ART INSTITUTIONS AND WEB SOCIAL NETWORKS:

FACEBOOKS INNOVATION IN REACHING NEW MARKETS

INDEX:
Part I:

1. BIRTH OF THE SOCIAL NETWORK OF THE NEW GENERATION pag 3


2. BUT WHAT EXACTLY FACEBOOK IS? pag 5
2.1 The Social Network Analysis
2.1.1 Short history of Social Network Analysis
2.1.2 But what exactly a social network is and works? pag 7
2.1.3 How social networks affect economy? pag 10
2.1.3 a Culture economy and art markets pag
11
2.1.3 b Social network influence on economy theories:
-The Granovettian theories pag 16
- Podolny and the pipes and prism concept pag 20
-Watts, Strogatz and Newmanns small world model pag 21

2.2 Web Social Networks
pag 23
2.2.1 The Facebook social analysis pag
26
2.2.2 How begin the Facebook experience pag 27
2.2.3 Facebook VS Myspace: who is the winner? pag 35

Part II : THE REASEARCH ON THE FIELD pag 42
3.1 Brooklyn Museums Facebook page
3.1.1 Deeping the Brooklyn Museum experience: Pages, ArtShare and involving
application for Facebook pag 44
3.2 MoMA Facebook page
pag 53
3.3 Tate Britain Facebook page
pag 54
3.4 Centre Pompidou page
pag 55
3.5 The Italian situation
pag 56

Appendix
pag 61
Bibliography
pag 84
3


PART I:
1. BIRTH OF THE SOCIAL NETWORK OF THE NEW GENERATION
The birth of Facebook is in February 2004 from the mind of the Hardvard student
Mark Zuckerberg. The idea was to substitute the old program used by the students of
the University to keep them in contact each other: Face Mash, a previous experiment
of Mark Zuckerberg. This first experience quite caused the withdraw form Harvard for
his inventor: he was accused of breaching security, violating copyrights and violating
individual privacy by creating the website, www.facemash.com , in 2003. The website
used photos compiled from the online facebooks of nine Houses, placing two next to
each other at a time and asking users to choose the hotter person. Students were
ranked within the general Harvard community and individual Houses according to
attractiveness. Zuckerberg hacked into House websites to gather the photos, and then
wrote the codes to compute rankings after every vote. The programming and
algorithms that made the site function were Zuckerbergs primary interest in creating
it, he said. After creating the website, Zuckerberg forwarded the link to a few friends
for advice.
But the link then was sent out on several campus group list-serves, and traffic
skyrocketed. In the course of one day, the number of visitors quadrupledby 10 p.m.,
the site had been visited by 450 people, who voted at least 22,000 times.
The idea of create such programs was born because students already had a loose
affiliation with all fellow students at a college, they didnt have an easy way to learn
more about their fellow students outside their direct social network. Given the large
class sizes at most universities today, students dont have the opportunity to interact
with very many of their fellow classmates during class.
At the beginning, only Harvards student could join to The Facebook.com, through
their own university e-mail. Once the word-of-mouth and the buzz about it begin to
spread among the other University, all the Ivy Leagues Universities asked to be add
to the Facebook (Brown University, Columbia University, Cornell University,
Dartmouth College,Harvard University, University of Pennsylvania, Princeton
University, Yale University).
4
To be able to access to the program, it was mandatory login with a recognised mail
(.edu), belonged to one of the Institution inscribed to the new social network.
Zuckerberg and co. add new schools and Universities on the basis of the total amount
of requests to join coming by the same institution (the same method used by another
web phenomenon, the Craiglist.com). This allowed a high level of trust toward the
new program (contrary to facemash.com), as only recommended people could enter
in the network.
In 2006 Facebook opened its doors to users outside the .edu caste. To accomplish this,
they have created networks. High schools, employers and geographic areas are,
essentially, what colleges were to the original Facebook. When somebody join one of
these networks, is possible see the other members within the self-designated
network. Additionally, Facebook has implemented a number of privacy controls that
allow users to control exactly who gets to see the information they provide.
Now the social network has spread all over the world reaching in 4 years more than 42
million active users
1
, growing at more than 200,000 per day. More than half of
Facebook users are outside of college and more active users return daily, spending an
average time of 20 minutes on the site per day. Facebook is the top photo sharing on
the web and there are 6 million of active groups.

1
Statistic of 2007, September by Inside Facebook
5
2 BUT WHAT EXACTLY FACEBOOK IS?
2.1 Social Network Analysis
2.1.1 Short history of social network analysis
Technically talking, the program Facebook is part of the big family of web social
networks, the online evolution of the classical theorem of social network. People have
used the social network metaphor for over a century to connote complex sets of
relationships among members of social systems at all scales, from interpersonal to
international. In 1954, J. A. Barnes started using the term systematically to denote
patterns of ties that cut across the concepts traditionally used by the public and social
scientists: bounded groups (e.g., tribes, families) and social categories (e.g., gender,
ethnicity).
Precursors of social networks in the late 1800s include mile Durkheim and Ferdinand
Tnnies. Tnnies argued that social groups can exist as personal and direct social ties
that either link individuals who share values and belief (gemeinschaft) or impersonal,
formal, and instrumental social links (gesellschaft). Durkheim gave a non-
individualistic explanation of social facts arguing that social phenomena arise when
interacting individuals constitute a reality that can no longer be accounted for in terms
of the properties of individual actors. He distinguished between a traditional society
"mechanical solidarity" which prevails if individual differences are minimized, and the
modern society "organic solidarity" that develops out of cooperation between
differentiated individuals with independent roles.
Georg Simmel, writing at the turn of the twentieth century, was the first scholar to
think directly in social network terms. His essays pointed to the nature of network size
on interaction and to the likelihood of interaction in ramified, loosely-knit networks
rather than groups (Simmel, 1908/1971).
After a hiatus in the first decades of the twentieth century, three main traditions in
social networks appeared. In the 1930s, J.L. Moreno pioneered the systematic
recording and analysis of social interaction in small groups, especially classrooms and
work groups (the first steps of sociometry), while a Harvard group led by W. Lloyd
Warner and Elton Mayo explored interpersonal relations at work. In 1940, A.R.
Radcliffe-Brown's presidential address to British anthropologists urged the systematic
6
study of networks. However, it took about 15 years before this call was followed-up
systematically.
Social network analysis developed with the kinship studies of Elizabeth Bott in England
in the 1950s and the 1950s-1960s urbanization studies of the University of Manchester
group of anthropologists (centered around Max Gluckman and later J. Clyde Mitchell)
investigating community networks in southern Africa, India and the United Kingdom.
Concomitantly, British anthropologist S.F. Nadel codified a theory of social structure
that was influential in later network analysis.
The American school was linked at the argument that the forms of social relations
greatly determine their contents, concentrating the analysis on how the size of social
system and the ways in which relationships are interconnected constrain individual
behavior and dyadic exchage. The Sociometry was the tool to describe patterns and
links, using networks diagrams to represent interpersonal relations in small groups.
In the 1960s-1970s, a growing number of scholars worked to combine the different
tracks and traditions. One large group was centered around Harrison White and his
students at Harvard University (the formalist school): Ivan Chase, Bonnie Erickson,
Harriet Friedmann, Mark Granovetter, Nancy Howell, Joel Levine, Nicholas Mullins,
John Padgett, Michael Schwartz and Barry Wellman. White's group thought of
themselves as rebelling against the reigning structural-functionalist orthodoxy of then-
dominant Harvard sociologist Talcott Parsons, leading them to devalue concerns with
symbols, values, norms and culture. They also were opposed to the methodological
individualism espoused by another Harvard sociologist, George Homans, which was
endemic among the dominant survey researchers and positivists of the time. Mark
Granovetter and Barry Wellman (representatives of the structuralism current) are
among the former students of White who have elaborated and popularized social
network analysis: their studies are based on the aim to describe the comprehensive
structure of role relationships in a social system trough patterns of connection,
structurally equivalent role relationships among system members, changes in
structure over time, direct and indirect links among individuals.
White's was not the only group. Significant independent work was done by scholars
elsewhere: University of California Irvine social scientists interested in mathematical
applications, centered around Linton Freeman, including John Boyd, Susan Freeman,
Kathryn Faust, A. Kimball Romney and Douglas White; quantitative analysts at the
University of Chicago, including Joseph Galaskiewicz, Wendy Griswold, Edward
7
Laumann, Peter Marsden, Martina Morris, and John Padgett; and communication
scholars at Michigan State University, including Nan Lin and Everett Rogers. A
substantively-oriented University of Toronto sociology group developed in the 1970s,
centered on former students of Harrison White: S.D. Berkowitz, Harriet Friedmann,
Nancy Leslie Howard, Nancy Howell, Lorne Tepperman and Barry Wellman, and also
including noted modeler and game theorist Anatol Rapoport.

2.1.2 But what exactly a social network is and works?
A social network is a social structure made of nodes (which are generally individuals or
organizations) that are tied by one or more specific types of interdependency, such as
values, visions, ideas, financial exchange, friendship, kinship, dislike, conflict or trade.
The resulting graph-based structures are often very complex. Social network analysis
views social relationships in terms of nodes and ties. Nodes are the individual actors
within the networks, and ties are the relationships between the actors. There can be
many kinds of ties between the nodes. Research in a number of academic fields has
shown that social networks operate on many levels, from families up to the level of
nations, and play a critical role in determining the way problems are solved,
organizations are run, and the degree to which individuals succeed in achieving their
goals. In its simplest form, a social network is a map of all of the relevant ties between
the nodes being studied. The network can also be used to determine the social capital
of individual actors. These concepts are often displayed in a social network diagram,
where nodes are the points and ties are the lines.

8

Among all the social network analisys currents, some schoolar centred his work on the
importance of the ties type, on the roles and rules determined by them, on the
influence generated in all life aspects of individual.
Mark Granovetter is known for his work in social network theory and in economic
sociology, particularly his theory on the spread of information in social networks
known as "The Strength of Weak Ties"
2
(1973). In 1985 published an article that
launched new economic sociology, "Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of
Embeddedness"
3
. In this article the scholar introduced the concept of "embeddedness",
the idea that economic relations between individuals or firms are embedded in actual
social networks and do not exist in an abstract idealized market (a concept originally
described in Karl Polanyi's book The Great Transformation
4
). This new approach on
reciprocal effects of social and economic life of individual considered as part of a bigger
structure, changed the rules of social and economic studies.
The Granovetters theorem of social network is based 4 principles:
Norms and network density: norms determine the proper way to behave
Strength of weak ties as exchange of new information
Importance of structural holes
Interpenetration of economic and non-economic action: the social
embeddnedness of the economy
Norms and network density: norms as shared ideas about the proper way to behave
are clearer, more firmly held easier to enforce the denser a social network is. In a
denser structure the paths along which information, ideas and influences can travel
between any two nodes, are more unique. So in a denser structure, concepts and
information (as norms) are shared and accepted in a faster and stronger way. This
allows an easy detection of deviance and harmful actions, with the consecutive
establishment of a punitive structure (re-action). As example, in this kind of structure,
is easier control and avoid the free-rider behaviours (behaviours that follows the
individual wellness instead the community interests).

2
M. Granovetter, "The Strength of Weak Ties", American Journal of Sociology,1973
3
M. Granovetter, "Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness",
American Journal of Sociology, 1985
4
Karl Polanyi, The Great Transformation, Beacon Press, 1980
9
The strenght of weak ties: innovation and fresh information is frequently exchanged
among nodes linked by weak ties. Because we tend to build strong ties with people
similar to us and our close friends tend to move in the same circles that we do, the
information they receive overlaps considerably with what we already know. Go
outside the own clique (the social network composed by our strongest and closer ties,
the core of any enlarged social network diagram) means enter in contact with another
clique through what Granovetter call a weak tie. The consequence is that unique and
non-redundant information travels through weak ties among the different social
networks instead passing through strong ties.
The importance of structural holes: R. Burt
5
(1992) reformulated the weak ties
theorem, starting from the assumption of the supremacy of how nodes are bridging
rather than the type of tie among them. More far two social networks are, more the
unique link can exploit the structural holes between the cliques. This will allow a huge
flow of non-redundant and completely new concepts.
The interpenetration of economic and non-economic action : even if the bigger part of
our social life doesnt direct concern the economic sphere, if economic and non-
economic activity are intermixed, also the non-economic actions can affect costs,
availability of new resources, techniques. This is what Granovetter calls social
embeddedness of economy (Granovetter, 1985).

2.1.3 How social networks affect economy?
As supported by the next theories of the most important social network analysis
scholars, the framework of the social relationships deeply affect different spheres of
our life, economic area included. I report some studies carried out on our current
economic system based on the exchange of private and public goods. Within this
system some agents and mechanisms play a principal role such as firms, producers,
consumers, prices, decision making process, market labour, production process,
competitors and alliances among them.
But before display the effect of social network on markets and economy, I will
introduce the particular sphere in which my research takes place: the culture economy.

5
R. Burt Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition , Harvard University Press, 1992
10
2.1.3.a Culture economy and art markets
Economy of creative activities is a very unstable and unsettled territory, characterized
by a high level of unpredictability (on final results, on quality of the output, on taste of
consumers, on continuity etc etc..) and uncertainty due to the nature of a cultural good
itself: creative goods are experience goods, so before tasted it, its hard to predict
what will be a success. But cultural good have also a nonutilitarian nature, which
disallow systematic comparison of the different products and determination of stable
standards of quality and damping the consumers decision making process.
Here I display studies and theories concerning characteristics, process and mechanisms
of this specific economic field, in order to take a picture of the structure in which we
are moving through.
Starting from the exam of creative industries, Caves
6
(2000) pointed out seven
economic proprieties of them: Nobody knows property, Art for art sake property, Motley
crew property, Infinite variety, A/B List property, Time flies, Ars longa property.
The first one is referred to the uncertainty of demand and so its about how consumers
will value a new creative product. The uncertainty is given not only by the nature as
experience good but also by an asymmetrical information problem: the buyers
satisfaction will be a subjective reaction. The risk in these cases is very high because
normally this kind of output has a complex production process, structured in different
stages and generates uncertainty on final quality. As normally cultural products have
elevated costs, allocation of resources, and even worse the reallocation of them, is a
very complicated procedure.
The Art for art sake explains the care and dedication that creators put in the production
stages of their own work, giving evidence to the prevalence and strength of tastes that
affect the quality and quantity of creative effort.
The Motley crew property is based on the idea that some creative products require
diverse skills as they involve what economists calls multiplicative production function.
This means that to complete the entire production process every input must be present
and do its job, adding its work to the previous collaborators work: Mark Kremer calls

6
R. Caves, Creative Industries, Harvard University Press, 2000.
11
this mechanism the O-ring theory of production
7
( as a large number multiplied by zero is
still zero, also in production process).
A creative work can be different from another one in a million way: the horizontal
differentiation is universe of possibilities from which the artist chooses to create its
original and unique work. This is the infinite variety property: for the consumers imply
an indifference in the final choice (at which Opera attend, for example) but for the
producers a valid alternative for the concrete realization of project (producers can
choose an alternative if difficulties or high costs rise).
But also quality is a differentiation element: this is what we call A/B List property, the
vertically diversified skills. Each stage of production can be performed by a star or a
second choice professional. This will influence the final output ( as the O-ring theory
states) but a lower quality is not predictable, even if people is more willing to pay for a
famous big name rather than a unknown performer.
Time is the essential topic: performances take place at a determined time, coordination
among all professionals of the motley crew needs time that imply terms and schedule
of production, the period employed for revenues realization.
The last property is the Ars longa one. The legal duration of copyright determines how
long creator will benefit of the royalties on its work. This durability is the ars longa
property, as well the material duration of an artwork (as Old Master Paintings or a
master tape of music recordings).
Cultural market is characterized then by a continuous balancing process between
imperatives of creative freedom and commercial imperatives. As Lampel, Lant and
Shamsie
8
(2000) claim, there are five polar opposites that shape the field of action of
cultural firms and organization.
Artistic value vs mass entertainment: the entertainment is the medium through which
cultural products attract the audiences. The choice is between the final artistic aim and
the rules of the market.

7
Michael Kremer, "The O-Ring theory of economic development," Quarterly Journal of Economics,
1993
8
J. Lampel, T. Lant and J. Shamsie, Balancing act: Learning from organizing practices in cultural
industries, Organization Science, 2000
12
Product differentiation vs market innovation: as the competition in cultural industries is
lead by a continuous search of novelty, the balance is between the novelty (that must
be accessible and familiar) and an innovation able to differentiates the products
without making them too unlike by the other of the same category. But sometimes
breaking with tradition generate the creation of new type of cultural products and
may expand or change the market: Kim and Mauborgne
9
(2004) defined this
innovation Blue Ocean, something completely new in the filed (so free from
competition with other producers) able to create a market that didnt exist before.
Demand analysis vs market construction: this corresponds to fundamentally different
view of why some cultural good become successful while others do not. They are the
expression of consumers needs and desires or their wants are shaped by the
producers? Anand and Petersons study on recorded music industry
10
suggests that
the process of market reading cannot always be distinguished from the process firms
use to construct it. As in the previous opposition, the break new elements twist the
entire market: the revolution of Impressionism moulded the taste of the public, and
also the way art market reads the testes of its consumers.
Vertical intergration vs flexible specialization: in order to exert a high level of control
during the goods development stages, many firms tend to integrate all the aspect of
the value chain. The risk is to reduce the creative freedom in favour of a greater
coordination and dispersion of resources that impede to concentrate all efforts on a
particular activity. On the other hand this will allow an expansion of the firms product
mix. In some cases a symbiotic relationship of collaboration between two
organizations operating in different steps of the production could be the best solution
Individual inspiration vs creative system: is the genius of a single person that generates
the value or is the whole system that stimulates the rise of elements of successful
cultural goods? Thats the question! The combination of both ingredients is probably
the best way to manage personal creativity and a framework able to support it: the
system gives the possibility to creativity to find a concrete realization.

9
W. Chan Kim and R. Mauborgne , Blue Ocean Strategy, Harvard Business Review, 2004
10
N. Anand, Richard A. Peterson, When Market Information Constitutes Fields: Sensemaking of
Markets in the Commercial Music Industry, Organization Science, 2000

13
The extreme dynamism and multidimensionality of the artistic and cultural economic
field doesnt permit a standard and unilateral evaluation of it: what we must consider?
Personal consumers satisfaction or the capability to generate revenues? The pluralism
of functions and aims present in each single good must be taken in account to realize a
multilevel reading of all the aspects that compose what can be regarded as economic
value.
Michele Trimarchi in its essay on contemporary creation
11
paints the nowadays
international art market situation, describing aspects and items such as
multidimensionality, new value of information and influence of extra-economic
aspects.
First of all art markets are in a continuous expansion: different art forms boundaries
became more and more thin and easy to be crossed, the concepts of art and culture
themselves have turned into a flexible notion. In addition, in our times we have
attended to a re-evaluation and re-qualification as art of many popular movements
and currents. Just think to graffiti and murales case, born as free expression of social
diseases and critical poverty situations, once were seen only as act of vandalilsm. Now
this kind of creative expression is part of biggest contemporary art institutions under
the name of street art (Tate Modern of London have recently dedicated to this kind of
art an international exhibition).
Art and cultural goods are exchanged in several different markets. Private agreements
and informal negotiations compose up a carpet of sunken commercial operations,
allocating private galleries and museums on different market levels of economic
action. Stratification has a great importance in the value construction analysis, taking in
account elements such as the presence of the artwork in public or private collection or
the path of the artist or the past of the piece. This confused and complex structure of
the market supports the rise of asymmetrical information phenomenon, high level of
uncertain and impossibility to determine boundaries. As identification of
characteristics, procedures, agents and rules could be incomplete and inaccurate, artists
and their works can easy cross different markets at the same time, causing an increase
of difficulties in economic evaluation.
In such atmosphere dominated by uncertainty and confusion, by emotions and artistic
economic coefficient, by subjective impressions and vagueness of evaluation standard,

11
Michele Trimarchi, Martina De Luca, Flaminia Gennari Santori, Bartolomeo Pietromarchi,
Creazione Contemporanea, Luca Sassella editore, 2002
14
the role played by social network is of leading importance. If in a common economic
contest relationships are able to influence tastes, decision making process and
innovation, in the cultural framework their value is even more evident and powerful.
The web of contacts and links in the managing creativity system lead to a more fresh,
uncovered and with all probabilities successful artistic and cultural production patterns.
2.1.3 b Social network influence on economy theories:
The Granovettian theories
The first studies on the impact of social network on economy have been developed
during the centuries in two different approaches: the undersocialiazed and the
oversocialized conception of the man in society. The theoretical topics deny any impact
of social structure and social relation on production, distribution or consumption.
Adam Smith affirmed that in competitive markets no producer or consumer is able to
influence aggregate supply or demand, prices or any other term of trade. In this way
all social relations are removed from the economic analysis, as the economic structure
is a self- regulating system. In early years of XXth century, the academic group of the
formalists (founded by Georg Simmel, the aim was capture the underlying forms of
social relations providing a geometry of social life) took a similar position in the analysis
of tribal societies: economic behaviour is sufficiently independent of social relation to
be useful. In more recently years, the new institutional economics school (started by
R. Coase, is an economic perspective that focus on the social and legal norms and rules
that underly economic activity), suggests that in the study of economy analysis of
social institution the integration of behaviour and institutions (detectable also in earlier
societies) is much better understood as resulting of from the pursuing of self-interest
by rational, more or less atomized individuals.
On the other hand the oversocialized position view at the individual as overwhelmingly
sensitive to the opinions of others: in this way obedience to the dictates of consensually
developed system of norms and values, internalized through socialization, is not
perceived as burden ( Parsons and Wrong are from this school). Social influence is
seen as an external force able to alterate the decision making process of people (but in
this case is the society to have uncontrolled power over the single person). The point
of contact of the two opposite theories is the view of the individual as an atomized
actor: the individual is always taken in exam as an isolated element, moved by
personal impulses and motivation, pursuing personal realization. The system of
15
relationships is seen as a superior level structure, but its role is relegated to marginal
sphere of social life, the mere framework of interpersonal ties.
The Granovetters thesis of social embeddedness,
12
take the distance from both the
previous theories, developping a new point of view on social networks, cliques and
links among them and how economic outcome is influenced by them.
Due to the fact that social networks influences flow and quality of information, they
are a rewarding and punishment system, facilitate the creation of trust as confidence
that others will do the right thing (despite have free-rider behaviour). Trust has
been for a long time considered as a generaliazed morality (as in Arrows theories
13
) or a
substitute of the structure to substain order. But trust, from the Gravettian point of
view, is not a guarantee towards malfeance or conflicts, but its the foundation to
generate long term relations, able to lead changes, exchanges and modifications of
social-relational and economic life.
Social network and labour market: prospective employers and employees prefer to
learn about one another from personal sources whose information they trust. This is
an example of social capital. This kind of information (in a market characterized by a
bilateral asymmetry of information), are exchanged through pre-existing relationships
that dont concern at all the economic sphere or interests: the cost is less than of more
formal intermediaries. Of course, if mobility results from network connection, it will
change the network structure, adding new patterns. As the example of the Silicon
Valley shows, a high rate of mobility from a firm to another allows a growth of the
rate itself, due to information on ability and skills of colleagues brought by new
employees.
Social network and prices: several studies have been carried out in order to determine
the influence of social structure on prices: Sahlins, Uzzi, Lancaster, Podolny and Scott-
Morton are just some of the academics who analyzed this relation.
The study on the tribal economies of Sahlins (1972) suggest him that the economic
flexibility of the system depends on the social structure of the trade relation and
cannot be predicted without knowing the social structure. A change in trading partners

12
M. Granovetter, Economic Action and Social Structure: the Problem of Embeddedness, The
American Journal of Sociology, 2003.
13
K. Arrow, The Limits of Organization, Norton New York, 1974
16
has a cost and is difficult, and depends on the economic and non-economic costs of
serving a long - time tie and available social alternatives.
Uzzi and Lancaster (2003)
14
showed as some seller costs beside credit risk may be
reduced by detailed personal knowledge of clients: prices as lower for corporate clients
with continuing ties to law forms because the trust developed over time, and norms
and reciprocity, allows firms and its client to reach agreement on potentially
contentious issues.
In 1999 Podolny and Scott-Morton
15
and then Ingram and Roberts (2000)
16
analyzed
the relationships among different competitors and the creation of cartel and how does
this affect prices and performances: friendship among competitors allows a net impact
on performance and made easier resist to price wars. Cartels use a mixture of market
and non-market forces punishment and incentive to enforce member cooperation due
to the fact that members have both economic and non-economic goal that are pursued
by them simultaneously.
Social structure, productivity and compliance: many tasks cannot be realized only by
the book because of their complexity and need the tacit knowledge (the new
knowledge generated by the share and exchange of know-how among people). In this
way, interaction and sharing work practices deep influence productivity. But also
group norms and firm culture do that, as they are able to create sense of loyalty,
respect for the network and the firm itself.
Social structure and innovation: the network is the square where innovation is
created by the sharing of different knowledge and is diffused. Many studies support
this theory (as Zerlier and the use of religious language in the life-insurance industry or
Mac Kanzie and Millo on the Chicago Board of Options Exchange). But as the structural
hole Burts theory says, the new ideas come from far, away from our close groups and
cliques; Shumpter defined entrepreneurship as the creation of new opportunities by
pulling together previously unconnected resources ( due to the fact that they reside in

14
B. Uzzi, R. Lancaster Embeddedness and Price Formation in Corporate Law Markets,
American Sociological Review, 2004
15
J. Podolny, F. Scott-Morton Social Status, Entry, and Predation: The Case of British Shipping
Cartels 1879-1929, Journal of Industrial Economics, 1999
16
P. Ingram, P.W.Roberts, Friendships among competitors in the Sydney hotel industry,
The American Journal of Sociology, 2000

17
a separated networks of individuals or transactions) for a new economic purpose. The
anthropologist Fredrik Barth, who studied the Fur of Sudan and Arabs trade and
sharing goods system, defined entrepreneurship as the ability to derive profit from
breaching such previously separated spheres of exchange. Another example is the
deployment of resources outside of their usual sphere, as happened in the 60s with the
Silicon Valley technology industries, when engineers and marketing specialists, thanks
to their extensive personal networks, arrived from firms and industries to bring the
financial innovation in hi-tech new society beating banks. This passage generated the
firsts venture capital. When Boston technology district tried to re-edit the success of
the Valley, even on the long run, they failed. And the answer is also in the different
structure and links that the social networks build in the two different areas (Saxenian
1994).
But new elements can be affected by social network such as the choice of alliance
partners ( as point out in the Gulati and Gargiulos analysis of 1999), take the decision
to acquire another firm and how to do so ( Haunschild 1994), the diffusion of corporate
governance techniques ( Davis and Greve 1999).


Podolny and the pipes and prism concept
18
Podolny has developed a sociological theory of market competition based on status
dynamics and conducted research on the role of social networks in mobility and
information transfer within organizations. The Podolnys definition of pipes and
prisms of the market (2001)
17
referred to the link for the transmission of information
and resources and to the role of prism through which the quality of actors are inferred
by potential exchange partners.
Starting from the problem of risk and uncertainty of markets, Podolny claim that is
possible identified two different type of uncertainty:
- uncertainty of the producer regarding market opportunities and decision on
resources allocation in order to exploit this opportunities , what we call the
egocentric uncertainty
- uncertainty of consumers or of potential alliance partner about the quality of good
or services that the producer present in the market , the altercentric uncertainty.
Podolny observe that in a situation of large presence of Burts structural holes, the
information flow among the nodes ( in this case firms or institutions) have a new
importance as they bring fresh information about opportunities and how to exploit
them. This have a big implication on the choice of market segment as these vary in
order of egocentric uncertainty. In the case of cultural organizations ( an art gallery or
a record company), for example, the decision of the target is narrowly linked to the
style it will have and produce, and lot of time this genre can be ranked as
uncertainty of standard of quality. So because of structural holes reduce egocentric
uncertainty, organizations with many structural holes in their network should seek for
that markets or segment characterized by this kind of uncertainty.
But also the status can be considered as a quality value: this happens when we are in a
market with low rate of altercentric uncertainty and this allow producer (or
organizations) to have more decisional power in choosing collaborators or access to
resources, becoming a desirable partner. So the higher is the producer status the more
likely it will sort market segment that are low in egocentric uncertainty.

Watts, Strogatz and Newmanns small world model:


17
J. Podolny, Networks as the Pipes and the Prisms of the Markets, The American Journal of
Sociology, 2001.
19
In the late years of the 90s three researchers of the Santa Fe Institute
18
defined the
Small Worlds Model and determined its properties. They compare it at the cave
man social structure where a single little community shared the same space of a cave
and there was a significant distance from a caver to the closer one. Within each cave,
the internal structure was a dense, overlapping, redundant relationship among
inhabitants, determining a cohesive cluster.
The distance among caves reduce dramatically the possibility of contact among the
different cluster but if few conjunction relationships among caves were possible than
we would have the creation of a small world.
The ties, the bridging connections, decrease social distance because now each cave
member can reach different cave members through indirect links, as everybody within
its cluster knows everybody and so also the bridging person. In absence of those
members, the cave remains isolated in a world that we defined large.
Creative firms tend to create small worlds, encouraging collaboration and
communication across their clusters. This influence creativity and innovation,
producing evident effects on the economic side.
If cohesion within a cluster support the existence of trust as sharing process,
widespread and lateral communication, fast diffusion of ideas and control of harmful
behaviours, bridging ties provide to bring fresh, non-redundant procedures and
information. The combination of these elements composes the best recipe to manage
creativity in cultural market as it allows a drastic reduction of costs in terms of money
time and efforts for industries.
The focal point of small world management is around the identification of the
gatekeepers figure. This is the bridging tie, the connection with outside, so a value for
the whole organization.
As the study on the Frank O Gehry case by R. J. Boland, J. K. Lyytinen and Y. Yoo
19

shows, big and complex artistic projects (such as the ones realized by the great
architects office) are the sum of new inventions, different evolution of different
elements for different projects.

18
D.J. Watts and S.H. Strogatz , Collective Dynamics of Small World Network, Nature 1998
M.E.J. Newman, A.L. Barabasi, D.J. Watts, The Structure and Dynamic of Complex Networks,
Princeton University Press, 2003
19
R. J. Boland, J. K. Lyytinen and Y. Yoo, Wakes of innovation in project Networks: the case of digital 3-
D representations in architecture, engineering and construction Organization Science, 2007
20
The wakes of innovation come by the collaboration of the office with professionals
coming from complete different working areas (so from unlinked clusters), putting in
action a process of continuous renovation and adoption of new techniques and
technologies (the 3-D software introduction for example, able to change also the
communication pattern through which actors learned about each others plan and
coordinated their works.).
Each innovation reached in an element can generate a new challenge for one another
which is related to. The adjustment of new type of roof enable the exterior and interior
surfaces of the building to directly coincide with each other, challenging the interior
surface contractors to invent new, closer tolerance, curved surface construction
techniques; the curved interiors created a new challenge for smoke evacuation studies
and for the acoustic control.



2.2 Web Social Networks:
Since its beginning, the web has often been used as a tool to meet new people, but in
recent years the interaction between web-users has grown dramatically, spawning a
new generation of networking sites.
The notion of Web 2.0, or an internet model where
content is created and shared by users, has given birth
to some of the most popular sites the internet has
ever seen. So much so, that anybody who is anyone,
wants to be part of the online social networking
scene.
A social network service focuses on building online communities of people who share
interests and activities, or who are interested in exploring the interests and activities of
others. Most social network services are web based and provide a variety of ways for
users to interact, such as e-mail and instant messaging services.
Social networking has created new ways to communicate and share information. Social
networking websites are being used regularly by millions of people, and it now seems
that social networking will be an enduring part of everyday life. The main types of
social networking services are those which contain directories of some categories (such


21
as former classmates), means to connect with friends (usually with self-description
pages), and recommender systems linked to trust. Popular methods now combine
many of these, with MySpace and Facebook being the most widely used in North
America, Nexopia (mostly in Canada), Bebo, Facebook, Hi5, MySpace, Tagged, Xing,
and Skyrock in parts of Europe, Orkut and Hi5 in South America and Central America,
and Friendster, Orkut, Xiaonei and Cyworld in Asia and the Pacific Islands.
At first glance the sites could be dismissed as posh blogs, but tools that make it simpler
to post text, photos, music and now home-grown video have turned social networking
into an online phenomenon.
Bebo's Sarah Gavin says: "It's really powerful. I think it's the first time that individuals
have got the power. We've got authors up there publicising their books. If they're just
starting out as a film producer they have the opportunity to get their content up on
the site and go out to the general public to see what they actually think about it. It's a
hugely powerful medium and people are just starting to grasp how effective that can
be."
In 2003, a site was unleashed on the net that would change everything; a site so
popular and influential it has launched the careers of pop stars and was purchased by
Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation for $580m (310m). That site is, of course,
Myspace
The inclusion of music on Myspace has been one of the biggest reasons for the site's
success.
Unknown artists have demonstrated that social networking sites can be an effective
means of promoting themselves. Artists like Lily Allen and the Arctic Monkeys have
used Myspace as a springboard to success.
It is not just bands who have adopted social networking sites as a means of promotion.
Club and radio DJ Dan Greenpeace was introduced to Myspace by friends in America:
"I use Myspace primarily for networking. What I like about it is people can access me
and access information about myself and what I'm working on. It's a much more
personal and interactive way of communicating with people out there who are actually
interested in what you're doing."
22
While Myspace enjoys the largest slice of the social networking pie, rival sites such as
Bebo have hit back, introducing the same sorts of features that have made Myspace
such a success. One of the key things was music, which has been hugely successful for
them. Over 100,000 bands signed up in six weeks and a new trend is recorded with
video.
On the smaller end of the scale, sites are specialising to appeal to specific groups.
Dedicated music network Last FM uses software called audioscrobbler to track the
musical tastes of its members. These profiles can be used to suggest community
groups that like the same music, or introduce its members to new music which
matches their existing profile.
Last FM's Martin Stiksel says: "I think the future of social networks still lies in the
connections between people and the potential that lies in these connections between
people."
He added: "If there is a possibility to pool all of this knowledge, like there is in a social
network, to the benefit of everybody, that's a really,
really powerful thing."
While most social networking sites do not
discriminate, and allow anybody to log on, a few sites
have cropped up with a very particular sort of user in
mind.
Beautiful People's entry criteria are simple - good looks.
Beautiful People's Greg Hodge says: "Beautiful People is like an elite online club where
every member works the door. Essentially you put up a picture and a profile where
you're rated over a three day period by members of the opposite sex on whether or
not they deem you attractive enough. It is not just, as you'd expect, a dating site. It's
become a site where people will help each other find apartments, find work, they have
sensational parties.
But what moves people to put all their interests, affairs, business and life on the web?


23
2.2.1 The Facebook social analysis
The great sociologist Derrick De Kerckhove and the Italian researcher Vincenzo Susco
recently published a social analysis about the phenomenon
20
, starting from the point
that Facebook did not create a community where one never existed before ( as for
example Second Life), but it provide an important information and communication
service to a pre-existing offline community.
The two scholars started from the display of lifes more emotional, sensitive and
symbolic aspect of inscribed people. The game consists in make public our affairs,
publishing a sort of private diary in the cyberspace and leave a sign of us on the wall (a
virtual blackboard) of our friends. In this way everybody is part of each friends life.
The natural drift to see at other peoples pages is not dictated by a voyeuristic impulse,
but from feeling based on a willingness to share the everyday life events of our
friends, referring to a common destiny. Leave a sign of our presence on the other
people pages, increase the relationship and make more strength the tribe (= cluster,
clique) which are part of. All communities are crossed by solidarity actions among
members. Its not a matter of narcissism because facebook allows a double perspective
experienced by the individual: be part of one or more groups without lost its own
identity and to have an enhanced identity without lost the sense of the group.
Without the messages of our friends leaved on our wall, our personal page became
poor, anaemic. In this way Facebook eliminate the solitude and isolation typical of real
life but for some aspect, also of cyber life.
Social networks like Facebook are a step beyond the blogs phenomenon, where many
times the writer and the reader are the same person, the blogger.
On the contrary, Facebook with more than 47 000 groups, make the ambient more
familiar, supporting the creation of new ties and links based on the concept for which
the friends of my friends are my friends.
But in Facebook is also detectable an high level of democracy: is possible find the
concrete contact and chat with the biggest managers, artists or scholars from all over
the world, without passing for secretaries and dozen of telephone calls. This VIP
became accessible people to everybody.

20
D. De Kerckhove and V. Susco, La rete incantata, The Mc Luhan program in culture
and technology, ( article of LEspesso, july 2008)
24
The program provide to a series of different communicative tools as the private chat,
the wall posts, a sort Skype call until traditional letters and posted photos. Facebook is
the first photos sharing service with something like 2,7 billion of photos. But these
dont look like the model photobooks. The photos loaded on Facebook reproduce
passions and icons that move each social actor, in a complete spontaneous way, where
the display of personal and banal information is far from the mechanism of the reality
show: here the user is the show.

2.2.2. How begin the Facebook experience?
Begin to use Facebook is extremely easy: for the inscription is required only a valid
e-mail (any kind of mail, on the contrary of what happened until 2006). Once
inscribed, the program ask you to fill up an information web sheet about your
country, age, family status, studies, favourite food, hobbies, passions, and also
politic or religion view. On one hand this could seems a privacy violation but will
be so useful in order to put you in contact with people you might know. And this
is what exactly Facebook do: put in contact people. The Magic of Facebook is
inside this power to find people from our past and give us the possibility to re-
create a link with them. Facebook is the tie. The first step in order to begin to
collect friends (otherwise, as De Kerkhove and Sousa say, it wouldnt have any
sense) is find people from the same network (the high school for example, or the
hometown). Then, you can import your e-mail contacts to detect who is already a
Facebook user. At the end the miracle tool of Facebook: the friend-finder. This is
a sort of browser within the entire Facebook community. Entering the name (a real
name, first and second name) of somebody that we want to contact, the Friend-
finder will check among all the people inscribed to find out a list of possible
individuals corresponding to our request. But not only proper names are the key-
words to use the friend-finder: also schools, cities, sport teams or hobbies can be
used in order to find people from your network. This is the essence of the
program, create ties with people you might recognize, taking them from your old
past (as your school mates, or neighbour when you were ten).
To invite somebody to be your friend, the other must accept your request and
confirm that he/her knows you, and provide some kind of information about your
relation/friendship if he is willing to do so. Once some friends confirmed you, a
25
new box will appear: people you might know. Here are showed friends of your
friends, in order to facilitate the enlargement of your facebook- clique process.
In this period, in parallel with the explosion of Facebook phenomenon, many
articles and studies moved a rude critic to the new way to rule relationships.
Some journalists, scholars and intellectuals have expressed all their adversity to the
new social network. Mainly the topic point is the quality of relationships: we are
friends of a lot of people that we even know well, collecting information (as the
new pictures of the last summer, or the favourite dishes) of people we are not
really interested in. The common idea is to generate a network with few strong
ties, a structure characterized by superficiality, not by real confidence and feelings.
The concept of internet eras flimsiness hit also facebook.
But whats new, different in the Zuckemberg program?
Facebook is not a substitute of the normal communication media (voice,
telephone..), but is an enhancer of them. People dont use it to talk with their best
friend or see their cousin photos: these are practices that we do in person, without
necessity of the use of the web. But what it would be harder is see the weddings
video of your desk mate, chat with you colleagues in another country, find a group
of the Kiss fans. The weak ties (the more important links for a community) are the
real protagonists and actors of Facebook.
Tools and characteristics of Facebook:
Facebook has a complex architecture: there not only the personal pages but a lot of
forms and structures, applications, online games, sharing programs. Lets see the
main and useful of them.
Personal pages: is structured in Home ( a resume of what happened in all your
friends facebook pages in the lasts days: who changed the profile picture, who
wrote on the wall, who posted a new note); Profile ( your wall where your mates
leave you messages and comments, advices appears when you post something
new), Friend ( the complete list of your facebook friends, with possibility to create
different lists), Inbox ( private message with one or more person, but invisible to
the rest of the community).
26
Profile page is composed by the Wall, Info (with basic, personal, contact, education
and work and groups information), Photos (all the photos about you posted by
others and the photos you uploaded), boxes (this is the funny part of facebook,
here there are all your application and games), and so on.
Fan pages: this is a new structure added in 2007 addressed to all the entities, other
from natural people, that wanted be present in Facebook. Public institutions,
organizations, associations and private companies find in this architecture the perfect
solution: a Fan page is just one single page where all applications, information and
contents are displayed (no other clicks to reach what we desire). In add, this kind of
page is highly customizable with official and unofficial applications (for ex: the
HTML app, Youtube app and so on). There are no friends requests, but with one
single action, you can already interact and be present on the Fan page. All Fan pages
of a member are showed in their personal information, visible by everybody.
Applications: these are an innovation respect Myspace. Applications are the funny
and social part of Facebook. These are the tools that allow a real interaction (much
more than MySpace) with the other member of your net (and even with people out
side your friends clique). The most important are:
! Photos: with more than 2. 7 billion of images uploaded, Facebook is the first
sharing pics program. The procedures to uploaded files is very easy and
simple, but the real innovation is due to the possibility of tag people in the
pictures. This means give a name to an image, in order to make it visible by
every friend of the tagged person (and also by him/herself is the photo was
uploaded by a friend). Of course people must confirm their agreement when
tagged by others, and theres the possibility to un-tag pictures of us if we dont
want share them with others or simply, because we dont like our smile!). The
organization of this part is very easy and well structured, with the creation of
personal albums and the capability to share them with all your friends ( sending
a message o posting a note on the walls)
! Video: it gives the same possibility of pictures, sharing them, recording and
sending to people, publishing video from your mobile. The exploitation of User
Generated Contents!
! Groups: this part is fundamental for my personal research. The groups put in
relation people (already linked or completely unknown) which share the same
hobbies, the love for the same singer or the same football club. Everybody can
27
create a group in really few steps: give a name, a short description of the central
theme, the type (party, art, sport, fun) and then the e-mail. The next passage is
customize with pictures and post the new born and at the end, invite your
friend to join. Voil, a new group was created on Facebook. Groups are external
pages from the personal ones, but the format is very similar: there is a public
wall where all members can leave a message, with a photo and video section. Is
possible to invite people to join, or leave the group whenever you want. Share
the page with your network means send a personal message to you invite your
friends to take part of it. Depending on the type (open or close group) members
are allowed to upload contents, write on the common board, creates a new topic
of discussion.
From politic to art, passing for schools, passions, cities, lifestyle, fashion, food and
just fun (maybe the more populated section of Facebook groups) everybody can
find something to share with others, from your bloc or from another continent.
Groups are the link to fill the structural holes with the weak ties, able to connect
people with a common interest that in another way would have been impossible
to link.
! Market place: this is, of course, a space dedicated to the offers and purchases of
everything. There are different sections: for sale, housing, jobs, free stuff, item
wanted, housing wanted, looking for work. As Facebook is based on the idea of
confidence and trust, the Market place is a very used application: is possible post
a wishes list, and your object of desire will be published on the public wall (the
common tool use by facebook in all its application). People will contact you if
interested in your notice.
! Events: this is a great success for facebook. This application allows generate a
new page on a future event. Giving a short description and basic information
(when, hours, where, type of event), and then personalize it with photos, video,
link and posts, is possible invite all your facebook friends to your event in few
clicks. This has been one of the easier and faster way to communicate a party,
inauguration, concert, presentation of a book, congress or public manifestation
or even a strike. People can send their willingness to attending to the event (or
not attending, or maybe) and, of course, participate to the discussion board. The
event application has become one of the most used and useful by leisure and
cultural industry to promulgate movie release, exhibition openings, club parties
or sport matches.
28
! Notes and posted items: these two applications are used to publish written notes
more long than normal posts of the wall (ex: a music list that you want to share
with your members, or a digression on an event). Posted item are the links to
outside facebook pages: most of all are youtube.com links. A frame of the video
(or of the web page) is visible on your profile, to make the link more interesting.

! Other applications: The web is social. Developers just like you have built
applications on Facebook Platform that millions of people use everyday. Join our
developer community and help make the web even more social. This is taken
by the homepage of Facebook application developer. This is what definetely
differentiate Facebook from Myspace, the possibility that everyone have to be
part of the Facebook program in an active way. Connect users and solve real-
world problems with your applications. Build a business by offering users
valuable experiences. Building great applications is easy when you combine an
active, passionate community with our forums, wiki, resources, and developer
tools. Create a new application is very easy and quick: only few competence in
coding language, web hosting fundamentals and database are
required. In few minutes your application would be available
for all Facebook members from the application menu. All fb
developers create a very participated community, managed by
Fb itself. The Facebook Platform is a standards-based Web
service with methods for accessing and contributing Facebook
data. They have made the methods as easy to understand as
possible, and this wiki includes full documentation to help you
learn more. All content is created by the Facebook team and
developers, so everybody can contribute, leaving post on the
discussion board and on forums. But also partecipating to Fb
developers events, as for example the Fb Developers Garage
of San Francisco that will focus on monetizing Facebook
applications through the use of virtual currency ( nov. the 28
th
);
or Fb Developers Garage of New Dehli centred on the
exploration of Facebook applications and Facebook Connect to
help technology firms appreciate its potential (nov. the 29
th
).
The Uganda Fb Developers Garage (dec. the 13
th
), will be a
workshops focused on Facebook applications, marketing your
29
apps, and fund raising using the social network, with a guest speaker from
Facebook headquarters. All the Garage events are supported by Facebook but
they can be organized and proposed by private institutions, Universities or
private societies. Some contests have been created for translated applications:
as many Italian, Spanish and French Facebook users are not able to use the
nowadays existing apps (normally they are all in English), Facebook launched a
contest for the development of new app in different languages. As apps are able
to generate revenues ( by advertise, for example), the risk to lose a big part of
potential consumers is avoid as the parameters are Originality of Concept,
Market,Social/useful,Expressive,Intuitive and Potential.
The most used applications are: Causes (take part and invite people to join to
world emergencies or funny problem of everyday life), Top Friends ( to show
images of your best friend, adding music ), Superwall (a blackboard
customizable to see Youtube videos, poster and all multimedia contents),
Bumper sticker (funny and irreverent digital sticker to stick on your friends
wall!).
30
This is my personal social network on Facebook, each colour indicates a specific cluster.
2.2.3 Facebook VS Myspace: who is the winner?
31

When we think of social networks you probably think of MySpace. But recently,
Facebook has been gaining popularity boosted further by the launch of Facebook
apps. Now lets compare the two social networks
Round 1: Design

Layout: Facebook profiles are well set up and neatly organized and its easy to
navigate through the profiles to find the info you want. It mainly beats MySpace
because most profiles are so unpleasant and inconsistent, even if are more
customizable. But its quite difficult do so as HTML language skill is required.
Overall Site Design: MySpace looks unprofessionally mainly again because of its
inconsistent design. This time its MySpace themselves, not the users, who make the
site difficult to use.
Profiles: MySpace has a lot of customization, wit the possibility to personalize the
design of personal page.
Customization: While Facebook lets you add and remove applications, MySpace
lets you do whatever you want with the pages, if you know a little HTML that is.
Unfortunately thats the reason MySpaces design is so unruly for the most part,
loosing a big opportunity to beat the opponent in the war of web social network.
32
Site Organization: Both sites are pretty well organized. However, Facebook wins
because of its clean layout that allows you to find everything right away, and the
homepage resume you everything happened to your profile and to your friends
pages, In a look, you have everything under control, reaching immediately the
fact you are interested in.
Round Winner: Facebook!

Round 2: Media

Pictures: Facebook at the moment the first sharing program for picture: more than
2,7 billion of files have been uploaded on the platform. The ability to tag people and
have people tag themselves adds a new to picture, that became a new vehicle of
sociality (comments, tags..) Also, with the apps recently released you can now add
Fiickr and other photosharing site streams to your profile. However, Fox now
owns Photobucket, which provides photo hosting to MySpace users.
Videos: Both MySpace and Facebook let you upload video and they both have
their own flash player. MySpace will let you embed video into your profile but you
can post videos to Facebook as well.
Music: MySpace wins as every band has a MySpace account, using it as a normal
web site page, but tracks and video can be uploaded ( but not downloaded).
Pre-releases, or un-released tracks are often available from here. More, MySpace
Music is now the most used and easier way to listen in real time music and discover
new artists. However, with the new Facebook apps you can add your data from
music tracking sites like Last.fm and iLike: in fact one of top applications on
Facebook at the moment is the iLike app.
33
Sharing: Facebooks advantage here is only a slight one. Facebook allows you to
share media links very easily and in fact automatically though the Facebook feed,
something that Im sure many MySpace users would like to be able to do (MySpace
News isnt really suited to this). You can, however, grab embedded media like
videos from other profiles to repost on MySpace.
Round Winner: Facebook!

Round 3: Community

Relationships: MySpace page and Facebook page have quite a different function
(MySpace with the possibility of customization is more a substitute of a normal
web page whereas Facebook is principally structured to manage relations), the
relations on MySpace are often not existing in everyday life, and normally people
tend to have much more friends on My Space than on Facebook (which friends
meter will stop at 5000). In Facebook we add friends and people we may know
and friend of my friends, but well never request the friendship of an unknown
person.
Groups: Both sites have groups, but Facebook makes them more prominent. They
are a bigger part of the service and there are a lot of people using them for clever
uses like planning meet up and giving info to fans.
Keeping Track of Whats New: in this field Facebook kills MySpace. On MySpace
the only way to know if a friend added something new to their profile is to go look
at it, and the only way to know if you made a new friends is to look for the person.
Facebook has two feeds. One tells you whats new with you, like who accepted
your friend request or your posted items, etc. The other feed tells you whats up
with all your friends, like who they added and what groups they joined. And both
feeds are reachable by the homepage, just after the login.
34
Messaging: Both the programs have a place where people can leave messages on
your profile and they both have a basic mail system. But, multiple sending on
public walls is not allowed with MySpace, this oblige to cut and paste the
message in every one friends wall.
Co-Workers: Facebook can be used as a tool to talk to the people you work with
also and see whats new with them. You can even join a network for your
company, upload documents, plan events and invite colleagues to it. As MySpace
was designed for teens so it doesnt really have these types of features.
Round Winner: Facebook!

Round 4: Usefulness

Finding Old Friends: One of the major reasons for joining a social network is to
reconnect with old friends or classmates. Facebook makes this really easy because
the whole site is organized by networks (schools, cities, nations). So unless you
forgot your friends name you will probably be able to find them if they have an
account. MySpace lets you search for school friends, but doesnt put the emphasis
on real friendships.
Communication: Facebook is a good way to contact people if you dont know their
contact info. Someone is more likely to notice a Facebook message than a MySpace
Message due to the fact that there is less Facebook spam.
Promoting Yourself: MySpace wins here. Thousands of bands use MySpace to
promote their music and their fans use it to show their support, due to the fact that
MySpace pages have an high rate of personalization and media content are
available from the page itself. This isnt nearly as evident on Facebook, although
groups allow companies to promote themselves.
35
Applications: became a Facebook developer of application is very easy and
everyone can contribute to the whole system adding its new application (that can
have a social aim, or artistic or simply just for fun!). On the contrary, MySpace
didnt care so much to this point, limiting the community participation and giving
way to Facebook.
Round Winner: MySpace!
Round 5: Ease of Use

Adding Friends: MySpace wins here because adding new friends and accepting
friends requests is usually a one click process. The major advance here over
Facebook is the ability to add large amounts of friends at once which for some
reason was never added to Facebook. On the other hand, the security check of
Facebook increase the trust in the program for real interpersonal relationships.
Search: Facebooks search beats MySpace so far. Even though the search engine
giant Google is providing MySpaces search, its results are not nearly as useful as
Facebooks. The big issue here is that MySpaces search looks in the whole profile,
even when just looking for a person, Facebooks is smart enough to know if you
are looking for a user, a group, a fanpages or a movie in someones interests,
presenting the results for categories.
Navigation: Both MySpace and Facebook have a nice navigation, but Facebook
beats MySpace when it comes to getting to specific peoples profiles due to its
superior search.
Privacy: Facebook makes it really easy to hide info from certain people and to not
show information that you want to be kept private. So, if you only want you close
friends to see you contact info, it only takes a second. A long list of restrictions and
privacy tools can be applied to profiles. MySpace has privacy too, but its far less
granular.
36
Round Winner: Facebook!

And the Winner is Facebook!!

MySpace was a great social network for a while, but now there are too many
spammers and the developers have stopped innovating.












Part II: THE RESEARCH ON THE FIELD
37
3.1 Brooklyn Museums Facebook page:
The Brooklyn museum presence on Facebook is a fan page. This format is the perfect
solution to be personalized and costumized through applications. The page has 4582 fans.
After the general information (address linked to google map, opening hours and public
transport), all the links to other Brooklyn Museum web pages are listed (the Information
box).
Then theres the extended info box: in this area a list with a picture of all current
exhibitions is reported. A click on the image and a link to the official BM exhibition page is
opened. Administrator are visible (theirfacebook pages are linked) and Hey we work here
and we run this page. Let us know if you need anything! is their message in the extended
information box, in perfect harmony with web social networks philosophy.
YouTube Box: 19 videos, coming from the Museum account on YouTube, are uploaded
and directly accessible from the Facebook page, without go on YouTube site. Comments
can be added by all the fans.
Simply RSS: called also My Feeds, this box uses the RSS (Rich Site Summary) architecture
that, after the subscription, updates the user of all new content of a site. This is normally
used in blogs site, to be alerted for each new post or message leaved by others members.
The Brooklyn Museum publish on Facebook a short line on whats new, then with a click
the information area is enlarged and a longer explication is provided. The link to the
bloggers page of the official site appears at the end of the page.
Next box is the Reviews one: articles are submitted by the museum staff or the user, and
other people can report it giving a vote (stars). Until now, only one article has been
written.
ArtShare is an application developed by the Brooklyn Museum staff. ArtShare permit to
show on your personal profile a selection of artworks coming from more than 20
museums form all over the world. A short explication about piece and artist is provided.
Subway status: this box really shows the aim of the Museum to be part of the community,
helping visitors and potential visitor to facilitate their visit. The subway application is a
tool that provides the updated situation of traffic and subway situation of New York: is
generated and refreshed by users themselves. With few clicks, is possible reach the Mobile
38
Underground service, a Facebook application that send on mobiles message with the last
news from the traffic and public transport service.
Next app box: My Flickr. Instead to use the Facebook photo application, that is limited to
60 pictures each album, Brooklyn Museum added to its profile a link to their Flickr
account. On the Facebook page is possible appreciate some pictures, covers of several
Flickr album uploaded by the staff. The choice to use Flickr for picture is probably do to
the fact that Flickr is a recognized community of professional/amateurs photographers.
Many photographers or designer or graphics have a portfolio of their works on the
yahoo program. Facebook photo instead is most for share picture with your friends,
tagging them on your files, completely unprofessional and just for fun.
My del.icio.us is a bookmark application: reports all the articles, pages and texts on the
web where Brooklyn Museum activity is nominated. Newspapers and Televisions web
sites, blogs, entertainment and culture web pages compose this list, normally completed
my video or pictures.
In the end, My favourite pages, links to other Facebook pages of other institutions,
museum, applications, art centres, and the posted items.
Is important to report that at the beginning of the page some special useful tools have
been added: view updates and I ride the 2 (public transportation app).
Even if this is one of the more complex and structured for users Facebook pages among
the Museums ones, theres no public wall and discussion board. Information, comments
and pictures are always provided by the Museum staff, missing the opportunity to make
participate visitors also on the Facebook page.

3.1.1 Deeping the Brooklyn Museum experience: Pages, ArtShare and involving
application for Facebook
"Social" is the operative word in social networking. Simply defined as "seeking or enjoying
the companionship of others; friendly; sociable; gregarious," this can be a challenging
proposition for a large institution seeking to participate in a site where individual and
personal connections are key. How do you give an organization a face? How can an
institution make personal connections?
39
Facebook give them a useful tools to personalize content as much as possible, since Web
2.0 for the Brooklyn Museum is all about social connections and growing communities
and deliver content their way: Museum surveys have shown that visitors want to
consume more information in shorter visits. Hence, they wanted to allow audiences to
easily receive information from the Museum, and dynamically share it with others.
Unlike MySpace, Facebook has a strict policy: profiles = individual people, not institutions,
no exceptions. The reason is pretty simple: the site is based on social interaction and
relationships. So how can a Museum work within Facebook's structure? In the early days
of Facebook, one could establish a personal account, start a group (for the organization,
and administer the group by posting announcements, pictures and videos. The benefit of
this system was that members could connect a face (and perhaps a personality) to the
organization, rather than encountering a disembodied Museum voice. Now, on fan page
where theres no link to administrator personal page, mantein a direct contact with users
is fundamental. Became of critical importance being part of a community, rather than
operating for the sake of marketing or public relations, in order to reach high level of
trust and thus increase and feed the sense of community around the museum, to make of
it a place to live.
ArtShare:
Over time, Facebook has made some changes to its original model, and to stay in step
with the community of users on Facebook it was important for the Brooklyn Museum to
adjust. In Spring 2007, Facebook opened up its social networking architecture so that
anyone could create applications for the site via its Application Programming Interface
(API), allowing independent developers to create applications they could share with other
users. Facebook users began to install an astonishing variety
of applications on their profiles, quickly making Facebook
unique among social networking sites. The Brooklyn
Museum Information Systems department responded by
creating ArtShare, an application that allows Facebook users
to select works of art from the Museums collection, which
they can shuffle on their personal profiles. Recognizing that
social networking is never one-sided, but rather an exchange
of information between parties, they developed this
application so other Museums could use it to share works in
40
their own collections; and so artists on Facebook can upload their own artwork to share
with friends.

So, what is the significance of ArtShare? ArtShare functions just like everything else on
Facebook, allowing the members of its community to get to know one another, but in this
case through art. It allows users (art lovers, museum-goers, artists and others) to connect
their profiles and personalities to works in museums collections. ArtShare allows them to
display their favorite paintings, photographs, and objects on their own terms and in their
own social spaces. Each item if clicked will show a short explication of the artwork, giving
quick pills of art knowledge. Browsing through Facebook users who have installed
ArtShare, one begins to get a sense of the personal tastes and interests they have, just by
looking at the works of art theyve selected for their profiles. A long list of museums
from all over the world requested to be added to the project: Allen Memorial Art Museum
Art Gallery of New South Wales, Auckland Art Gallery, Australian War Memorial,
Brooklyn Museum, Canada Agriculture Museum, Corning Museum of Glass, Delaware
Art Museum, Fort Collins Museum of Contemporary Art, Houston Museum of Natural,
Science, Indianapolis Museum of Art , Mattress Factory, Memorial Art Gallery of the
University of Rochester, Metropolitan Museum of Art, Milwaukee Art Museum, Morgan
Library & Museum, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Nelson-Atkins Museum, New Bedford
Whaling Museum, Oklahoma City Museum of Art ,Powerhouse Museum, Royal Ontario
Museum, Tate, University of Richmond Museums, V&A, Virginia Historical Society,
Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, Walker Art Center, Walters Art Museum, Wolfsonian-FIU,
Worcester Art Museum, Zuiderzee Museum.

ArtShare won Silver in the Online Presence category at 2008 Muse Awards (The American
Association of Museum, Media and Technology Commitee) and the Jim Blackaby
Ingenuity Award. Judges said: ArtShare on Facebook is a simple web application with a
great, innovative concept: provide a database-driven storehouse of images for users to
populate their Facebook pages with and allow users to add their own artwork.
In other words, this application creates a new virtual port of entry to museum content
(albeit one limited to Facebook users), that taps into the universal desire to "share
ownership" of great art. By tapping into mainstream social networking, this application
engages new audiences and spurs communal discussion and conversation about artwork
41
and other collections objects. Visually, the application succeeds in retaining the clean and
appealing interface of the Facebook site itself, no mean feat in the often-cluttered social
networking environment. The Brooklyn Museum's foresight and generosity in opening
this application up to use by its museum peers (ArtSpace now includes content from eight
different museums ranging from the Metropolitan Museum of Art to the Powerhouse)
preserves the integrity and authority of art and institution alike makes this application an
award-winning development. Three cheers for ArtShare's art-sharing concept, execution,
and cross-museum synergy.
ArtShare helped win the Brooklyn Museum a 2008 Groundswell Award ( to recognize
firms that accomplish business goals with social applications) for the category Social
Impact.
Moving away from the earlier policy of banning institutions from the site, in November
2007 Facebook launched pages, a new feature that allowed an organization or
institution to create its own page. This feature distinguishes Facebook from other social
networking sites. The open application structure, so important to Facebooks identity, also
works within this new feature; therefore the institutions administrator can install various
applications to make the organizations page more dynamic. When selecting and testing
applications, they selected applications that work with fully syndicated content. Then they
found applications that allow us to connect to our existing content on other sites like
Flickr, del.icio.us, YouTube, and
our blog.

Why are these rules of thumb so
vital? Social networking users
dont like to leave the social
networking sphere and go
elsewhere for content ( ex: RSS
feeds or YouTube videos) they
worked to embed as much
content as possible on the same
page. On Facebook, when
possible Brooklyn Museum avoid
making people leave Facebook
to see their content. Museums
42
Facebook page is designed so that visitors can easily read blog posts and play the videos
right there on the page. Because many talented developers have created applications on
Facebook, they have been able to establish a fully featured page (for the Brooklyn
Museum, so that it provides a comprehensive snapshot of whats happening at the
Museum. As a nice side effect, these pages are viewable by anyone on the Internet (not
just members of the Facebook community) and can be fully indexed by search engines.

Next part of Brooklyn Museum analysis is focused not Facebook but on other instruments
useful to reduce the perception of Museum communication as Voice of the Authority
and generate inclusion and engagement among users. For my research is important
deepen these topics as all of them have been incorporated in the Museum Facebook fan
page ( most of all as applications).
Flickr
The aim adding Flickr was to do something of interest both to our visitors, who seek to
learn more and/or extend their on-site visits, and to Flickr photographers, who are
personally invested in a particular subject. For the photography exhibition Goodbye Coney
Island? they asked photographers to upload their own photos of Coney Island to a Flickr
group. The Brooklyn Museums curator of photography, Patrick Amsellem, will review
users submissions and select a few to discuss on the Museums blog during the run of the
exhibition. The curatorial presence is key to this project, because the curatorial voice is
what matters most at a Museum and, therefore, matters most to the people participating
in the project.
YouTube: Visitor Video Competition
Brooklyn Museum had a YouTube profile in addition to the one at blip.tv, but the material
didnt seem to capture much of an audience. Thinking about ways to improve YouTube
presence, Museum staff started to believe that content created by the Brooklyn Museum
might not be as engaging as content created by others. Asking for visitor-created content
seemed more in sync with the YouTube community.
The Public Information department had worked with two students at the Pratt Institute, a
college in Brooklyn known for its art and design programs, to create a Public Service
Announcement (PSA). The students short video inspired the idea for a video contest
43
hosted on YouTube. Closely working with Public Information, Brooklyn Museum invited
visitors attending the October 2007 Target First Saturday (a free monthly event at the
Museum featuring films, performances, dance parties, and other entertainment) to bring
video cameras and create their own PSAs for the Museum.
Similar to Flickr, YouTube is a site where users create and upload their own material,
retaining full rights to their content. Instead of asking for copyright or blanket use, as is
the norm in such competitions, they simply asked contestants to upload their PSAs to
their personal YouTube accounts. As a result, viewers can access each contestants
personal YouTube profile and learn more about him or her. The power of this exercise lies
in the spontaneity and diversity of the participants and what their fresh, unbound
perspectives can bring to our daily working environment. PSAs created by our visitors
are quite different from what the institution would typically produce; for example, youd
probably never see a video called Art Thief, one of our most-viewed visitor-contributed
PSAs on YouTube, produced by the Museum. As a testament to the power of user-
generated content, the videos submitted for the competition were viewed four to five
times more than anything else we had previously posted on YouTube. And when
YouTube decided to feature the contest in its Groups area, the view counts increased
exponentially.


RSS Feeds and Embedding
44

RSS (Rich Site Summary) is a format for delivering regularly changing Web content to
subscribers. RSS helps to meet the objective to deliver content their way: available feeds
now include Exhibitions, Blogs, Podcasts, Events, Target First Saturday schedules, Press
Releases, and more.

Brooklyn Museum podcast series with embed code in user interface
45

Brooklyn Museum embeddable player
By providing embed code, they enable people to share museums content the way they
want to, via their own Web sites. All of podcasts and cell-phone audio stops come with
embed code. If a visitor sees something s/he likes on Brooklyn Museum Web site and
s/he wants to share it with others, the visitor can use the embed code to place our content
directly on his/her own site. Giving the visitor ownership of the content in this way
increases word-of-mouth, too. This is similar to some of other initiatives, such as ArtShare,
and will play an increasing role in our overall technology strategy moving forward.

Blogs
In June 2007, after a previous experience with blogger.com, the Museums various blogs
were consolidated and integrated into the Museum official Web site. The idea was to
move forward with the intention to make publishing quick, easy, and enjoyable for staff,
and also to make the information provided to audience as open and transparent as
possible. In contrast to other means of communication (e.g. Web sites, publications,
printed materials, press releases), blogging in its very nature is more personal, uninformal
and friendly allowing for much quicker, direct communication from staff. The aim pursuit
by the Museumis to show the human face of the official institution.
Authors, following a set of institutionally approved guidelines, write posts focusing on
behind-the-scenes information not readily accessible to the public. Diverse in terms of
content, posts are written personally by staff members and retain each authors unique
voice and perspective; they also identify each author with a small picture and short
biography and use tags to integrate posts with appropriate exhibition pages on the site.
Readers can follow the subjects in which they are most interested using a number RSS
feeds. Blog system provides feeds for a wide range of subjects and authors, and for
categories such as Rarely on View, On Loan, Recent Acquisitions, Architecture and Planning,
Egyptian Art, Technology, etc. The content is fully syndicated; this further supports the
46
interests of subscribers/readers, as new content can be delivered directly to them
whenever they want it, eliminating numerous clicks through our site.

Conclusions:
Goal reached by the Brooklyn Museum through a deep penetration in the web 2.0 are of
two different type : deliver content their way (ArtShare on Facebook, fully syndicated
content with no need to click-thru , blog and RSS feeds for events, exhibitions, press
releases, embedding opportunities), and the keep it real( embedding opportunities,
visitor video competition, blogs allowing for author identification and instant publication
As showed by this case, the use of Facebook program joined and enrich by other external
but community enhancing programs ( Flickr and so on), is the best choice to pursuit aims
of increase cyber and real Museum active visitors.
I choose to analyze the Brooklyn Museum case because it has been one of the first
institution to perceive the potential of Facebook in reaching and involve in a pervasive the
community but also new tagets since then unknown. ArtShare and the Facebook page
shows the willingness to embrace the Facebook aims of inclusion, mutual sharing and
spread of information. But Brooklyn Museum fan page dont give enough space to users
voice, without a wall or a discussion board, leaving this task to all other programs linked
on the page ( Flickr and YouTube with the contests, Blogs and so on). At the end, an
important and basic aspect of Facebook as the use of UGC (user generated content) is
limited and delegated to other web 2.0 tools and programs.

3.2 MoMA Facebook page:
47
As Brooklyn Museum, also MoMA choose a fan page instead a personal or a group
format. After the boxes with basic Information and links to official website, we find a
YouTube box, with 23 content uploaded ( but none have been commented). Next box is
the Wall, with more than 200 posts and, very important, many of them leaved by MoMA
staff to answear to fans requests. A new space for a quick and easy communication have
been found. Also in this page, the Reviwes app is not so used, with only two articles
posted. A part the Flickr box, that always is a link to Flickr Museum albums, MoMA
leaved the originary Facebook photo box: this is dedicated to all fan photos that they can
upload without limits. A perfect solution to make partecipate the visitors but also to have
a feedback on how the Museum is seen and perceive through users pictures ( uploaded
files are quite 650). The bookmark box of My del.icio.us report 20 item, with related
articles completed by video and photos. Then The Discussion Board: just 3 topic have
been subscribed, but by the nature of them is easy understand that users feel free to use it
for any kind of expression of love and appreciation of MoMA and modern art in general (
one topic is a poetry dedicated to Van Gogh by an english guy).
The Extended info reports all current exhibitions ( of course, they are all links to the
official web site), upcoming exhibitions and , most of all, the Support MoMA program:
Members have more fun. Join today and renew your membership are the two links just
below this section dedicated to fundraising, that provide also a brief list of benefits in
becaming a supporter. Then the Events: but just two past event are published and also not
so recently. Favourite pages is used to promote only one other page, the MoMA Teens, a
Facebook fan page of teenager Museum programs.
MoMA Facebook page is really lived by members page. The quantity and quality of the
information provided by the Museum allow users to enjoy contents without leaving the
social network (YouTube and Photos for example), and on the other hand the overuse of
public wall ( posts are written in different languages: english but also italian, french,
spanish) gives the idea of an international community that wants to be present,
everyone wants to say something, everyone wants to be recognize as part of the MoMA
group. The sharing of knowlegde, opinions, the spread of them and interaction is realized.
3.3 Tate Britain Facebook page:
Tate Britain fan page, doesnt give basic information such as address or opening hours,
but it includes Company overview, mission and product of the Museums. A large space
is dedicated to Mini-feed, a resume of what happened in last days on the page, comprised
written notes, photos and upload applications. Then theres the Blog Rss Feed Reader,
48
linked to the Twitter program. Twitter is a web social network similar to Facebook but
more istantaneous bacause is based on the question What are you doing now? and
need an immediate answer ( to make it more rapid and pervasive, sended messages
arrive also on mobile phone). But Tate use it just as link between Facebook and the official
Tate blog site (tinyurl.com) or posted album on Flickr. Following with the page, the Flickr
box, even if only pictures by the same event are showed in, it allows to take a look to Tate
Flickr albums without leave the Facebook page through a pop up (very useful). The
Reviews box is empty and the wall has 34 posts, all by utents. The YouTube player is able
to show only two videos, but the Notes box has several posts, used to give short
information of events, upcoming exhibitions, interviews and so on. After the Favourite
page with only Brooklyn Museum link, theres the ArtShare box. Tate is part of the
project providing to all application users a selection of artworks pictures and explications.
Of course, all artwork in this box came from the Tate collection. The Photo section is filled
by fan photos plus one official album of all Tates builgings, and then the Simply RSS
provides feeds to the official web pages topics, separated for each Tate centre: Britain,
Modern , Liverpool and St. Ives. The Event section is full of past events, but none of them
have been commented or received a post by guests. The last box is the Video one, with
content uploaded by the same user and all commented by his friends! Tate Britain has
4,783 fans.
I think that this page is a good balance between provided information and contents and
space given to the fan to participate actively. What lacks is interaction between two
worlds: Tates staff never contributes to the wall or posts a comment but simply feed
the Facebook page with news and updates. This is perfect in order to deliver fresh info in
an un-informal and quicker way, but theres no true exchange.
Really interesting is the case of the Tate Modern Facebook page: even if is has not been
created and managed by the Museum staff but by just a lover of the Museum, Tate
Modern has more than 24,700 fans! As its an unofficial page, theres no track of events,
updates, notes, explications and so on, but theres just the Review box with more that 50
articles published, the discussion board, and then the photo and video boxes, for a total
amount of more than 570 fans files updated! People charge not only picture of the day
passed in the museum, but also their own artworks. Is incredible how people created and
keep alive this page without any help from the institution itself, but just with their shared
passion for modern art.
49
The same plot is for the Louvre page, with more than 14,000 fans and no intervention of
official staff (even if this page too is so participated).
3.4 Centre Pompidou page:
Le Centre Pompidou is a full developed fan page, very colourful and attractive: Extended
info, as always, are used to publish the image of current exhibitions, just a click and we
are on the official site. We find detailed basic info (comprised tickets fee and bus to get
there) and then the YouTube box, but it is under maintenance. The single posted video
anyway is a project of Manchester School of Architecture about the building by Renzo
Piano and Richard Rogers. In the Discussion board, funny discussion topics (your
favourite Pompidou exhibition) have been started by internal staff. Maybe without any
aim of statistics and research (even if could bring interesting results), it is useful just to
keep in life a dialogue between institution and public in an informal and familiar way. My
del.icio.us is connected not only with external articles, but also with the Museums
dossiers: digression of the educational department on the architecture of the building,
showed artists, the centre for young visitors. Also on the wall, with active participation of
staff, is clear and pursuit the goal to share knowledge and create a community (Museums
posts not are only about opening hours but provide a series of link and indications to
make well known important cultural contents). After the Mini-feed box, are present
official Photo albums (no Flickr), one with all the exhibitions posters and the other with
pictures of the building; then the fan photos (only 75 files) and the Event box (but the big
potential of this tool is not exploited at all, only few event have been created with few info
and images, so unappealing). The Notes: here are posted (and arrive also on the private
Facebook mailbox of fan) also the long texts published on the Group of the Centre
Pompidou (which have also a centre Pompidou workers close group and a Young
Visitors group). Otherwise, notes reported are all digressions and in-depth examinations
of artistic currents, shows, performers and special event of Museum. ArtShare is present
but not uploaded, so the box results empty. The fans are in total 3, 068.
3.5 The Italian situation:
In Italy only few museums have perceived the potential of Facebook as MART of
Rovereto, MAMbo of Bologna, MAO of Turin, Museo delle Maschere Mediterranea,
Mamoiada ( Sardinia), and MIAAO ( Museo Internazionale delle Arti Applicate Oggi) of
Turin.
MART of Rovereto has developed, as all other international institutions, a fan page (with
321 fans), quite basic in the structure and applications added. In the Information there are
50
also the instruction on how reach the Museum from the airport. The Extended info
application is filled with explications on mission and history of the museum with the list of
current exhibition (but there are no images). There are no links to official web pages
starting from information on institution, and also current exhibitions MART web pages
are uncompleted. On the other hand the wall sees the active participation of both fans and
Mart staff, but no discussion board topic or reviews have been introduced. Photos box
host two albums uploaded by Mart itself with images taken from the current exhibition
and the famous architecture of the building. The Flickr application instead shows the set
up of a past show The 24 hours hotel. No You Tube box, but a simple video one, with
two upload. On the Event section, only a previous inauguration has been created and just
one note is present. The Note explains the evolution of Mart presence on Facebook:
before the fan page, Mart had a normal personal account with more than 2000 contacts.
But, as for Brooklyn Museum, individual accounts pages have been put side by side with
a fan one. A fan page is much more customizable with applications and boxes, doesnt
produces redundant information and most of all, to be reached by people is so much
easier (with a personal account is mandatory introduce a formal friend request and must
wait for an answer). But the personal page of Mart is more structured and interesting than
fan one, with the Museum Media Podcast and Blogs application, a widget that contains
existing museum podcasts and blogs available on internet (this is the first time that Ive
found it on a Museum page), and the Artshare app with works coming from the
permanent collection. And also Twitter is used by Mart!

Other Italian museums seems to have a similar approach to Facebook: they assumed the
necessity to be part of the program, but they didnt exploit at all its potential. Like Mart,
also MAMbo, MAO and others have an individual account ( many times without be
accompained by fan or a group pages). But a personal account limit so much the great
possibilities of Facebook. First of all because of friend request: many time, if not already
friend of someone (or some institutions, organization, company) you are not allowed to
see his page ( this is a specific restriction setting decided by accounts owner). On the wall
and home of an individual account are reported also all your friends minifeed: this imply
the generation (and delivery on your friends home) of redundant and not useful
information. Another limit is the structure itself of personal pages: box and application are
reacheable only after some clicks. Fan page instead provide all interesting data and
contents on the same page, characterized by a high rate of personalize chances, and
doesnt send undesirable feeds to fans.
51
In the end, even if Italian Museums recognize the importance and necessity to be on
Facebook, there is still a great difference with other countries approach. But this is just
another aspect of the great discrepancy of perception and use of the web in general: few
Italian museums have a structured internet web site and most of the time this is not
update, only few pages compose it and theres no track of any kind of interaction with
users. This is due to a series of bigger problem that affects since long time the Italian
museum system: a very old and static conception of visitors (normally still considered as
feet instead that heads) and a tragic lack of resource that impede to invest in web sites
(considered in Italy most of cases an accessory, not a necessity/opportunity).

To conclude my research on Facebook widgets used by Museum, is important examine
also the Art application available. A part the already analyzed Artshare, some others
applications have been created all by the same developer Kurt Stuchell. He is a master's
degree candidate at Harvard University on the Museum Studies Program and Founder of
MuseumPods. Kurt has undertaken significant work with the development and
implementation options of podcast technology in museums to support access and
marketing strategies. His applications are all based on making available podcasts and
videos from Museums on Facebook. With his own words: Museums are now making
some of the best online audio podcasts on the internet, so if you enjoy museum related
information try our Museum Audio Player (MAD) it is a great resource for museum and
educational related videos. Museums contributing include the TATE, Getty, Guggenheim,
National Gallery of Art, USA, National Gallery of Art, UK plus many more from around
the globe. This is the Museum Audio Podcast RSS Player application and permit you to
listen to podcasts and educational services audio contents directly from your Facebook
page.
Many other similar applications are developed by the same author: Museum Media
Podcasts and Blogs, Museums - National Gallery of Art podcasts, Museum Video Podcast
Player, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Museum Jobs and Internships,
Museum Reviews and Exhibitions. Not olny the delivery of web and podcasts, but also a
service for search and find vacant places in art institutions and a tool to be always updated
with all over the world exhibitions. But just few people added this application, even if very
useful and interesting.
Conclusions:
52
My research aim was demonstrate how the web social network Facebook is fundamental
for art and cultural organizations to create a strong community around them, to delivery
quick and interesting information about their activities, to make the museum a less boring
and dusty place. But most of all I want to emphasize its power in reaching brand new
contacts, something that a normal web site is not able to do. All the social network
theories show as interpersonal relationships, even if not strong, are able to provoke deep
changes in the social tissue. Influencing all aspects and spheres of individuals life, social
relations are responsible for most part of our decisions, in politics as in economy. This
influence becomes vital in a total uncertain territory such as the cultural consume. And as
drive consumers tastes is impossible (and anyway not easy), try to establish relations
with groups of people in order to create a network is the winning strategy.
Facebook is an instrument that not only simplify the relationships mechanism, decreasing
effort and energies to keep alive the contacts, but first of all, is perfect to generates new
ones. As philosophy of Facebook users is what De Kerckhove explain as the friends of
my friends are my friends, create a link with new people, to enter in contact with
complete new scenarios through the weak ties, fill Burts structural holes, is extremely easy.
Personal social networks become every time bigger and bigger, there are no more space
and time limitations. Every one can contact and be contacted by every one. All the net is
interconnected.
In this vision of the program, Facebook is a great opportunity for art/ cultural institutions
to achieve complete new markets (intended as potential audience), and at the same time,
solidify and make more cohesive and integrated the already lover group. Fan pages,
groups and applications keep alerted all the members at the first click (the home),
supplying information and knowledge that stimulate fans willingness to broaden. An
involved individual will be able to create interest in a new potential consumer more easily
than a not engaged one and, on the other hand, be part of a recognized online community
(visible by everybody) means gain a status able to generate appealing for other friends.
No quantitative and qualitative researches on the impact of Facebook on total amount of
museums visitors have been carried out, also because the method to detect in a group
who is a brand new member in a museumgoers group is very complicated. But the
impact is undeniable and this medium is going to raise its importance and power.
Facebook team demonstrate several times its flexibility and adaptation capability in order
to satisfy the request of users, even if not natural person but institutions, societies,
associations. Every day new applications and tools are developed to make all kind of ties
53
(personal, work and so on), much rich and easy. Unlike MySpace, Facebook is in a
continuous change, thanks to the contribution of official team and normal users.
I examined the relation between some of the biggest contemporary art museum and the
Mark Zuckerbergs program. I choose contemporary art institutions simply because they
are normally pushed to pursuit new technologies thanks to their own nature (lets think to
all the artworks that imply technologies that for us are still unknown).And in fact most of
modern art centres are on Facebook but no so many other type of museums do (for ex:
national galleries, archeological museums and so on). But Facebook is an instrument adapt
to enhance all kind of museum audience, is addressed to all genre of cultural organizations
as theatres, library, sport centres, opera and ballet theatres, concerts halls.






APPENDIX:
Art Institutions Facebook Pages






54






Bibliography:
-Michele Trimarchi, Martina De Luca, Flaminia Gennari Santori, Bartolomeo Pietromarchi,
Creazione Contemporanea, Luca Sassella editore, 2002
- Michele Trimarchi, Dentro lo Specchio: Economia e Politica della Domanda di Cultura,
Economia della Cultura, 2002
-D. De Kerckhove and V. Susco, La rete incantata, The Mc Luhan program in culture
and technology, 2008
- R. J. Boland, J. K. Lyytinen and Y. Yoo, Wakes of innovation in project Networks: the
case of digital 3-D representations in architecture, engineering and construction
Organization Science, 2007
- D.J. Watts and S.H. Strogatz , Collective Dynamics of Small World Network, Nature
1998
-M.E.J. Newman, A.L. Barabasi, D.J. Watts, The Structure and Dynamic of Complex
Networks, Princeton University Press, 2003
-L. Fleming and M. Marx , Managing Creativity in Small Worlds, California
Management Review, 2006
-J. Podolny, Networks as the Pipes and the Prisms of the Markets, The American
Journal of Sociology, 2001.
-M. Granovetter, Economic Action and Social Structure: the Problem of Embeddedness,
The American Journal of Sociology, 1985.

55
- M. Granovetter, "The Strength of Weak Ties", American Journal of Sociology,1973

- J. Lampel, T. Lant and J. Shamsie, Balancing act: Learning from organizing practices in
cultural industries, Organization Science, 2000
- W. Chan Kim and R. Mauborgne , Blue Ocean Strategy, Harvard Business Review,
2004
- Bernstein, S., Where Do We Go From Here? Continuing with Web 2.0 at the Brooklyn
Museum Museums and the Web 2008: Proceedings(CD-ROM), Toronto: Archives &
Museum Informatics. Published March 31, 2008.
- N. Anand, Richard A. Peterson, When Market Information Constitutes Fields:
Sensemaking of Markets in the Commercial Music Industry, Organization Science, 2000
-R. Caves, Creative Industries, Harvard University Press, 2000.
- Il fenomeno Facebook, Il Sole 24 ore, Nva, 2008
Web sites:
facebook.com
archimuse.com
mashable.com
thecrimson.com
utoronto.ca/mcluhan/
fastcompany.com
insidefacebook.com






56