Jewish life. This essay argues that they do. The blogs and
newspapers that ulHmately forced MASA to rethink its public relaHons strategy exerted
influence over a large, establishment organizaHon. Because of its strategy of invesHng in mutual
links, Myjewishlearning exerts influence over the Jewish virtual sector, and once we account for
blogs, it appears that FrumsaHre does the same. In Los Angeles, Jconnectla works on a similar
principle and, as a result youthful organizaHons dominate the virtual sector. Each of these cases
represents one way in which websites that are authored by or cater to a younger audience are
pu•ng themselves into influenHal posiHons within the online network that represents the
Jewish community.
Part of what makes Myjewishlearning, Jewcy, Jewlicious, FrumsaHre and Jconnectla so
influenHal in this analysis is their respecHve abiliHes to culHvate mutual links that cross social
disHncHons and in this way, build relaHonships that circumvent some of the older poliHcal
disHncHons (though someHmes creaHng others). Working largely outside the establishment
Jewish organizaHons (though someHmes funded by them), the websites of these organizaHons
(and Mr. Fried) prove far more capable at creaHng and sustaining mutual links than their
establishment counterparts.
This dynamic was brought into sharp relief by the comparison of the San Francisco and
Los Angeles sociograms. San Francisco, dominated by the SFJCF, presented a strongly
68
centralized but weakly connected network in which non‐establishment organizaHons played a
marginal role. Los Angeles, by contrast revealed a well‐connected and diffuse network in which
sites represenHng non‐establishment organizaHons emerged as the most significant and
influenHal presences in the network.
In this way, what we observe the creaHon of new spaces for expressions Jewish
communal life. But more importantly, we can understand that the internet is modeling a
different kind of communal structure, one that is decentralized, mulH‐dimensional, diverse, and
in which mutual relaHonships bespeak not only one’s ability to lead, but a different sensibility
toward what consHtutes community. Blogs are but a manifestaHon of this larger tendency, and
how their introducHon reshapes the Jewish virtual sector is crucial here not only because they
readjust the overall structure of the Jewish virtual sector, but because they also emphasize non‐
establishment sites. These uncoordinated relaHonships make for a more healthy, more
decentralized network, and the uncoordinaHon is part of what lends the network its overall
dynamism. This is a crucial factor in the emergence of new leadership within it.
Whereas the “Jewish community” used to be shorthand for the organizaHons that
claimed to represent the concerns and needs of Jews, the map of the Jewish internet landscape
clearly captures a much more variegated and diverse community, sustained across social
divisions. The internet has given both younger and more marginal voices a pla|orm for
speaking, broadcasHng, organizing, and creaHng their own communiHes while sHll parHcipaHng
in larger communal conversaHons. The emergence of online technologies has opened up the
possibiliHes for new forms and formulaHons of leadership, and these voices are spurring the
Jewish virtual sector to vie for prominence alongside its public and private counterparts. The
69
leaders are those who have most successfully leveraged this new technology and who, more
importantly, acHvate their social networks both online and off.

70
APPENDIX A:
Top 99 Jewish Websites by Traffic (in alphabe7cal order)
adl.org holocaust‐history.org jnf.org oukosher.org
ahuva.com holocaustresearchproject.org jpost.com remember.org
aipac.org huc.edu jrants.com seraphicpress.com
aish.com huji.ac.il jsingles.com shamash.org
ajc.org iranjewish.com jta.org shemayisrael.co.il
ajudaica.com israelnaHonalnews.com j|.org shlager.net
ajws.org israelnewsagency.com jtsa.edu shmais.com
akhlah.com jbooks.com judaicawebstore.com templeinsHtute.org
anshe.org jccmanhaXan.org judaism.com thejc.com
artscroll.com jccsf.org juf.org thejewishmuseum.org
askmoses.com jcpa.org jwa.org thejewishweek.com
babaganewz.com jewfaq.org k12.il torah.org
beingjewish.org Jewishagency.org kashrut.com torahmedia.com
chabad.org jewishaz.com kkl.org.il tzadik.com
cjh.org Jewishblogging.com kosher.com ujc.org
cjnews.com Jewishencyclopedia.com kosherdelight.com urj.org
crownheights.info jewishfamily.com luach.org uscj.org
debka.com jewishgen.org maven.co.il ushmm.org
feldheim.com jewishjournal.com mechon‐mamre.org virtualjerusalem.com
Forward.com jewishmag.com my‐hebrew‐name.com vosizneias.com
haaretz.com jewishpress.com nmajh.org wiesenthal.org
hareshima.com jewishrecipes.org ohr.edu yadvashem.org
hebcal.com Jewishsovware.com oorah.org ynetnews.com
hebrewbooks.org jewishvirtuallibrary.org ort.org
hebrewsongs.com jewishworldreview.com ou.org
71
APPENDIX B
Top 49 Jewish Websites with significant audiences between ages 21‐35
by Traffic (in alphabe7cal order)
92y.org jewishclub.com
aHme.org jewishfirendfinder.com
bangitout.com jewlicious.com
bbyo.org jewssip.com
birthrighHsrael.com jewssip.com
brandeis.edu jewtube.com
calmkallahs.com jlove.com
chossonandkallah.com jpeoplemeet.com
frumchat.com jvoices.com
frumsaHre.net mostlymusic.com
frumster.com myjewishlearning.com
g‐dcast.com ncsy.org
geshercity.org nextbook.org
headcoverings‐by‐devorah.com nvy.org
hebrewcollege.edu presentense.org
heebmagazine.com roicommunity.org
hillel.org sawyouatsinai.com
israel‐music.com shabot6000
israelfree.com theknish.com
isreallycool.com theyeshivaworld.com
jcarrot.org tznius.com
jdate.com usy.org
jdubrecords.org wejew.com
jewcy.com yu.edu
jewishcafe.com
72
Appendix C: Sector Breakdown of Websites
News Singles Blogs, Magazines

jpost.com jdate.com theyeshivaworld.com
haaretz.com jpeoplemeet.com jewcy.com
jewishworldreview.com frumster.com bangitout.com
ynetnews.com jewishfriendfinder.com Jewlicious.com
israelnaHonalnews.com jewishcafe.com nextbook.org
debka.com sawyouatsinai.com heebmagazine.com
jta.org jsingles.com seraphicpress.com
jewishjournal.com jewishclub.com Jewishblogging.com
Forward.com jlove.com frumsaHre.net
vosizneias.com jewschool.com
jewishmag.com jewssip.com
thejewishweek.com jbooks.com
jewishaz.com jrants.com
israelnewsagency.com jcarrot.org
jewishpress.com jvoices.com
thejc.com theknish.com
cjnews.com babaganewz.com
73
Appendix C: Sector Breakdown of Websites
Orthodox Service Organiza7ons Museums, Schools

aish.com adl.org ushmm.org
chabad.org jewishgen.org brandeis.edu
ou.org urj.org yu.edu
torah.org ujc.org 92Y.org
crownheights.info uscj.org yadvashem.org
oukosher.org hillel.org thejewishmuseum.org
akhlah.com ort.org jtsa.edu
ohr.edu birthrighHsrael.com jccmanhaXan.org
shmais.com jnf.org huc.edu
shemayisrael.co.il juf.org jccsf.org
oorah.org Jewishagency.org cjh.org
torahmedia.com ajws.org nmajh.org
anshe.org ajc.org huji.ac.il
frumchat.com israelfree.com hebrewcollege.edu
aHme.org j|.org
calmkallahs.com aipac.org
bbyo.org
nvy.org
usy.org
wiesenthal.org
ncsy.org
jcpa.org
kkl.org.il
iranjewish.com
geshercity.org
roicommunity.org
presentense.org
74

The Reality of The Virtual: Looking For Jewish Leadership Online

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

The Reality of The Virtual: Looking For Jewish Leadership Online

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

The Reality of the Virtual: Looking for Jewish Leadership Online

The Reality of the

Looking for Jewish

Singles Blogs, Magazines Commerce Media Reference

Rank Betweenness Site Name

Rank Bonacich Site Name

Rank Betweenness Centrality Site Name

Rank Betweenness Centrality Site Name

Rank Bonacich Centrality Site Name

News Singles Blogs, Magazines

Orthodox Service Organiza7ons Museums, Schools

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi