Olivia: Alright Jackson, pop quiz. What do the #MeToo movement, ISIS, and LEGO have in common? Jackson: Wow. That sounds like the setup to a truly terrible joke. I have no idea. A shared love for building things? One of those is… very dark. Olivia: It is dark, and that's part of the point. The answer is that they are all masters of a force that’s completely rewriting the rules of influence. It’s a force that explains why some ideas change the world while others just disappear into the digital noise. Jackson: Okay, I'm intrigued. A force that powerful and that… morally flexible, has to be worth understanding. What is it? Olivia: That force is the central idea in a really thought-provoking book, New Power: How Power Works in Our Hyperconnected World by Jeremy Heimans and Henry Timms. Jackson: Right, and these aren't just academic theorists watching from an ivory tower. Heimans is the guy behind massive global movements like Avaaz and GetUp!, and Timms is the force who co-founded #GivingTuesday. They've been in the trenches, building these 'new power' currents themselves, which gives the book a ton of credibility. Olivia: Exactly. And it was shortlisted for the Financial Times/McKinsey Business Book of the Year for a reason. It gives you a new lens to see the world. So let's start with the absolute core of their argument, which is a fundamental shift in what power even is.

Olivia: Let's go back to that first example from the quiz: #MeToo. It's the perfect illustration of the book's central idea: the clash between what the authors call Old Power and New Power. Jackson: Okay, break that down for me. What’s the difference? Olivia: Think of Old Power as a currency. It's held by a few, it's jealously guarded, and it's pushed down from the top. For decades, a figure like Harvey Weinstein was the ultimate Old Power player. He had the money, the connections, the control. He could make or break careers. His power was a finite resource that he owned and spent to get what he wanted, often with terrifying impunity. Jackson: It was a fortress. You were either inside the walls with him, or you were out. And he controlled the gate. Olivia: Precisely. Now, contrast that with New Power. The authors describe New Power not as a currency, but as a current. It’s like water or electricity. It’s made by many, it’s open, participatory, and peer-driven. It surges. The goal isn't to hoard it, but to channel it. Jackson: And #MeToo was a surge. Olivia: A tidal wave. It wasn't commanded from a single source. It started with Tarana Burke's grassroots work years earlier, then was amplified by Alyssa Milano's tweet, but it truly exploded because millions of people participated. They shared the hashtag, told their own stories, and created a collective current of outrage and solidarity that became too forceful for Old Power structures to ignore. No single person owned it. That’s the key. Jackson: That currency versus current analogy is really sticky. Old Power is a vault of gold coins you control. New Power is a river, and your influence comes from your ability to direct its flow, not from owning the water itself. Olivia: Exactly. And this is where it gets complicated, and a little scary. The book makes it very clear that New Power is value-neutral. It’s a tool. The same dynamics that powered #MeToo have also been used by groups like ISIS. Jackson: Whoa, hold on. How does that connect? Olivia: ISIS was terrifyingly effective at using New Power. They didn't just broadcast top-down propaganda like an old-school government. They created a participatory, peer-driven recruitment machine. They encouraged followers to create and share their own content, their own memes. They built a sense of community and belonging for disaffected youth online. A Scottish schoolgirl like Aqsa Mahmood could become a more effective recruiter than an entire state department, because she was using New Power—a peer-to-peer current—while the government was still using Old Power—top-down, formal messages that just didn't connect. Jackson: That's chilling. So the same force that can topple a Hollywood mogul can also build a terrorist network. It’s really about the structure, not the morality. Olivia: It’s all about the structure. But this raises a huge question that I think you were hinting at earlier. Is it really that simple? Old Power institutions like the New York Times and The New Yorker were absolutely crucial for breaking the Weinstein story with their investigative journalism. Doesn't this New Power current still need Old Power channels to have real-world teeth? Jackson: Yeah, that’s what I was thinking. A hashtag is one thing, but a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigation is another. It feels like they need each other. Olivia: And that is the most sophisticated point the authors make, which we'll get to. The ultimate skill is blending them. But before we can blend, we have to understand the mechanics of the current itself. Because it's not just luck that makes one idea surge and another one vanish.

Jackson: That makes sense. So if New Power is a current, how do you actually start one? It can't just be random. For every Ice Bucket Challenge, there are a million hashtags and campaigns that go absolutely nowhere. What’s the secret sauce? Olivia: The authors argue there is a formula, or at least a framework. They call it ACE. For an idea to spread effectively in a New Power way, it needs to be Actionable, Connected, and Extensible. Jackson: ACE. Okay, I like a good acronym. Let's use their big example: The Ice Bucket Challenge. How does that fit the ACE model? Olivia: Perfectly. Let's start with 'A' for Actionable. The action was simple, clear, and easy to perform. Dump a bucket of ice water on your head. It wasn't asking you to read a long report or attend a boring meeting. It was a tangible, slightly ridiculous thing to do. And crucially, the action itself—sharing the video—was the mechanism for spreading the idea. Jackson: Right, the action contained the marketing. You didn't have to do the thing and then tell people about it. Doing the thing was telling people about it. What about 'C' for Connected? Olivia: This is about how the idea brings people together. The Ice Bucket Challenge was deeply connected. First, it connected you to the cause, ALS, often through a personal story. But more importantly, it connected you to your peers. The nomination structure was genius. It wasn't a broadcast message from a charity; it was a direct challenge from your friend, your cousin, your boss. It created social pressure and a sense of shared, communal experience. You saw everyone from your neighbor to Bill Gates doing it. Jackson: You felt like you were part of something. And the 'E'? Extensible? Olivia: This might be the most important part. Extensible means the idea can be easily adapted, remixed, and customized by the participants. It feels unfinished, inviting people to add their own spin. The ALS Association didn't create a strict branding guide for the challenge. People could do it in their backyard or on a mountain top. They could wear a costume. The book mentions a 102-year-old man who did it in nothing but his Union Jack boxer shorts. Jackson: (laughing) And I'm sure he got more views than anyone. That makes so much sense. It wasn't owned by anyone, so in a way, everyone owned it. Olivia: That's the core of it. The authors contrast this with Old Power "sound bites," which are polished, centrally-controlled messages you're supposed to consume. New Power ideas are more like "meme drops"—they're given to the community to play with and make their own. Jackson: This sounds a lot like what the best modern marketers are trying to do. Is this just a new name for 'going viral'? Olivia: It's deeper than that, because it's about shifting agency to the crowd. A company like BuzzFeed understands this instinctively. Their content isn't just designed to be read; it's engineered to be shared. They obsess over what makes someone click that share button. It’s an action. Another great example from the book is #GivingTuesday. Jackson: The day of charity after Black Friday and Cyber Monday. Olivia: Right. Henry Timms, one of the authors, was a driving force behind it at the 92nd Street Y. He tells the story of how his colleagues initially wanted to brand it as the '92nd Street Y Giving Tuesday.' He fought against that. He knew that if it had their logo all over it, no one else would feel ownership. So they made it an open-source, ownerless brand. That's why you see other organizations creating their own versions, like #GivingShoesDay for a clothing charity or a local community creating #BmoreGivesMore. It's extensible. Jackson: They gave the idea away to make it more powerful. That's a very New Power way of thinking. It’s counterintuitive to a traditional, Old Power mindset where you want to control and own your brand at all costs. Olivia: Completely. And that brings us to the most advanced and, I think, most practical part of the book. It’s not about choosing one over the other. The real masters of influence in the 21st century aren't New Power purists or Old Power dinosaurs. They are strategic blenders.

Jackson: Okay, so this is where it gets really interesting for anyone trying to actually get something done, whether in politics or business. It’s not just about creating a viral movement. It’s about sustaining it and directing it. How do you blend the chaos of a 'current' with the structure of a 'fortress'? Olivia: The book uses a fascinating and, for some, controversial example: the National Rifle Association, the NRA. Jackson: I would not have picked them as a New Power model. They seem like the definition of an Old Power institution—big money, powerful lobbyists in Washington, a rigid hierarchy. Olivia: And they are! That's their Old Power side, and they wield it ruthlessly. The book talks about their famous grading system for politicians. A bad grade from the NRA can be a political death sentence. That is pure, top-down, fear-based Old Power. But the authors argue that's not the main source of their strength. Jackson: What is, then? Olivia: Their New Power base. The NRA has spent decades building one of the most engaged, passionate, and powerful grassroots communities in the world. They empower their members. They make them feel like owners of the movement, not just consumers of it. The book tells the story of a recall election in Colorado in 2013. Two state senators were ousted for supporting gun control. The effort wasn't started by an NRA executive in a boardroom. It was started by a plumber named Victor Head and his friends, organizing on online message boards. Jackson: So the NRA just fanned the flames? Olivia: They channeled the current. They provided some funding and support, but they let the local community lead. They understood a key principle: a movement is only a real movement if it moves without you. They have mastered the art of blending. They use Old Power to intimidate politicians in Washington and New Power to mobilize an army of advocates back home. The two reinforce each other. Jackson: That's a powerful and slightly terrifying combination. What about a less political example? I remember the book talking about LEGO's incredible turnaround. Olivia: Yes! LEGO is the perfect business case study. In the early 2000s, they were on the verge of bankruptcy. They were an Old Power company making toys for kids, with a top-down design process. They were losing touch. Jackson: And then they discovered the AFOLs. Olivia: The Adult Fans of LEGO! This passionate, slightly nerdy community of adults was building things with LEGO that the company's own designers couldn't even imagine. At first, LEGO's Old Power instincts took over. Their lawyers saw fan sites as copyright infringement. But a new CEO, Jørgen Vig Knudstorp, realized this community wasn't a threat; it was their greatest asset. Jackson: So how did they blend? Olivia: They kept their Old Power control over manufacturing, quality, and the core brand. You can't just have anyone making official LEGO bricks. But they created New Power structures to channel the fans' creativity. The biggest one is the LEGO Ideas platform. Jackson: Where fans can submit their own designs for new sets. Olivia: Exactly. A fan submits an idea, and if it gets 10,000 votes from the community, LEGO's official designers will review it for production. If it gets made, the fan creator gets a percentage of the sales. It's a brilliant blend. LEGO maintains Old Power quality control, but they've harnessed a global, New Power R&D department of passionate fans who work for free. They turned consumers into co-creators. Jackson: They gave them a real stake in the outcome. It's not just a suggestion box. It's a pathway to becoming part of the official LEGO universe. That's incredibly powerful. Olivia: It is. And it saved their company. They went from near-bankruptcy to surpassing Mattel as the world's largest toy company.

Jackson: So, when you put it all together—from #MeToo to the NRA to LEGO—it seems the big takeaway isn't to just chase 'new power' trends or try to go viral. It’s about understanding that power now flows in two fundamentally different ways. And the real skill is knowing which tap to turn on, and when. Olivia: Exactly. The book isn't an argument that New Power is inherently better than Old Power. It’s a roadmap for a new reality where both exist and often collide. The most effective leaders and organizations will be bilingual—fluent in the language of both. They'll know when to build a formal hierarchy and when to unleash a swarm. Jackson: It also feels like a warning. The authors talk about "participation farms"—platforms that use the language of New Power, of community and sharing, but are really just Old Power structures designed to extract value from users. Think of Facebook. We, the users, create the content, the connections, the data—the entire current—and a handful of executives and shareholders at the top hoard the value, the currency. Olivia: That's the central tension of our age. And the book leaves you with a critical question to ask yourself, not just about the platforms you use, but about your own life and work: Are you using power like a currency to be hoarded, or a current to be channeled? And are the systems you're part of designed to genuinely empower you, or just to farm your participation? Jackson: That's a heavy, but really important question. It makes you look at everything from your social media feed to your company's suggestion box in a totally new light. We'd love to hear what you all think. Are you seeing this shift from old to new power in your own lives or workplaces? Let us know your thoughts on our socials. Olivia: This is Aibrary, signing off.