The two main different types of networks we discussed are local and cosmopolitan. Local networks are defined as closer ties with an increased sense of support. Local networks are comprised of cliques where information can be spread quickly and values are shared among the groups of people. The limitation of local networks is that they are self-contained, so there members exert lesser influence among the larger society which they exist. In contrast, cosmopolitan networks are defined as weaker ties that offer a wider perspective. Individuals who possess weaker ties with a lot of people get access to more information. This is why the wealthy and educated usually belong to a variety of cosmopolitan networks. The weak ties intertwine, making them more connected to a variety of other powerful people in different fields. The article “The Power of the Elites” explains that all decisions made by authority are interconnected and are often the same people, so their power is at such a high level. For example, well-known celebrities hold the power to “gain the ear of those who occupy positions of direct power” (303). Both local and cosmopolitan characteristics advocate for the importance of the formation and maintenance of networks in order to achieve professionally.