Social networking has had a marked influence on society and re-defined social relationships via the speed and expanse of the networks themselves.

The social networking experience is not quarantined to the young, nor are there generational gaps turning into chasms of divide. Rather human beings are simply being human and exhibiting their social nature, but on an accelerated trajectory. An examination of recent social networking activity provides evidence of the direct impact on social relationships, corporate policy and even regime change. And a deeper examination of how social network engagement, of customers, by corporations, is changing our purchasing decision making process, supports a view that social networks will ultimately be the mechanism by which we communicate.

The depth and speed of recruitment, to a cause, via social networking is illustrated by examples of social networks facilitating fundamental human behaviour but on a geometric scale. In August 2011, during the aftermath of the London riots, the manufacturer of the Blackberry
announced that it would co-operate with Scotland Yard and their investigation into individuals who had posted inflammatory messages on Blackberry Messenger and social networking sites such
as Twitter and Facebook (Halliday, J., 2011). In March 2011, Syrian eyewitnesses to the regimes crackdown on protests, communicated to the world what was happening through a mix of mobile phone video accounts that were uploaded to YouTube (Hassan, N.,2011). By the end
of 2009 after over seven million views of a video United breaks guitars United Airlines changed their baggage damage policy and compensated the songwriter and the videos creator Dave Carroll, for the guitar damaged by United baggage handlers (Li. C., 2010. Open Leadership.
Chapter 1, Why giving up control is inevitable, pp3-5). And in their book The Hyper- Social Organisation, Gossieaux and Moran (2010) wrote, how Jeep through its marketing initiatives had found a tribe, a tribe of young and old, sharing a passion for adventure.

A common thread in these events, to para-phrase Gossieaux and Moran (2010),
is that social networks are not about the network or the technology. Social networks are about the social nature of humankind, and via social networks humans can join tribes that are not bound by geography, and belong to multiple tribes. What Gossieaux and Moran (2010) call
the Hyper-Social shift, is as Dr Robert Cialdini identified, the playing out of principles of social influence, with technology allowing natural social behaviour to develop on a scale never seen before in history. The technology of social networking has delivered ease and speed of
engagement and like historical tribes, social networking tribes are not bound by age, but formed with shared beliefs, experiences and commonalities.

The phenomenon of social networking is important as it has changed the mechanism via which we connect in an irreversible way. As to why this is happening now, in her book, Groundswell, Charlene Li (2008) describes the rise of social networks as resulting from the collision of three forces; people, technology and economics. This is an astute viewpoint as it
is true that people have always formed social movements or connected with those who share common beliefs. Technology and access to it, is common place especially in the Western world and there is money to be made for those who can tap into and direct the cyber traffic.

Corporations, according to Gossieaux and Moran (2010), have had to adapt to this new world, realising now that two-thirds of all buying decisions are made based on information that does not come from the company itself. The face of marketing has changed with the process before social networking at the control of the company. Now after social networking , lead generation is about the company becoming accessible on the web and being helpful in social network conversations. Product development is becoming a social process, with companies from Dell to garden tool manufacturer Fiskars fostering social network communities to innovate product development. This leads to sales, and as Gossieaux and Moran (2010) note, the Fiskateer community of 5000, increased store sales by
300% in 18 months.

Some would have us believe that this social and corporate revolution is the domain of the 18 to 29 year old demographic. In Josh Salman.s 2009 article he cited mobile sales as an example that younger peoples purchases are predicated on accessibility via handsets to social network sites, whilst older generations desire a basic communication tool. This may be the case but in Shirley Duglin Kennedys 2009 article, Getting a Little Perspective on Social Networking, she reported that the fastest growing demographic on Facebook was women aged 55 and over. And while Charlene Li in Groundswell, notes that people over 50 don't participate in social
networking at the same levels of younger consumers, her data shows that baby boomers participate as creators and maintainers of websites and blogs indicating that several million older people are actively involved in social networking.

Some corporations understand this as described by Gossieaux and Moran (2010), and see that social networking success, is not a pitch to demographics but a support of commonalities and passions in people, such as freedom and off-road adventures for Jeep or more obtusely scrapbooking
for the Fiskateers. Do these connections mean that people have become closer? Professor Nicholas Christakis in an address to freshman at Harvard in 2011 (Harvard Gazette, 2011), doesn't think so, arguing that Facebook has changed the meaning of the word friend, suggesting that at best our
Facebook friends are mere acquaintances belying the social connectivity that social networks purport to facilitate. But did Tottenham residents feel closer to their community during the cleanup where students through to retirees came together organised by a Twitter campaign? The answer through the emotion, a resounding YES (Lawless, J., 2011).

Social networks have re-defined social relationships and in doing so are having a marked influence on society. It is not a re-creation of what it means to be social, rather social networks have amplified the inherent human processes of socialisation providing a greater capacity and accessibility for human beings, young and old to socialise. From community bonding, supporting those in need, protesting injustices and fostering our consumerism, social networks allow humans to engage at a level not seen before in human history. This has adverse consequences and as the Tottenham riots illustrated, via social networks it is far easier to recruit the disaffected. The most likely outcome is that the future mechanisms by which; communities form, we obtain our information, we find new friends and we make decisions from the important to the mundane, will
be the lasting change to our social relationships. The creator of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg best describes the vision of how we will interact as a species in the future. In his 2010 interview with
Zuckerberg, in The New Yorker, reporter Jose Antonio Vargas, noted Zuckerberg's vision that Facebook ultimately becomes a layer underneath almost every electronic device and simply by turning on your television you will see what your friends are watching, and make decisions based on what your Facebook friends have recommended. The lasting change on society may be that one day all word of mouth is via Facebook.