Notes

- The argument asserts that our acquaintances (weak ties) are less likely to be socially involved with one another than are our close friends (strong ties). Thus the set of people made up of any individual and his or her acquaintances comprises a low-density network (one in which many of the possible relational lines are absent) whereas the set
consisting of the same individual and his or her close friends will be densely knit (many of the possible lines are present)

- It follows, then, that individuals with few weak ties will be
deprived of information from distant parts of the social system and will
be confined to the provincial news and views of their close friends. This
deprivation will not only insulate them from the latest ideas and
fashions but may put them in a disadvantaged position in the labor
market, where advancement can depend, as I have documented else-
where (1974), on knowing about appropriate job openings at just the
right time. Furthermore, such individuals may be difficult to organize
or integrate into political movements of any kind, since membership in
movements or goal-oriented organizations typically results from being
recruited by friends. While members of one or two cliques may be
efficiently recruited, the problem is that, without weak ties, any
momentum generated in this way does not spread beyond the clique.
As a result, most of the population will be untouched

-