In Shirky's "Here Comes Everybody" he discusses how cheap it has become to put information out there. The lines between a blog and a media outlet have been sufficiently blurred. With the ability to put out information with shorter notice, and of lesser cost, it has become harder to regulate collective action. Groups can organize without any organization essentially. If a group widely publicizes a march for days and days in order to reach a large crowd, it can easily be prevented or regulated by the police or government. However, now with the speed information can be spread, marches or rallies can be held last minute, and therefore are less likely to be prevented.

This also emphasizes how the cost of joining groups has decreased. Groups can grow much faster now. An example of this that was discussed is the Voice of the Faithful which kept doubling in size every six months. Its speed of growth was not the only interesting part about this group, it was also extremely spatially diverse. Which in the past, would have been much less likely and near impossible without this cheap, fast technology.

While Shirky makes some good and interesting assertions, I lean more towards Gladwell's views on the subject. The counterargument is that these unorganized internet groups are working by weak ties instead of strong ties, so people are less likely to do costly things. If one merely signs a petition online, or responds to an email, or clicks "join" they are usually much less invested than if one joined in person, or sought out the petition to sign. This decreases the chances that they will show up for a sit in, or a march with people they do not know, for a group they do not feel unified with. This is why I side more with Gladwell's arguments although I am not saying social media can be ignored because it certainly plays a role in publicity.