@aplusk @oprah have Tweeted us away.
You are now familiar with my regular cyber squatting on Pat’s blog. Today 1 year after this post we are going to see if Twitter can be mainstream and still be interesting.
In last few weeks celebrities took over our favorite social medium. Not that it bothers me. Twitter is a democracy. My issue is mostly with the exchange everyone is asked to make in any society. You cannot invite yourself to my table and not share or entertain conversation.
Celebrities- as much as I hate the term- have massively polluted our tool engaging themselves in a race for followers. Ashton Kutcher aka @aplusk is now self-declared King of Twitter. Oprah will rule on top of the pyramid in a couple of weeks and I’m an inch away to drop out.
To better understand what is happening I have to throw some figures. Boring – I know…but it makes my case.
@aplusk ‘friends’ grow at a rate of 770 followers per tweet
@oprah ‘friends’ add up at a rate of 33.000 followers per tweet. She has nearly half a million follower after 13 updates.
And we want to ignore something is broken?
I wanted to believe Twitter is all about CONVERSATION not COMPETITION. It survived spambots, porn, escorts, solicitation, gaming but not fame…if not stopped now the race will get nasty. @michaeljackson, @mariahcarey, @robertredford, @hannahmontana, who is next?
I couldn’t figure out numbers of tweets related to the stupid challenge @aplusk vs. @cnnbrk but I’m sure it captured over 50% of total stream.
There is a solution to avoid social hijacking. Very simple solution. Make stats private. No more public count of followers/following. It will make the Twitter community much ‘cleaner’ and bring everyone back to sharing. Celebrities are welcome to bring good noise. They will certainly get a lot of attention but they will have to follow rules of social engagement.
Last night I threw the idea –I’m not claiming to be the 1st who thought about it btw- on Twitter thinking it will be ignored. To my surprise it has been massively re-tweetted. Twitter: you need to listen – we do not want popularity, we want quality content.
Ironically Twitter founders have engaged themselves in a race against Facebook so I guess we have come full circle. After all they ‘only’ need 200 Ashton Kutcher to beat them.
Guest Post by Florian Seroussi
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=074290ba-afbf-4d5e-a6db-6c992eb00604)
I agree 100%
Florian, playing devils advocate here but how does the presence of celebs on Twitter affect you? Apart obviously from the loads on the infra-structure.
Twitter is never going to “hide” the number of followers as the game is all about exposure and numbers unfortunatly. Having @oprah and her ilk on Twitter creates more exposure than the likes of you, Pat or myself.
Can we not just ignore the hype?
Hi Florian,
I have read both this and last years article, now perhaps as a new twitter user I am missing something but I fail to see how more people using twitter is a bad thing. Also I follow Ashton and I have to say I find some of his tweets to be very imformative.
As regards what you call broadcasting as oppose to conversation. I already have many mediums for conversation, text email etc.
However what I find excellent and unique about twitter is when someone posts a link to an interesting article/webpage/blog etc. Before twitter I had no previous way to see a brief description of something and decide whether I would check it out. (I know RSS feeds, but I think twitter is different due to the amount of people you can follow without it being a hassle).
In summary, don’t worry the celebs who are in it for the exposure will be gone soon enough along with the race for fans. But because of these races there will be a much bigger amount of people to learn from…
@evertB it pollutes my timeline
More important and you said it : hype. Fame will put Twitter in a stage of disillusionment where technologies fails to meet expectations and quickly become unfashionable. Consequently, people usually abandons the topic and the technology…it’s a huge risk.
@fiscalstudent I strongly believe you find @aplusk interesting because he is Ashton Kutcher. I don’t get the same thrills when I read him.
Being attracted by popular figures starts at a very young age. I’m not much of a fan myself. Maybe to egocentric for that
It is true I added him because he is famous and to see what he’d say, again as I said I am new to twitter. But it is not his opinion I find interesting it is links to articles such as this
http://www.emarketer.com/Article.aspx?R=1007050
I believe my age to be irrelevant. Is most of the world not attracted by Obama…..
totally agree. i cleaned up my twitter account by unfollowing all the celebs.
now i just follow ordinary folks who post interesting stuff.
twitter is how you make it. give celebs a wide bearth and you’ll have a totally different experience.
fully agree. 100%. I dont read the chaps update. And although I wish any chap all the best. Whilst he is on twitter – it is becoming a numbers game moreso than its original intention.
easy. remove the numbers. strip the glamour away. basic numerolgy resumes.
bulaidh bós pat. Lets hope logic prevails
@Florian Then again look at Jaiku. A much better service than Twitter in my opinion but the lack of exposure killed it.
and a bunch of bitchy geeks Evert
@patphelan Bitchy? Who?
Hi Florian,
I’ve been on Twitter for two years and I find it to be the most useful site on the internet.
If I have a problem with a computer, camera software…a tech thing…I ask a question, and instantly get numerous answers. Often at least one of them solves my problem.
Same holds true if my website’s acting up. Someone is always there to help or offer suggestions. And it goes on and on. If I’m writing an article and I want confirmation of a trend I’m noticing…. If I’m thinking about reading a certain book or seeing a particular movie I can ask if someone’s read/seen it and get some feedback on it beforehand.
Then there’s what I’ve discovered by following links; myriad wonderful and amazing websites and stories.
For business… Awesome. Let me count the ways. I’ve found excellent clients and collaborators. In fact, almost everyone I’ve worked with in the past six – eight months I’ve met via Twitter.
I’ve been able to get word out about my blog updates…to a highly targeted group…like nowhere else. (I put lots of time and effort into my blog so this is important to me) And lately, in the past couple of months, with almost every golf business known to man having suddenly woken up to Twitter, I have a constant window to what my competitors and potential customers are talking about ..and who they’re engaging with.
There there’s the pure social… chatting/or carrying on an intellectual conversation…its very natural on Twitter and happens often.
No I can’t see any downside to having more poeple on Twitter. Maybe I’m missing something but how can it pollute your timeline, you choose who to follow, don’t you? I do. I never auto follow ,never use the aps that get you followers or recommend followers. I choose them all individually and they’re all perfectly pertinant to what I’m doing.
Florian, the only thing I’m getting from your post, by others voicing similar complaints is that you were early adopters who had “loads of followers” in the days before Twitter tipped. You had the high numbers and that gave you authority. Now with all the auto follow kings and celebs, your numbers don’t seem so high (though believe me, they are).
Look at me, I was an early adopter and for quite a while I was the number one Twitterer in CT and the number one golf Twitterer. That gave me authority …with anyone who felt Twitter rank was important – a relatively small and rarefied group at that time, but a group none the less. Now that Twitter’s tipped, I’m neither the top CT Twitterer nor the top golf Twitterer, because now there are all sorts of folks doing auto follows and Follow Fridays and what ever else people do to get tons of totally random followers as quickly as possible.
And that’s fine with me. Because, though I can no longer advertise myself to potential clients as the “top golf Twitterer” or the “No. 1 Twitterer in CT”, there’s so much more potential : clients, collaborators, information/answer providers, cute guys/girls to flirt with… there’s more of everything… you just have to find and select them. And that’s the thing. It takes work to make Twitter work. But that’s OK.
The only issues I have with the celebrity social media whores is that they slow down the system, and creates Other then that…bring em on. I for one would love to see the whole world on Twitter.
Anyway, we’ll see what happens.
Sorry Florian this is much too long. Please feel free to edit or even eliminatie it…I was just thinking out loud.
)
Florian
Interesting point about surviving fame. Applies to people so why shouldn’t it apply to networks of people such as Twitter?
I think the real victim is authenticity. I can’t for a second believe it is Ashton Kutcher who sits and reads and shares emarketer links. Some tweets surely can be his; but largely the work is outsourced. Like getting your secretary (or PR if you will) to tweet for you.
The only ‘celebrity’ like people I follow are conversation-oriented business people – Pat, Paul Kedrosky, Shel Israel and Guy Kawasaki (some say he uses outsourcing but before I sound too much like Clarkson introducing Stig on Top Gear, I must stop!). They are real in that sometime in London, Pat may be a person I can have coffee with. Ashton Kutcher I am not so sure either of bumping into or wanting to have coffee with.
So as I said – real victim: authenticity.
But of course it would help if Twitter could monetise some of this. :-/
isnt this the same as the LinkedIN guys did some time back – with connections – where you either have less than 500 or more than 500….. It changed mindsets overnight..
Actually – I believe that it is not the number that is the issue here, it is the quality of the people you follow. This may seems like a no-brainer for old timers for (non-verbal) communication – but it is really not a no-brainer for a lot of people. I have seen the same of Facebook – people collect contacts. Even on LinkedIn some people collect contacts.
In principle I do agree with Ken Camp that quality trumps quantity any time of day. However, there are exception to the rule. I do follow a very few people that are following a couple of thousands people. My reason for following these people are not that I need them to listen to what I have to say. I really do not care if people listen to what I have to say – it is not important for me personally. I do follow these people simply because they provide high quality content.
On the other hand – if people decide to follow me I do sincerely hope that it is because that I contribute good content. That is fine with me. It does not boost my ego – it does not boost my self confidence (yes – I know I am an arrogant pri*k). I contribute because I seriously believe that I have something worth reading. If not, I rather shut up.
One issue is the current crop of Twitter clients (in lack of a better word). Most (all?) clients do not support something as simple as filtering. Unless there are filtering capabilities built into those clients sooner or later people will move on to less crowded services. If I had such capabilities today I could have filters for “friends and family” and then work related matters (which is my primary reason why I use Twitter). I can not ditch my friends and families from my Twitter feed. I also refuse to have more than one Twitter account.
One does not need to follow these famous people.
I also believe that no one should tell anyone else how to use the communication tool Twitter is.
If people feel that following famous people on Twitter make their day – good.
If people do like I do, use Twitter for 90% business related communication – this is also fine.
My fiancee uses Twitter to update her friends and family about what goes on in her life.
However, my use of Twitter is not in any way more superior than those who follow famous people.
Every one to their own devices – and Twitter is a excellent device!
Today you twitter, then you tweet,
as though to make your lives complete,
by echoing thoughts of people you admire.
Anticipating that great twitter,
you clutch your phones to reconsider,
the text-ed words of wisdom you desire.
You twitters prattle thoughts absurd,
as tweeters follow in a herd,
of voyeuristic bids to be of note.
You tweet and twitter photographs.
You L O L, the twitting laugh,
amassing twit-wits, with the rights to gloat.
You Tweeter-Dumbs are text-ed astray,
rushing to twitter your lives away,
losing precious time you’ll come to rue.
As tweeted gems of rehashed glitter,
by willing twits, of useless twitter,
dissolve in a vast milieu, void of sinew.
© 2010 JVD
I like this, one more poem for you!
Twitter this and Twitter that
My hair is wet, I lost my cat
I took a picture of a tree
I can twitter, look at me!
Twitter doesn’t profit a dime,
as investors blindly form a line,
to twitter that they own a share,
of something that’s not really there.
This twittered game of mirror’s and smoke,
will prove itself an impractical joke,
with time wasted on useless prattles,
of twitter’s ads and brainless addles.
As those who parlay self promotion,
feed the public’s frenzied notion,
that tweets are read by those who twitter,
internet landfills heap tweeted litter.
A passing thought to reconsider,
there’s more to life than witless twitter,
as all the hype begins to show,
the more you tweet, the less you know.
© 2010
Eliza Doalot