understand the dynamics

[muniyaakter]

the latest neuroscientific research shows that people's lives unfold within social networks that influence every aspect of them. Social networks tell us what to do, where to go, what brands and products to buy. But it could also be extended to the political area, guiding us in choosing the ideas we believe in. for the first time in history, man has the technical tools to “map” social interactions, to record and analyze in real time how human beings interact with each other. And this allows us to of communication in a completely new way.


In his latest book, Grouped ( out in November), Adams will report some brazil telegram data interesting conclusions that we can summarize as follows: people generally tend to have no more than five different groups of friends of about ten members each, many of these, for strictly numerical reasons, end up belonging to more than one group at the same time. These individuals are therefore the key figures in society, the most interconnected, the most trusted, the true opinion leaders. So where is the difference compared to the classic approach? The difference is that these figures have nothing special. They do not necessarily have charisma or exceptional personalities, and yet according to Adams these are the pillars of the information society, the true levers of communicative power that companies must learn to maneuver in order to influence the masses of users who live online.