By Ethan Lyon, Senior Writer

The Internet was born in 1969 as a communication tool developed by the military to increase the flow of information between academics and researchers. At first, there were a couple of murmurs between a few computers. Then, the backbone of the operation was further developed by the private sector. As technology advanced, the Internet became faster and faster and millions of people began adopting the new technology, vast networks began to form. What started as a whisper between a few computers over two decades ago, now influences the way we communicate and receive information on a daily basis.

Today, social media is the number one activity on the web; Facebook alone has added 100 million users in the past nine months; and more than 1.5 million pieces of data are shared on Facebook, daily. As 24 out of 25 newspapers are experiencing record declines in circulation, answers about the future of news and politics might lie in social media. More and more, social networks are the go-to source for the freshest, up-to-date information. Accordingly, media companies are playing a much larger role on these networks. How are media companies faring amid these new waters? The Digital Influence in News & Politics Report examines several popular sites (Twitter, Facebook and Digg) to determine the most influential news and politics media outlets on the social web.

To evaluate social influence, we explore the social structure of Twitter, Facebook and Digg, including best practices by the top digital media influencers. At the top of the social influencer list is CNN, followed by The New York Times and Huffington Post. Each of the top social influencers owns a particular quality: CNN is about facts and churning news in a 24-hr cycle; The New York Times has quality, quantity and an insider perspective; The Huffington Post leverages the talents of its audience and digital newsroom to find the juiciest, freshest news and politics stories. In fact, The New York Times makes the top three list across many of the largest social media platforms (i.e. Twitter, Facebook and Digg).

Though the Huffington Post might outwardly build social capital (i.e. through a community of supporters), CNN and the New York Times indirectly harness the power of the crowds. As we’ll discuss, The Huffington Post takes a circular approach to build social capital, while the New York Times and CNN take a pyramid approach. We have discovered, based on the company’s social capital building approach, certain social networks are more conducive to specific fan-building strategies than others.

The Social Twyramid
Twitter is a pyramid-shaped community–or a triangle-shaped social capital structure. At the top, there are the key influencers, such as CNN, the New York Times, and TIME–with millions of followers tuning into the most recent celebrity flub or crisis. These Twitter influencers are the capstone; they are the go-to source of information. It is not a one-way relationship, however. The capstone has to be supported by the rest of the pyramid below it–otherwise it would be nothing more than a speed bump. In essence, the number of Twitter followers is a gauge of influence; the more followers you have, the higher your pyramid stands; the greater your social capital.

Rally ‘Round the Fans
Would you be fans of 300 brands on Facebook? For most people, the answer is no. Would you, however, follow hundreds of brands on Twitter? Our relationships are different based on the community structure we operate in. What is the difference? From its inception, Facebook has been about cultivating personal communities. Friend recommendations is an important initiative that illustrates how relevance and personal investment are involved in Facebook—not the case with Twitter. Instead of the pyramid structure, Facebook is more like Ring Around the Rosie–every person is holding hands and can see the faces of all of those within their ring. When a Facebook user wants to invite The New York Times or The Huffington Post, NPR or Google into their circle, it carries much more weight than if they followed them on Twitter. It would dilute the quality of your circle to invite 300 brands to join. For those few brands that are a part of our personal community, there is a higher level of engagement and interaction that cannot be matched on Twitter.

Ring Around the Pyramid
If there were a mashup between Twitter and Facebook, it would be Digg. There are smaller pyramids in the middle of a community circle. Those playing Ring Around the Rosie have a relationship built on reciprocity (you digg this submission, I will digg your submissions) and those pyramids in the middle are the collectively preferred sources. The tallest of those pyramids is the Huffington Post, with 1.1 million diggs in the past year; the New York Times stands beside it with 617k digs; and CNN with 464k diggs.

Each digital community has a particular dynamic that makes it unique and differentiates it from its peers. Based on our findings, the social community structure–a pyramid, ring or a blend–you wish to enter will inform your strategy and reflect differing levels of user engagement. Before setting out to collect hundreds of thousands of Twitter followers, Digg and Facebook fans, answer a simple, basic question: what is the best way I can build influence?

Read the full Digital Influence Report (PDF)

Image by Flavio Takemoto from Stock.Xchng

Related posts:

1. The Value of Reciprocity in Social Influence
2. Social Bookmarking: A Pulse on Society?
3. Social Influence Marketing: Recap of the Fluent Report
4. Finding a Job Through Social Media
5. Can Web Innovation Save Media?