http://www.shirky.com/writings/powerlaw_weblog.html

Classroom discussion has brought up the linking between weblogs (one of which I am linking myself in this post) as an example of a network governed by a power law distribution. The above article describes how this power law distribution arises, attributing the development of a seemingly more connected “community” within the larger network to inherent inequalities in a large, diverse, and free network. By not accounting for this structure by referring to individual behavior, it becomes easier to understand potential counter-intuitive examples of power law behavior in web logs.

As an online social system becomes larger, there are more options for people to express their preferences. As the number of options increases, the power law curve becomes even more extreme. This is perhaps the opposite of what one may think would happen in a situation where more options are present - that when people are presented with more opportunities for searching and linking the curve will generally flatten out as the most important aspect governing linking, a person’s time, is diminished among these options. However, the opposite occurs.

Though it is an easy model to consider, linking between blogs is not governed by uniform linking probably to every site, which would result in a relatively flat curve. People’s choices do greatly affect one another, and in many ways, a simple model of a blogging network could resemble a type of information cascade. One user would choose to link blogs with no view of other users’ signals. A second user would see this first user’s signals in addition to his own. Users farther down the line receive their own signals regarding different blogs, but will be much more likely to link to previously linked blogs based on the signals he gathered from other users. Of course, the probably of a blog being linked is also due to its visibility among users, and thus a simple cascade model does not reveal a very clear picture of blog linking because it is a function of a user’s signals regarding the blog in addition to that blog’s visibility among users. However, when considering that the linking of a blog both increases its positive signal among users in addition to its visibility, its is easier to see how even small differences among blogs (quality, preferences, solidarity) can greatly change their popularity once they begin to be linked.

Finally, this article attempts to address the potential inequality in the weblog world. This blogger clearly believes that the system is relatively fair due to the fact that there is true freedom in the weblog world, users are relatively equal, popularity does not result from a cliquish preference but a reinforcing distributed approval, and the lack of no real “A-list.” Though it may appear there is a true A-list due to that fact that 2/3 of users may fall below the mean, there is no true cutoff. The power law distribution is indeed continuous, and thus any set designations are arbitrary markers. This distribution, however, is not static. When there are only a few blogs receiving most of the new traffic while most blogs are getting below average traffic, the distribution must become more extreme. The rich do get richer. In some cases, those top web loggers may join mainstream media in that there is no way for the blogger to answer all posts, and thus becomes a mechanism for material distribution. The bottom majority will become conversational, where having your 3 closest friend read a post is more an achievable goal than having 3 random users read your blog. This is an aspect of weblogs that sites such as LiveJournal have embraced. Especially as time goes on, a growing number of blogs will becoming relegated to this sphere of the weblog world.