In order for bloggers to build a campaign, it is necessary to build a group that has a particular aim, and - critically - understands what that aim is and is agreed that this is so.

I find it helpful to think of campaigning groups in terms of "communities" and "networks"; this post compares and contrasts the two.

A community is likely to:

- Be Long term.
- Be "Bigger" than a single current cause or aim.
- Consist of people known to each other because of a common philosophy or set of principles, who have become friends.
- Have a large emotional investment from its members.
- Become embodied as an institution, such as a charity, if it exists for an extended period.
- Require considerable time and infrastructure to maintain.
- Take a long time to change direction.

A network is likely to:

- Be short term and provisional - serving only a temporary purpose.
- Be linked to a particular cause.
- Be made up of people together primarily to promote a particular cause.
- Demand a small but focused commitment from it's members.
- Be flexible and adaptable.
- Be very "light" in terms of infrastructure.
- Evolve into a community if it exists for a long time.

In politics, the most obvious examples of communities are political parties, but we also have societies gathered around particular ideas - such as the Fawcett Society or Liberal Democrat Party.

One of the questions facing any campaigning coalition of bloggers is to decide what they need to be: community or network?

Examining a cause in the light of the contrasts I have set out above *may* provide information to help make that decision. The answer can inform the way you build your coalition.

I have posted some Reflections on Creating Community Online at my own blog.

Matt Wardman edits the group blog The Wardman Wire.