Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Introduction
Social network analysis seeks to trace the flow of information that passes through a
network of relations. As actors make use of computer networks the computing
networks are “clear indicators of communication structures within society” (Garrido
& Halavais, 2003). Garrido and Halavais argue, “A map of the communication
network is roughly isomorphic to the structure of the relationships among the users
(2003).” Creating a Website or blog, the blogger ties their own efforts to those with
similar interests using hyperlinks. Designing and placing a hyperlink is an act that
requires a certain level of hypertext mark-up language (html) knowledge and as
Adamic and Adar (2001) state, a form of cognitive, social or structural connection
between the blogs. Jackson (1997) and Kling (2000, cited in Garrido & Halavais,
2003) indicate, “Hyperlinks represent reasonable approximations of social
relationships.” I have targeted blogs using hyperlink network analysis uncovering the
keyplayers of the Singapore blogs with higher levels of ‘closeness centrality’ and
‘betweenness centrality’ (de Nooy et al., 2005) to assess which blogs are more
‘important’ to the flow of information. A blogs position indicates whether it has
access to information and better opportunities to spread information.
Deleuze and Guattari (2004) present us with a model of knowledge and perception
known as rhizome. The rhizomatic model of knowledge according to Cavanagh
(2007:43) results in a network model that appears to be chaotic. The rhizomatic
network works on the principles that any point in the network can be and is connected
to every other point in the network. The logic of the connection in the rhizomatic
network is movement. A connection is the sprouting off in a new line. The lines may
appear to be random as they do in hyperlink analysis but they do have a purpose.
Hyperlinked culture has as its main aim ‘intertextual evolution’ (Dreyfus, 2001)
whereby all possible associations and linkage is enabled regardless of how tenuous
they may appear. Resulting in a disordered knowledge and enabling a new form of
knowledge to emerge. The main point with Deleuze and Guattari’s rhizomatic
network is that there is no hierarchy; no node takes precedence over another. The
order is in constant flux with total inclusiveness. The flow of information however
pre-dates the existence of the nodes. The nodes are interruptions in the flow. The
nodes merely channel the flow of information. Cavanagh (2007:47) argues that the
main concern regarding the utility of Deleuze and Guattari’s rhizomatic network is
that it is a philosophical position rather than a method for studying hyperlinks. In
Deleuzian terms, the Internet itself is the node in the flow of information and
knowledge exchange.
Knox et al. (2006) argue that American Social network methods map roles
comprehensibly and this results in the incorrect assumption that they have delineated
the ‘real’ social structures. Although it provides a counter measure to the
encroachment of rational choice theory in American social sciences the problem is
that it ends up reinforcing a view of relations that are very far removed from the
everyday experiences of people. Knox et al. argue that Social Network Analysis’
focus on structuralism has in recent years shifted to attempts at developing a cultural
approach. This shift in focus has come about because of the study of social
movements by researchers such as Ansell (1997), Bearman (1995), Gould (1995), and
Mische (2003). For Knox et al. the problem is that other methods of social research
are either quantitative or qualitative. The network produces a unique situation unlike
the graphs, charts and diagrams of statistical data. The network according to Knox et
al. results in a position because of its use as a method, metaphor and form, of being
the sign and the signifier, the referent and the representation. This they argue opens up
potential benefits and new horizons but is also potentially dangerous. Similar to Knox
et al. (2006) I will arbitrarily add the anthropological or ethnographic approach to the
structural approach of American Social Network Analysis. I intend to conduct a two-
tiered approach in the hope that it sheds light on the methodological issues raised in
doing so.
I chose the Singapore blogosphere as a case study as it is, according to others (Lin et
al, 2006 and Hurst 2006), an isolated and distinct network. In adherence with Nadel
(cited Cavanagh, 2007) the important factor is to not to arbitrarily demarcate a unit of
analysis to study. By reducing the social to the network, it allows for the unit of
analysis studied to materialise throughout the process of conducting the research. The
network will be discovered using empirical evidence rather than imposed by the
researcher at the beginning.
relational data is network analyses that are qualitative measures of network structures.
Emphasis is on the ‘structure’ of social action. “Structures are built from relations”
(Scott, 2000:4). Social meaning constructed by the group members of the network
based on the perceptions and experiences of the context in which they are operating.
Paths of connections run between the groups and these paths divide the groups into
distinct regions. Lack of paths separates regions from each other (Scott, 2000:11).
Paths run within the regions but not between the regions. These regions are
constraints or boundaries. These boundaries are the ‘forces’ that determine group
behaviour.
American Social Network Analysis on the other hand prefers to work with the concept
of the ‘network’ as a geographical metaphor instead of a structural metaphor. Garrido
and Halavais (2003) argue that, “A map of the communication network is roughly
isomorphic to the structure of the relationships among the users.” Emphasis is on the
communicative aspect of the network therefore seeing the ties as facilitators and not
constraints or boundaries. The communicative basis of the network leads to the
erosion of the distinction between organisational networks and interpersonal ones
(Scott, 2000:33-36). It is more concerned with ‘intensity’ and ‘strength’ not
‘reciprocity’ and ‘durability’. The focus is on a form of social capital that facilitates
action while at the same time arguing that individual components retain their pre-
existing identities (Cavanagh, 2007).
that shape the interaction and the network are themselves generated by the network in
the interplay of the component parts that comprise the network (Cavanagh, 2007:33-
34). The power of a network resides in the interactive and generative mechanism of
the network itself. The network according to Actor-Network theory behaves as if it is
a thing, a separate phenomenon from the component parts that make it up. Actor-
Network theory networks are not only comprised of people and personal connections
but also texts, objects and a diverse array of material. The network as a whole, the
materials, the nodes, the links, and the images do not possess fixed properties so
agency is a property of the initial goal that resulted in the creation and formation of
the network (Cavanagh, 2007:37).
For Hardt and Negri (cited Cavanagh, 2007) the network form is the dominant form of
power in modern society. They argue that the social network is – plural, inclusive and
yet always contested and it enables action by the component parts rather than the
network as a whole. They posit that the network has no central power relation and that
“one essential characteristic of the distributed network form is that it has no centre. Its
power cannot be understood accurately as flowing from a central source or even
polycentric, but rather as distributed variably, unevenly, and indefinitely.” (Hardt &
Negri, cited Cavanagh, 2007:42) The network behaves somewhat like a swarm, which
may appear to be uncoordinated. However, communication is not the top-down
decision-making model but is communication between the various component parts
that comprise the network. This leads to the problem of Hardt and Negri’s ‘swarm’
seemingly arguing that the network acts and yet it is agency without an agent
(Cavanagh, 2007:43).
Knox et al. (2006) argue that network methods map roles comprehensibly and results
in the incorrect assumption that they have delineated the ‘real’ social structures. It
ends up reinforcing a view of relations that are unlike the everyday experiences of
people. Knox et al. argue that Social Network Analysis’ focus on structuralism has in
recent years shifted to attempts at developing a cultural approach. This shift in focus
has come about because of the study of social movements by researchers such as
Ansell (1997), Bearman (1995), Gould (1995), and Mische (2003).
No network is ever truly ‘isolated’. However, Lin et al. (2006) have conducted
attempts at defining a core group of users who continually return to a particular site of
online interaction. They used various techniques to visualise and extract these
communities. Lin et al. (2006) used blog ranking and their social connections, via
hyperlinks of various types to devise a visual representation of blog communities.
They established communities by assessing the level of mutual awareness through the
various actions of bloggers, such as commenting on each others sites or using
trackbacks to inform the writer of an article that they have linked to it. Lin et al.
(2006) have defined the Singapore blogosphere as a “community with no obvious
central topic”, and stated that it was a rather closed network, or rather closed off from
the wider global network of bloggers. Hurst (2006) using the same data as Lin et al.,
created for the WWW 2006 Workshop, highlighted the same group of blogs as Lin et
al. (2006). I collected an initial list of political blogs or seeds by engaging with the
blogosphere. I started by gathering a large set of political blog addresses, or URLs, by
downloading a list of political blogs1 compiled by myself and a group of Singapore
bloggers and others.
1
List available http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pQcRq80yuyWXeqpakIg2ibA viewed 02/08/2007
2 http://www.issuecrawler.net/index.php
Figure 1. Singapore Political Blogosphere measured in July 2007. All network closeness
centralisation score of 0.38627 and a betweenness centralisation score of 0.08783. Blogs
grouped together by colour.
Using the same approach as Lin et al. (2006) what resulted was more akin to an ego-
network. It appears isolated from the wider global blogosphere with no links to blogs
of other countries appearing. It is also important to point out that the resulting
‘network’ based on the more quantitative aspects of Social Network Analysis
generates a representation that results in upwards conflation. I return to this in the
discussion below.
Feenberg (1992) argues that technology is a social object, technology is more than its
explainable functions, and it has interpretable meaning. Technology has ‘social’
meaning and a ‘cultural horizon’. It might be argued that once the ‘object’ is fixed in
its design, that it becomes a debate over the ‘goals’ and that the engineer has the last
word. The focus on goals by managers, engineers, strips technology of its social
context. However technology is a historically evolving phenomenon.
What the object is for the groups that ultimately decide its fate determines what it
becomes as it is redesigned and improved over time. Technology then can only be
studied by studying the situation of the various groups involved. In this instance the
cultural situation of Singapore is important when conducting an ethnographic study of
the Singapore blogosphere.
Ethnography
The ethnographic approach enables the researcher to ascertain what the network
boundaries are as defined by the process of attaining access. It also enables the
classification of situations (Mische & White, 1998). The ethnographic researcher
takes part in the everyday experiences as a blogger uncovering meanings pertinent to
those involved.
The researcher encountered blogs that are essentially political in nature and yet did
not appear on the initial list of self-proclaimed political blogs. Individuals approached
me via email and co-authored blogs before finally setting blogs up on their own. I
was then able to harvest a list for the Singapore Gay and Lesbian blogosphere from
Sayoni Speaks (http://blog.sayoni.com/). The addresses of the Singapore Social
blogosphere came from the Singapore Social Media Directory
(http://sgsocialmediadir.wikispaces.com/).
Figure 4. From Left to right: Singapore Gay and Lesbian blogosphere: Closeness Centralisation = 0.38918,
Betweenness Centralisation = 0.16183; Singapore Social blogosphere: Closeness Centralisation = 0.34469,
Betweenness Centralisation = 0.08866.
I then combined the two lists of blogs to the initial list along with a Malaysian group
and a Christian group. Using these blogs as seeds, I was then able to compile a list
that generated the following graph.
Figure 3. The Singapore Blogosphere 2008: Contains 1,239 nodes. The size of the
node represents the Betweenness Centrality (BC), the larger the node the larger
the BC score. The black lines refer to the hyperlink connections between the nodes.
To the left of the graph are English-speaking bloggers and to the right are Malay-
speaking bloggers. It is clear from the graph and confirmed by further Social Network
Analysis that the Singapore blogosphere is comprised of two distinct factions (see
Appendix 2 for a further breakdown of the top 50 key players in table 2, ranked
according to Betweenness Centrality in the Singapore blogosphere of June 2008 and
figure 4 further illustrating the two distinct factions).
Discussion
blogging technology used by the bloggers is also having an effect on how the
blogosphere is breaking down into two factions. The English-speakers use technology,
such as Blogspot, Wordpress, and Livejournal while the Malay-speakers tend to
favour alternative providers such as Blogdrive.
The Singapore blogosphere is not a “community with no obvious central topic” (Lin
et al., 2006). When seen through the cultural lens of the ethnographic approach what
emerges is a ‘public’ engaged in oppositional discourse. Using the same approach as
Lin et al. (2006) what resulted was more akin to an ego-network. It appears isolated
from the wider global blogosphere with no links to blogs of other countries appearing.
The motivations or the will of those involved in the initial stages are evident at the
beginning of the narrative but the boundaries are the ‘discovered’ structural elements
of the network. Agency becomes structure; and then agency is a mere epiphenomenon
of the network. The so-called quantitative elements of social network analysis runs
the risk of reducing the network into a metaphor for ‘the masses’ when conducting
hyperlink analysis; in turn reducing its own efficacy into that of an advanced polling
system of online networks. The shift in focus to a cultural approach within Social
Network Analysis will undermine the structural dominance. However, it will not
overcome the problem of upward conflation and the reduction of the agent to that of
an epiphenomenon.
If as Dewey (1927, cited Kelly & Etling, 2008) argues, “The outstanding problem of
the Public is discovery and identification of itself.” The problem for Social Network
Analysis is to ensure that it does not conflate that public that is appearing in the
blogosphere with the wider social structural elements, be they structures resulting
from the technology and institutional generative mechanism or cultural forces, be they
ethnicity, race or nationalism.
References
Adamic, L. A. and Adar, E. (2001). You are what you link. 10th annual International
World Wide Web Conference, Hong Kong. Retrieved June 19: 2001.
Ansell, C. K. (1997). "Symbolic Networks: The Realignment of the French Working
Class, 1887–1894." AJS 103(2): 359-90.
Bearman, P. S. (1993). Relations into rhetorics: local elite social structure in Norfolk,
England, 1540-1640, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ.
Castells, M. (2000). The Rise of the Network Society. Blackwell Publishers.
Cavanagh, A. (2007). Sociology in the Age of the Internet, Open University Press.
Chua, B. H. (1997). Communitarian Ideology and Democracy in Singapore. New
York, Routledge.
Deleuze, G. and F. Guattari (2004). Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia,
New York, Continuum International Publishing Group.
de Nooy, W. et al. (2005). Exploratory Social Network Analysis with Pajek. New
York, Cambridge University Press.
Dreyfus, H. L. (2001). On the Internet, London, Routledge.
Fairclough, N. (2003). Analyzing discourse textual analysis for social research.
London, Routledge.
Feenberg, A., (1992) Subversive Rationalisation: Technology, Power and Democracy,
Inquiry, 35: 3 / 4.
Garrido, M. and Halavais, A. (2003). Mapping networks of support for the Zapatista
movement. In McCaughey, M. & Ayers, M.D. (2003). Cyberactivism: Online
Activism in Theory and Practice, Routledge.
Gould, R. V. (1995). Insurgent Identities: Class, Community, and Protest in Paris
from 1848 to the Commune, University Of Chicago Press.
Hurst, M.W. (2006). Interactive Map of the Blogosphere.
http://datamining.typepad.com/data_mining/2006/07/interactive_map.html.
Jackson, M.H. (1997). Assessing the structure of communication on the World Wide
Web. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(1): 1997.
Kelly, J. and Etling, B. (2008). Mapping Iran’s Online Public: Politics and Culture in
the Persian Blogosphere. Research Publication No. 2008-01, The Berkman
Center for Internet & Society Research Publication Series.
Knox, H. and Savage, M. et al. (2006). "Social networks and the study of relations:
networks as method, metaphor and form." Economy and Society 35(1): 113-140.
Lin, Y.R., Sundaram, H., Chi, Y., Tatemura, J., Tseng, B. (2006). Discovery of blog
communities based on mutual awareness. Third Annual Workshop on the
Weblogging Ecosystem: Aggregation, Analysis and Dynamics, at the 15th
Annual World Wide Web Conference-WWW: 2006-03.
Mische, A. (2003). "Cross-talk in Movements: Reconceiving the Culture-Network
Link." Social Movements and Networks: Relational Approaches to Collective
Action: 258–280.
Mische, A. and White, H. (1998). Between Conversation and Situation: Public
Switching Dynamics across Network Domains. Social Research, Vol.65, No.3.
Radcliffe-Brown, A.R. (1940). ‘On Social Structure.’ Journal of the Royal
Anthropological Society of Great Britain and Ireland 70(1-12).
Scott, J. (2000). Social Network Analysis: A Handbook, Sage.
Appendix 1.
Discourse of Globalism
Globalism
Supports Globalism 12 (6%)
Progress and Technology 11 (5.5%)
Inevitable 6 (3%)
Knowledge Based Economy 4 (2%)
Competing on a Global Scale 4 (2%)
Consumerism 4 (2%)
Processes 1 (0.5%)
Total 42 (21%)
Anti-Globalism
Disagrees with Globalisation 6 (3%)
Social Justice 6 (3%)
Negative Interpretations 5 (2.5%)
Unfair 4 (2%)
Welfare 4 (2%)
Rights 3 (1.5%)
Total 28 (14%)
Table 1. The occurrence and frequency of the nine styles of discourse and two forms of discourse
with subsets.
Appendix 2.
Betweenness Closeness
ID Degree Centrality Centrality Factions2
blogdrive.com 174 53533.926 4279 1
tomorrow.sg 216 51178.59 3929 2
photobucket.com 91 43716.617 4096 1
wordpress.com 111 33384.738 4074 2
technorati.com 120 29589.938 3919 2
sgblogawards.omy.sg 75 29244.604 4471 2
kuncup.blogdrive.com 130 28501.156 4396 1
flickr.com 96 25962.582 4016 2
bloggersg.com 81 19397.098 4058 2
nus.edu.sg 48 19138.492 4624 2
creativecommons.org 102 18930.762 4020 2
klinikminda1.blogspot.com 100 18157.41 4418 1
ads.blogdrive.com 153 17577.324 4554 1
kennysia.com 100 16561.314 4133 2
apple.com 71 16197.214 4056 2
singabloodypore.rsfblog.org 75 15155.418 4192 1
azlina.net 54 12439.063 4324 1
rinaz.net 133 11686.452 4103 2
friendster.com 44 10979.605 4216 2
clappingtrees.com 92 10529.274 4134 2
hendri.squoar.com 86 9688.821 4166 2
yesterday.sg 57 9657.044 4282 2
youtube.com 64 9583.163 4069 2
sabrina.sg 90 9443.527 4109 2
mr-endoh.com 102 9430.799 4163 2
sgblogs.com 100 9320.283 4163 2
design.blogdrive.com 54 9299.348 4394 1
blog.dk.sg 110 9147.646 4166 2
chaosdingo.lah.cc 38 8939.661 4322 2
sgentrepreneurs.com 102 8720.266 4232 2
i-speak.blogdrive.com 29 8460.372 4414 1
limetouch.com 44 8008.385 4233 2
toomanythoughts.org 59 7892.979 4326 2
mrbrown.com 89 7697.419 4215 2
sixapart.com 60 7671.539 4321 2
jason.sg 78 7591.144 4227 2
ping.sg 123 7559.005 4226 2
nadnut.liquidblade.com 95 7376.924 4168 2
feedburner.com 57 7187.758 4273 2
bleongcw.typepad.com 100 7164.742 4217 2
imageshack.us 33 7018.768 4558 1
thunderstorms.blogdrive.com 45 6981.098 4457 1
advertlets.com 42 6706.255 4346 2
blogshopr.com 32 6681.252 4425 1
facebook.com 68 6643.85 4268 2
vantan.org 69 6615.124 4249 2
Figure 4. The list of 1,239 blogs is in the graph above. The red nodes to the left
represent faction 2 in table 2 and are the English-speaking linked blogs. The
blue nodes to the right are faction 1 from table 2 and represent the Malay-
speaking blogs. The red lines between nodes are hyperlinks between the two
factions. Size of node represents Betweenness Centrality score.