Still, networks were eternally undermined by the inevitable force of randomness. It was one thing, say, to go to a baseball game and hear the stirrings of rhythmic clapping that then cascade around the ballpark so that quickly everyone is clapping in unison. A powerful thing to behold—so much so that an inning later, you yourself might want to start the whole stadium clapping. Maybe the person to your left joins in, and maybe five or six others do, too. Until the clapping dies. In Watts’s view, networks were a wonderful phenomenon to observe, but all but impossible to replicate. Why did everyone in the ballpark feel the desire to join in the clapping in the sixth inning but not in the seventh? What was different? Could you somehow recreate the precise conditions that made that ephemeral but resoundingly successful sixth-inning network happen?
Watts doubted it. There were simply too many variables at work. Still, you could, in theory, try something: Start to clap, see if anyone joins in, stop if they don’t, wait for a new set of conditions to arise—another player to bat, a runner reaches second base? Or third? In other words, experiment, and measure the results as they occur, all the while adjusting, tweaking—try clapping louder, say, then faster, maybe adding a chant—but do so having accepted the likelihood that animates work for all scientists: failure.
Ken Lerer listened, and he was not deterred. Networks did, in fact, occur—vast networks through which previously disconnected people suddenly found themselves joined together, perhaps to share an idea, a song, a sentiment, a cause. Why not then try to create a network that could challenge the vast and powerful and sustaining network of the NRA?
“I know the answers,” Watts told him. “I am confident they are not there.” Then, having deflated Lerer, Watts threw him a lifeline: “Maybe my friend Jonah can help you.”
Jonah Peretti was 29 and had already earned a reputation as something of a wise guy. He had been a technology teacher at a New Orleans private school when he was admitted to a graduate program at MIT. His plan was to study ways networks might foster communication among teachers, but got sidetracked midway through his master’s thesis. In 2000, Nike was inviting customers to create footwear with personalized wording. The company had been criticized widely for selling sneakers made by desperately poor people in impoverished countries. Peretti, tall, skinny and bespectacled, submitted his request: He wanted his sneakers emblazoned with the word SWEATSHOP. Nike declined. At which point, Peretti did a clever thing: he e-mailed.
Nike replied. Back and forth they went: Peretti pressing his request; Nike, grasping at excuses, going so far as to refuse on the grounds that “sweatshop” was slang and therefore not permissible. Peretti, citing Webster’s, insisted it was not. He ended the exchange with a final request: “Could you please send me a color snapshot of the ten-year-old Vietnamese girl who makes my shoes?” What happened next represents one of those moments in which the tectonic media plates experienced a subtle but profound shift: Peretti offered the e-mail trail to Harper’s. The magazine declined. So, on January 17, 2001, Peretti forwarded the e-mails to 10 friends. Those friends, in turn, forwarded the e-mails to other friends and before long, a lot people who had never heard of Jonah Peretti—some of them in Australia—were sending around his e-mail conversations with Nike.
Less than two weeks after he first forwarded the e-mails, the San Jose Mercury News published a story about the exchange. Salon soon followed. Then Time, The Village Voice, and The Independent and The Guardian in London. Years later, Peretti would recall the sensation of watching something he had originated spread so widely that it would culminate in his appearance on the Today Show with a chagrined representative of Nike. “Every person who’s made something that’s gone viral remembers the experience with glee and disbelief,” he says. “Part of it feels powerful and part of it feels like magic—I just did this little thing and a big thing happened.”

Wow, how did you manage to spell the subject's name wrong in the photo caption?
#1 Posted by Gladys, CJR on Sun 22 Apr 2012 at 12:35 AM
Thanks, it's been fixed.
#2 Posted by Alysia Santo, CJR on Tue 24 Apr 2012 at 12:27 PM
This is a good article but I think you forgot to include the rest of the history of time and all living things...
Seriously, I perhaps spent half an hour reading through this story, and only got half way! I mean, sure it's good to be thorough and provide a bit of background context et cetera, but I feel like there's so much context swimming around I actually know what these people ordered for lunch when they met.
In saying that though I did actually enjoy the first half of the piece and you should be proud of writing such a fine and comprehensive work.
Warmest regards,
Square.
#3 Posted by square, CJR on Thu 26 Apr 2012 at 09:55 AM
Fantastic article with a lot of interesting background information. I feel more educated for reading it; thanks for writing it.
#4 Posted by Sam, CJR on Sun 29 Apr 2012 at 02:00 PM
Many thanks Sam
#5 Posted by Michael Shapiro, CJR on Tue 1 May 2012 at 10:39 AM
So, is the Huff Post brand stronger than the AOL brand now?
Also, what is behind the folding of sites like Black Voices and AOL Latino into what are essentially just channels on Huff Post....just cost-cutting moves?
#6 Posted by Carlos, CJR on Wed 2 May 2012 at 11:41 AM
I really enjoyed this piece, from the incorporation of the sociologist's book to the descriptions of Arianna Huffington's apparent charisma. Not only did I learn a great deal about the history of The Huffington Post, but I also got some excellent pointers about how to improve and maximize my own blogging presence.
Thank you for your work.
#7 Posted by Britney, CJR on Fri 15 Jun 2012 at 03:16 PM
Great article by my journalism mentor Michael Shapiro.
As a reporter I try never to manipulate my readers, to respect them. As a reader I want the same. This quote by Isaf the Huff Post manager "People will do anything for recognition" -- that's why I won't comment or jump on board huff post to be part of the conversation, I feel like I'm being tricked, used, like I'm online and there are all these sleazy carnys trying to get me to play their rigged games for little stuffed animals (badges, ironic tokens from reddit, etc)
Isaf and all web media will learn people will do anything for respect, anything for money, anything for ego, anything to get quoted in an article and on and on. We're complex -- the best bet is to be nice and honest, just like they taught you in 2nd grade -- the old tricks, even if they're dressed up in html or seo or engagement or vertical blah blah will fail just like the old tricks have failed since biblical days.
#8 Posted by Kevin Heldman, CJR on Mon 18 Jun 2012 at 10:27 AM
Aha, so influence is only next door to power in Arianna's house of fickle. But in the end she can't expunge history, viz., the fact that she and Republican then-husband Michael did spend $28 million on that failed attempt to unseat Democrat Feinstein in '94.
Btw, anything in HuffPost today about the 1 billion people who went to bed hungry last night?
#9 Posted by diannesteinfein, CJR on Fri 13 Jul 2012 at 03:50 PM
As someone who covered both Mike Huffington's 1994 Senate race during Arianna's conservative Republican phase and her 2003 run for governor for the San Francisco Chronicle, I enjoyed the piece. But when you say that in 2004 Jonah Peretti flew to Sacramento "for a rally in support of the Senate candidacy of Phil Angelides," there's a problem. Since 1992, California has had two Democratic senators, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, and Angelides, as former head of the state Democratic Party, certainly never ran against them. In 2006, however, he did run for governor against Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger.
#10 Posted by John Wildermuth, CJR on Sat 14 Jul 2012 at 09:19 PM
If you run an online business in the UK andAdidas Angry Birds Shoes Black 3D Toy Shoes online
are experiencing increased performance in your site in terms of the visitors you are getting, you have probably thought about enlisting for a dedicated server hosting service. In such a case it would be better to Adidas AR 2.0 Animal Black Gold Trainers online
choose a UK dedicated server solution over a dedicated server solution in another country. The advantage of doing so is the fact that since you are in the same geographical region, you can be able to ascertain that the UK dedicated server hosting company you are thinking of using or have enlisted with have quality infrastructure. Also, in case your company’s web servers have been collocated, you will have more control over the servers since your experts can be able to easily access them.
#11 Posted by adidasaustralia2012, CJR on Tue 4 Sep 2012 at 11:01 AM
A good alternative for rss news aggregation is http://www.todaynews.info
#12 Posted by John, CJR on Wed 26 Sep 2012 at 05:18 AM
Media and journalism both go side by side almost in all niches of the world. Here is better to say that Media is 3rd eye of society in which different circumstances happen and every kind of people live.Clickhere for further detail and obviously you will view a number of rich articles on Journalism and its overall worth throughout the world.In short, the journalists are actual commanders and essential entities of societies which play magnificent part in displaying difference between reality and imagination.
#13 Posted by Android, CJR on Tue 9 Oct 2012 at 07:17 AM
What you have here is about three chapters of a biography. Keep going.
#14 Posted by Carolina, CJR on Wed 10 Oct 2012 at 10:31 AM