Dear Web ‘Celebrity’ Who Never Follows Anyone Back,

by Brett Borders on March 30, 2009

I think you’re missing the point of social media.

At least the “social” part.

And I realize it’s nothing against me personally. As a general policy, you don’t follow anyone except the 102 people in your inner clique – even though 6,324 people follow you back.

I’m not here to tell you how to use Twitter or other social media tools. It’s your trip. You’re the captain of your own digital ship.

But I can and will share my own views on “web celebs,” the Twitter personalities who cut themselves out of the conversation by never following new people – even if they’re interesting.

(Behind your back, cause you’re not listening to me anyways.)

You might think that non-reciprocation makes you look like an “influential thought leader,” but to me it looks like:

  1. You’re kind of a noob. Your name might be “big,” but your social media interaction and filtering skills are small.
  2. You’re kind of a snob. You’re more concerned with appearing “popular” than listening and learning from people.


There’s a chance that maybe you’re just really, really busy with very important stuff and you get your social intelligence from other sources. I know that Al Gore’s got planets to save, Brittney’s got buns to tone, and Shaq’s got backboards to shatter. It’s understandable if the Hollywood, White House and NBA superstars can’t personally interact with 375,000 people on Twitter.

But if you’re a professional web geek “celebrity” with less than ~15k followers – and you use Twitter heavily – I see it differently. When I look at your profile page and see that you’re unlikely to follow me or anyone else back – you become exponentially less relevant to me.

Unless you’re my real-life buddy or associate that I already have a connection with – I’m prolly not gonna to follow you either. Even if you have very interesting stuff to say, cool links or breaking news to share — I can afford to tune you out.

Why?

Because there’s millions of peeps with different, but equally interesting stuff to share.

I get way too much pleasure out of connecting with people through social media to squander my screen space and attention on one-way signals.

And there’s plenty of brilliant, approachable rockstar web celebs who might well listen, interact and even follow me back if I reach out to them.

So, sorry Mr. Web-celebrity-who-never-follows-anyone-back, but…

You’re not on my list anymore.

Social Media Rockstar Runs on Thesis Theme for Wordpress

Thesis is an easy-to-customize, premium Wordpress theme that comes with full technical support. The beautiful style and pixel-perfect typography makes your writing look more polished and professional. If you’re serious about blogging and you want to focus more on your writing and do less hassling with PHP code… then check out the Thesis theme for Wordpress now! – Brett

Tagged as: , , , , , ,

  • angelia110

    Costs For Uggs--What It Costs?


    -->Are you lusting after a few (or even more) Uggs (UGG Australia) boots and if so, you're in good company, as girls and women of all ages, especially with the simple, slipper-like design of these sheepskin ugg boots, which are relatively easy and very comfortable to wear. And they appear to be affected. Some men are also jumping on the trend and luxury UGGs? Australia, the brand also offers a range of contemporary styles for them.


    -->Could you mind giving everyone loves from ugg-boots? There are so many types of uggs, ugg bailey button,ugg classic tall, ugg classic short, ugg classic cardy. How to choose your favorite? Or do you really want to one uggs regardless its style? Despite their design is awkward and slipper-lile, Uggs is one of the few stations that are of general interest, have argued that cross generational lines.


    -->Young people, students and young mothers and the Middle Ages, the original Black Ultra Tall UGG Boots, seem pulled the fleecy-lined boots that are manufactured in Australia, with the best materials. Are you sure that your feet warm in winter without socks, and cool in summer so that is more versatile too? If no, hurry up to take one ugg boots on goodugg uk sale ! That's why we see people wear them in schools, supermarkets, on the slopes and even in the most popular beaches in the United States and abroad. Many surfers also use uggs to keep their feet warm.


    -->What do you really care about? Is its price or quality, or you just following the general trend? You know what are you thinking in your heart!

  • angelia110

    Costs For Uggs--What It Costs?


    -->Are you lusting after a few (or even more) Uggs (UGG Australia) boots and if so, you're in good company, as girls and women of all ages, especially with the simple, slipper-like design of these sheepskin ugg boots, which are relatively easy and very comfortable to wear. And they appear to be affected. Some men are also jumping on the trend and luxury UGGs? Australia, the brand also offers a range of contemporary styles for them.


    -->Could you mind giving everyone loves from ugg-boots? There are so many types of uggs, ugg bailey button,ugg classic tall, ugg classic short, ugg classic cardy. How to choose your favorite? Or do you really want to one uggs regardless its style? Despite their design is awkward and slipper-lile, Uggs is one of the few stations that are of general interest, have argued that cross generational lines.


    -->Young people, students and young mothers and the Middle Ages, the original Black Ultra Tall UGG Boots, seem pulled the fleecy-lined boots that are manufactured in Australia, with the best materials. Are you sure that your feet warm in winter without socks, and cool in summer so that is more versatile too? If no, hurry up to take one ugg boots on goodugg uk sale ! That's why we see people wear them in schools, supermarkets, on the slopes and even in the most popular beaches in the United States and abroad. Many surfers also use uggs to keep their feet warm.


    -->What do you really care about? Is its price or quality, or you just following the general trend? You know what are you thinking in your heart!

  • well written social networking follow on link's.
  • isa
    quality not quantity
  • What you're missing in the story is that the "approachable, rockstar bla bla" people aren't any more two way than the others, they're only less honest about it.

    Sorta like the parents that don't simply neglect the kid all day, they carefully prop him in front of the tv and neglect him all day.
  • I for one have the hopes that I can obtain as many followers as possible. Not for my personal satisfaction, but because the information that I am sending out on Twitter are the posters and banners that I design and create of lost and missing loved ones.

    There are far too many missing people in the USA (and abroad) and I believe the more followers that I can obtain, the more likely they may pick up on my missing people and RT. I have interacted with many family members who spend their days living on the web hoping to reach out to anyone that may happen upon their tragedy and help. This is the least I can do.

    Unfortunately, only a handful of the followers that I have repost the banners:( Sad. A lot are missing children, missing young men and women, and ederly alike. If you want to follow me and take my banners and RT, I would be most appreciative. I do not copyright my work and I do update when a loved one is found. I am @LostNMissing and it would be awesome if celebrities helped to pick up and distribute a banner here and there...one just never knows when and if it could fall into the right hands.
  • Lavanda,

    It's incredibly considerate of you to care for those people with lost
    or missing loved ones! Some people might not want to follow because it
    your account has a (charitable) 'agenda':

    http://socialmediarockstar.com/11-ways-to-lose-...


    Good luck with getting as many followers as possible... and I hope you
    are able to bring someone home

    -Brett
  • ramboswife
    I've been on twitter for 5 weeks now and this is sound advice!!!! Thank you
  • Ramboswife,

    Thanks for your comments, I'm glad it helped you. Please check out
    some older articles or subscribe via RSs for more!

    -Brett
  • michael
    lol - this can be attributed to EVERY SINGLE Person "featured" on FriendFeed (the "circle jerk" of technology folk who follow each other and no one else)
  • Michael,

    Try and reach out to people you're interested in... famous or not. If
    you make a connection, great. If you can't get in touch with them...
    and their content isn't that great... forget them.

    I wouldn't personally ditch anyone I was truly interested in, though,
    just because they didn't follow me back.

    -Brett
  • I do want to give "props" to two celebrities who follow nearly everyone back: @mariashriver and @yokoono. As Yoko says, "Remember, we are all water in the same ocean." Celebrities have plenty of ways to promote themselves without using Twitter. If they do not wish to interact with us, I say, why bother?
  • On the one hand, I agree and you make lots of good points. On the other, your first example at the end is someone who is followed by 13,456 people and only follows 107.
  • Pam
    GOOD JOB!!! Love it!
  • I have to sT RGr @kathyireland is very sweet, interactive and kind
  • Nice try. Nice article.

    However, I don't agree with you. I don't think I or anyone should feel obliged to follow every get rich quick scammer, self proclaimed social media guru or the 20 millonth SEO expert that has followed me. I don't want to hear what they all have to say and I'm sure celebs don't want to hear what every sick stalker has to say either.
  • Mary
    Oprah has over 900,000 followers (of which i am NOT one), but she follows 11 people - all celebs. Yah, she gets it. (not). At least Mr and Mrs Kutcher follow some people and interact with regular peeps. I'm not big fans of theirs, but at least they try to be social. OTOH, I saw a tweet from someone today that "threatened" to block anyone who follows him to get followed and then unfollows. I unfollowed him. I care if he blocks me for unfollowing him? LOL What an ego he must have. I don't follow everyone that follows me. I only follow if I'm interested in them. I don't check to see if people follow me back. I don't care. It all comes out in the wash because my follow/follower numbers are very close. The whole follow me and I'll follow you thing smacks of junior high. Follow the people that interest you and engage with them. People will follow you. If they don't, maybe you should get out more and find some interesting things to talk about.
  • What many don't understand, had it not been for the lesser known bloggers, us "little peons" in the blogosphere, Twitter would not be the social site it is today. I don't blog, or use Twitter for popularity- I stopped worrying about who likes me and who doesn't in Junior High. I have 343 followers and no, I don't follow everyone who follows me. Yes, I have blocked spammers and marketers. I follow those I know, find interesting, or offer information. It's becoming more difficult to find people who share the same interests-who have a sense of humor and can be a little silly once in a while. Watching Tweets go by, with nothing but links, overused quotes and celebs, who, until recently, had no clue what Twitter was about- is becoming sickening. When Ashton Kutcher challenged CNN- I thought to myself, "How old are you?" "Do you even get what Twitter is?" Obviously not and frankly, the more celebs and web-celebs discuss Twitter, the more I wonder, is it really worth the trouble?
  • Just found you and your blog - Looking forward to more great stuff - I'm subscribed!
  • Excellent articel - I just scrubbed my own list and unfollowed several.
  • Pam Turner,

    Awesome! Way to stick it to the "man"!

    I am scrubbing my accounts of people who don't follow back and people
    who I have never, ever interacted with, head from or know who they are.
  • Well, Brett... It looks like we think alike. My thought is this: you never where a good idea or an inspirational thought can come from. Only from your inner circle? Hell, Oprah probably has Ellen on speed dial - why does she follow her on Twitter. it is networking if it is the same 10 people you already know??

    Does it really take any more time to follow more people? Once you click follow, you're done. Obviously you will not respond to everything, but you will still build relationships with the most unlikely of people. It doesn't take long to figure out who you might build a relationship with. I follow most with the exception of spam and something with a very tight niche that I don't even understand! :)

    Besides, how busy are these celebrities really? With nannies, chefs, trainers, drivers, ghost writers, publicists, producers, personal shoppers, hairdressers, gardeners, etc, what are they so busy doing?? Running errands at Walmart?? I know people with much busier lives. Taking the time to know your fans is important, even just a few. There a few that do, some of the music groups. I think most fans don't even expect a Tweet back, but it is nice to know these celebrities at least have one eye open to "listen"

    Not to put a shameless link to my blog here, but here.... on a similar note about celebrities and Twitter... http://www.inspiredtowrite.com/2009/04/is-twitt...
  • Julie M,

    I think that the more "important" and visible you get, the more busy you get. Web celebrties and real life celebrities get a lot of fan mail. you or I might only get a one-to-a-few @ replies to a Twitter question, but more busy people get hundreds.

    I would forgive people like Britney Spears or Oprah for not Twitteting perfectly, but I find it off putting when "Web Gurus" don't follow anyone at all.
  • You rock and this is so true
  • Very creative.

    A universal drive of human beings (indeed, some have said this is what it means to BE human) is a desire to be heard, understand, and be significant. Those who do not follow back seem to communicate "I don't want to hear, there's no need for me to understand, and the only one who deserves significant is me."

    Unfortunately, the established political covey tend to see themselves as "celebrities." Hmmm…maybe I should refer to Wikipedia to see what a Republic is or why early Americans were so incensed about "taxation without representation." From what I recall of 8th grade civics, the colonists were ticked that their leaders weren't listening.

    Now is a good time to reconnect with who we say we are as humans and renew a commitment to honoring our neighbor by paying attention, listening, seeking to understand, and by contributing to our neighbors' quest for significance.

    Imagine the world we'd create if we did.

    http://twitter.com/treypennington
  • Gailegrl
    I am new to Twitter so I don't have everything quite figured out yet ( hardly antything at all actually :) ) but, what's up with the people that post and you can't reply back to? I mean isn't that the point here the exchange of ideas and information?
    Still trying to learn how this works so I really like this page and article, thanks.
  • i don't understand...
    sorry.....
    i don't do twitter... it confuses me, i don't see the point.. isn't facebook ENOUGH?!?! what more do you need.... i don't know.
  • Dear Sitka,

    Twitter is real time, global social intelligence. A bit-by-bit, up to the minute account of what the collective unconscious is doing or thinking. It's more brief and to-to-the-point than Facebook.

    It's THE hot social network at the moment.. and it's fun!

    Sign up for Twitter, download Tweetdeck.. and send me a message! I've love to stay in touch.
  • I like to follow many people and I don't care who they are; eventually I will spend time following their conversation and get to visit their websites/ blogs; I never fail myself as to always find something interesting about each person; I guess I am playing the game of being; probably I simply love people.

    Again, somehow if I find people not following me back I will automatically fall into the space of making meaning out of it; I normally will get them know I want them to follow me back so we can have a 2 way conversation; I either announce in the public time line or unfollow them using Twitter Karma; Surprisingly they will follow me back.

    So I think time is the factor; Not the people; People are People; Remember the cosmic flows through people through you back to the cosmic! How else can our Higher Self detect what we want if we don't communicate?

    As always; we always want what others have; it's our natural sense of growth; so following more people to me will give me an idea of what I want the Cosmic to deliver me; The faster the better! Sometimes with twitter I get it right after I hit the send and next the home button.
  • It's ALL about the cosmic flow, yo!
  • Pharoah
    Hey to "celebrities" (cough cough) ... WE are just the "lemmings" that make them *look good* It's TWISTED.
  • Being followed I don't care about. Why would it matter if some insipid Web 2 point zero is reading what I write. They're swimming in their own self-indulgence and admiring themselves in the reflection.

    I do have an issue with not being replied to. If you 6,500 followers and I'm trying sincerely to participate in your conversation and you just ignore me repeatedly? Well that's just plain rude. I'll give someone 3 opportunities to reply and then sayonara. Strangely it's many of the people who have thrived on building community that are guilty of this practice and seem to think their Twitter don't stink.

    I give big kudos to Andy @Ihnatko, @ambermacarthur, @pistachio who although quite popular, consistently and sincerely honor their following by engaging when they can.

    But Twitter snobs like @THErealDVORAK, @hotdogsladies, @MissRogue and @ChrisBrogan? I know you're so very clever and so very important but when you get 140 characters will you all go @fuck @yourselves in the DM.
  • Bill Persell
    Excellent Points. @aplusk, @mrskutcher, @kevinpollak all respond, interact with their tweeps. @karlrove follows but never interacts or responds (Look at his time line. Lots of comments, very little in the way of 2 way share of info.)
  • Jennnjuce
    I have tried @plusk, @mrskutcher with no reply....maybe it is the fact they have so many tweets or maybe since I am new, its me.
  • You said everything I've always wanted to say about this subject but never got around to it...yet. Thanks for speaking out! P.S. I am weaning myself off a handful of them celebs. I find that I'm more inspired by what others just like myself have to say anyhow.
  • You should follow anyone that you find interesting or worthwhile... I'm just deciding to focus on people who interact well.. it's a richer and more valuable experience to me.

    Sounds like we have similar mindset. Thanks for stopping by, hope to see ya back!
  • Shelly
    I do agree that it's silly for someone to beg for followers and then not want to follow anyone back. Twitter's supposed to be a two-way street!

    But that said, I also agree with others here that following everyone who follows you can be a little overkill. Sure, I can follow them and filter them out with TweetDeck, but what's the point of that? Why not follow only the people who I think are genuinely interesting?

    I had to make this decision when, after starting to follow @guykawasaki, I had over 30 people follow me in one day (I don't think that's coincidence). For a noob, that doubled my following. At first I was flattered; then I realized that the majority of those people had absolutely nothing in common with me and were just following me with the hope I'd follow them in return and make their numbers higher. In fact, a few of them who I chose not to follow have unfollowed and refollowed me repeatedly so I get multiple notifications, thinking maybe I didn't see them or something.

    When someone follows me, I make it a point to take a look at their feed and see the types of things they post about and if I'm interested, I follow back. I probably won't ever have tens of thousands of followers, but that's OK with me. I'd rather be more personal with my Twitter and connect than play a game to get the highest number of followers I possibly can.
  • Marketing Girlie
    I totally agree with this strategy, both as someone who uses Twitter for personal enjoyment as well as corporate social engagement (2 separate accts). My work account is FLOODED with followers, simply because we're a big-name organization and they're hoping that I/we will reciprocate. Which is tricky for a corporate account because #1 - I don't want to be flooded with irrelevant info and #2 - it could potentially be viewed as an endorsement, which I have to be mindful of (like Shelly said of her @guykawasaki experience, where lots more users follow for no real reason).

    But those who have gained their 'celebrity' through the internet should be more open to making more friends -- accept every request on Facebook and MySpace and Flickr, etc. If the tens of thousands of people who read your blog are good enough to pay your bills (via ad revenue, buying your books, etc.) then they should be good enough to be your 'friend' on Twitter -- even if you're secretly filtering them using tools like TweetDeck. When it is that obvious that you don't care about your fans - or anyone else - what is the motivation to continue following you? If you want something 'private' for your real-life friends, then create a separate account. There are some well-known bloggers that I can think of who have 200k+ followers and they follow fewer than 100 people, which can feel like a snub to hundreds of thousands of people who are reading those tweets, buying the books, etc.
  • Marketing Girlie,

    I think that normal people and real-life clebs should be free to use Twitter how every they want to.., but like you, I would expect more out of professional bloggers and "social media pros".....
  • Shelly,

    your strategy sounds really sensible.

    you look at people's profile and feeds and follow people who look interesting.

    That sounds like a winning recipe to me.
  • LOVE this! I feel the same way about following on blogs.
  • Jennifer,

    Yeah,.. some people never visit the blogs of other or leave comments.

    There's no rules, but I find social media works really well if you make two-way gestures at least.
  • AWESOME FREAKING POST!
  • PHREAKING AWESOME COMMENT!

    Glad you liked!
  • I don't follow everyone that follows me because a lot of the people that follow me are Social Media Marketing Spammers or some such crap. I'm not gonna follow every spam follower that follows me. I really don't care about making money with Social Media Marketing. I follow people that have the same interest as me and have something informative and creative to say. I think Twitter needs to find a way to block the Spam Followers. I'm tired of having to go thru a crap load of followers to only find 1 or 2 that ain't a Social Media Marketer or some kind of Entrepreneur that was a new way of making fast money by having a rediculous amount of followers. Anyway that is my two cents. Peace
  • Eric,

    I feel your frustration.. there's a lot of marketers (like me) and a lot of them are perhaps more direct and aggressive about what they're promoting. Some people are outright spammers.

    Unfortunately some people exploit new communication tools and over-exert themselves... whether it be e-mail, phone, telephone...
  • Jim
    If you REALLY want to use Twitter to find relevant tweets (relevant to you), you may want to use Twitterfall http://twitterfall.com/ or TweetTrail http://tweettrail.com/ otherwise I agree with @jasonmitchener - "it's a river, jump in". I have had many fleeting and interesting/entertaining conversations with folks in my stream (2.5k) and I don't see it as overload. For me, it is easy to skim and identify what is noise and what may interest me enough to engage. The celebs I followed, I was surprised at the noise. I can accept noise, we all make noise, but 1 way noise is not cool. BTW, @guykawasaki (ghost or not) is the only 'celeb' to ever reply to anything I directed at a so-called 'celeb'. For all the crap he gets, I think he may be the one that 'gets it'.

    If you follow me, I a)check your tweets, are they in English (sorry, solo-linguistic), b)check to see that not all your tweets are links to your blog, c)not trying to sell me something in EVERY tweet.

    If those check out I follow you back.
    -Jim
    @SEO_Web_Design
  • Jim,

    I checked out Twitterfall once, briefly, and it looked pretty cool.

    I think I'll have to dive back in.
  • I agree completely. I there is slim to know chance that you will be followed back then there is also very little chance that you will actually connect in anything other than a one way conversation.
  • Gerald,

    It it ain't two-way, I'm not gonna stay.
  • I really appreciated your post.

    I entered Tweetworld two months ago. I soon realized (after 2 stressful weeks!) that if I really wanted to read everything that comes on my Twitter feed... man, I'd soon be in trouble! Of course it's not possible to read everybody's tweets when you follow thousands of people (I already can't with just a few hundreds) but I don't think it's the point anyway. I see Twitter as some sort of a game, a super-efficient way to learn new things, discover new people. To surprise myself. When I follow someone because I think we're sharing some business or personal interests, I need this person to have the same kink of curiosity; I want her to be open-minded; I expect her to eventually find something interesting in what I say. Their "not-following" sounds to me like a decision they already made to never find any interest in me. But so many people are ready to have a sincere sharing experience... why should I bother with someone who doesn't?
  • Lucie,

    No need to read everything... just read what you see when you're on it.
  • BastetAsshur
    I dont expect celebs to follow all who follow them but it costs nothing to acknowledge each fan/follower once. 'Thanx 4 the follow'. It's pretty simple!
  • BastetAsshur,

    That owuld be a nice gesture. Thanks for your comments.
  • "When I look at your profile page and see that you’re highly unlikely to follow me or anyone else back - you become exponentially less relevant to me" #welldone

    There are real life super heroes on Twitter that swoop down and rescue myriads of people on the daily. There is something about this arena where it invokes a need to give and help others. We'll that's something new?! ;)

    It's like nothing I've seen before.

    Those bougie snobs... let them be who they are. We'll make sure and represent and signify for the people that actually reflect back what you give.
  • Iamkhayyam,

    There's something about Twitter that bigs up a spirit of global, interconnected kindness for sure.

    I sometimes DO annoyed because some snobby and "unsocial" people seem to do very well in social media.... but I just need to focus on me and keep doing my thing and be nice to other people while I do it.. and it'll all be good in the long run.
  • Please bear that in mind when you start throwing aroud words like 'snob'. Doesnt do anyone any good. The people that follow these people should be doing so because they value what that person has to say or just find them interesting. They should not then expect a follow back. If you do follow someone and expect a follow back then you are totally missing the point.

    I for one follow plenty of people that dont follow me back. Why should I assume that just because they find me interesting they will find 'me' interesting? Doesn't work that way, and to think otherwise shows a woeful undestandting of social intereaction both physically and virtually.

    So i don't blow a strop when after 2 weeks they still havn't followed me, and in my strop I go and unfollow them. That's just utterely childish and frankly, immature.


    Now, if you are saying all this because Twitter is your life it is what you do full-time then fair enough. You have time to spend chatting to 1000's of people. But a lot of us dont. I have a job to service and Im not on Twitter to appease anyone or provide a public service, although many people seem to think that I am. Don't make sweeping generalizations when there are plenty of other factors to take into account. Namely, are you on Twitter all day every day, or is Twitter a in between working action? This will affect how many people can be effectively followed
    Also, if you are or a lame insincere nature then again, go ahead and follow all 30k people that are following you. Spammers and zombie internet marketers included.

    If I follow 'you' back it is because I have seen your tweets via other means, you have taken time to converse with me, to hook me in, you have Retweeted some of my Tweets. This means that person knows Im not just following them out of some insincere naive Twitter ritual, they know its because I have taken a personal interest with them.

    Enough of the fake sincerity already. If people don't or can't service an equal number of people that are following them then who are you to say they are being nooby or snooty? You are not. Its just part of the complexity of Twitter, you can generalise these things.
  • Graham Smith,

    Never did I say "Celebrities MUST follow EVERYONE or ELSE they are clearly BAD people!"

    I said "Social media (web) celebrities who make a game out of collecting AS MANY followers as POSSIBLE while striving to FOLLOW NOBODY back are kinda creepy."

    To me that is the essential definition of a snob.
  • I don't share your view on this.
    If everyone followed everyone it is highly likely you'll get more noise than signal through your twitter feed. And I don't buy into the 'follow everyone and just use filters on applications like tweetdeck to filter the noise from signal' - that's the exact same thing as not following someone except you're doing it out of the public eye.
  • Leon Poole,

    I couldn't disagree more.

    When I follow people in Tweetdeck... I look at EVERYONE's flow when I am on Twitter. Also people are able to DM me if they need something (and I leave that door open unless they abuse it, then I block).

    I catch all kinds of COOL STUFF in my 'all friends' column than the little echo I'd catch in my 'best friends' column.

    Also the public eye is important - at least busy celebs who follow SOME people back make them feel welcome and not distant.
  • I'd rather not be followed by anyone as a "gesture", as it'd be a totally hollow one. My ego isn't so fragile that it needs to be massaged by a follow - if anyone likes what I have to say, great, if not, no worries. It's not a reciprocal arrangement and it was never meant to be. If you're following people on the condition that they follow you back then you're doing Twitter all wrong.

    Another supporter of the Dave Gorman theory of Twitter here.
  • Matt Davies,

    In real life social situations, we make all kinds of "gestures" to create a safe and beneficial relationship with people both personally and professionally.

    What kind of social gesture is it when someone wants lots of followers but NEVER wants to follow anyone else (not even out of their followers... but out of ANYONE.. even other celebs) - they seem like a self-absorbed, narcissistic type that I avoid.
  • Yeah but this isn't a "Real life social situation" This is a bunch of anonymous people spewing tons of worthless junk to make themselve feel like what they say matters. I don't feel people should be obligated to follow anyone back. If all you tweet is "Heading out to the mall". "Just got back from Mall. Was fun. Got shoes". I'm sure as hell not gonna follow you back. In Real Life I wouldn't be friends with these people so I'm not going to friend them on Twitter.
  • Interesting you say that.. Have you read some of the top "wefollow" celebrities Tweets? Much of it IS mundane! But, people still follow them.. my point exactly. I have to admit the Kutchers are getting better, but some of the other ones are the "went to mall and had scrambled eggs" They really don't understand the power and usefulness of Twitter. If a non-celebrity did that - yes, no followers. if they have time for shoe talk and breakfast talk, they can respond to a fan, especially if that fan has something important to say... Besides, if they are soooo busy, why are they even on Twitter?? It is not a place for super busy ppl, it is a place to communicate (that's the social part) So, again, what it the point except to say "Look I can get hundreds of followers and don't give a shit about what any of them have to say... and oh I had a great promotion party last night for my new movie!" GAG!! okay, I am off my soapbox!
  • Julie M,

    I totally feel ya on this.. but celebrities who are famous offline have an entirely different set of standards and behavior for how they are perceived and what is interesting.

    Sorry to use a potentially horrifying analogy... but if Paris Hilton sits on her bed in her underwear and gossips on her cellphone about nothing.... that's prime-time MTV "programming" - and if I were to do the same thing, the station would lose its license and get boycotted. ;)

    Likewise, I am unimpressed at some web celebrities' blogging and Twittering. Just like a screen star should have looks and acting talent.. a web celebrity should be really lively and intelligent on the Web. Many are, but some are fairly unimpressive.
  • Eric Booth,

    I think you absolutely should not follow boring, inane Twitterers. Just follow some people you find interesting.
  • Agreed. I have a hard enough time keeping up with the 80-odd people I'm following and that's with Tweetdeck. Why? Because I spend my day working, Twitter's just a welcome distraction should I need any inspiration or I want to take my mind off what I'm doing.

    I'd imagine that most of the users who expect you to follow them back have migrated over from Facebook after hearing the myriad of celebs throw the "Twitter" name around. Twitter isn't Facebook, that's why I like it. It's far more personal, can be a great source of information and affords it's users the option of not having to put up with a slew of Facebook-esque status updates every time somebody in their friends list decides to post what they had for breakfast.

    Not following somebody back on Twitter is far more polite than clicking "Ignore" on a FB friend request, something I would imagine most people do if they don't know the person requesting friendship (I know I do). Besides, Brett, do you actually think that what you have to Tweet about is important enough for the likes of Gorman or Fry to take time out of their day to read? Or do you just want a group of people you've never met in your life to look at your Followers List and see that your opinions and updates are important to the Twitter Elite? I wonder who actually has the ego problem here...
  • Peter Morley,

    I would say that the person who is obsessed with as collecting as many followers as possible, while striving to NEVER follow anyone back unless they are forced to by a real-life obligation.... has the ego problem.

    This article is not a dig at people who don't follow everyone back - it's a dig against a kind of narcissistic "online celebrity" who fancys themself the social media guru but NEVER wants to follow anyone or interact

    It's not about like me (who uses Twitter to two-way network with people) or you (who uses Twitter for entertainment).

    I don't know how Gorman or Fry is (we've never been acquainted yet) so YES, for now, I think that what I have to say on my blog is just as important as what they say on their blogs.
  • You're assuming that these 'web celebs' actively set out to garner as many followers as possible. Can it be possible that they actually post informative, interesting things? The simple fact is that most of these 'web celebs' have links to their Twitter profiles on their blogs or websites. If I'm interested in their work, I'll add them via that avenue; I don't expect them to add me back or to be interested in my work TBQH, I don't care, that's not what Twitter is about. I can however, stay on top of their work or blog posts via their Tweets.

    Looking back at this blogs previous entries, it's pretty clear that you've stumbled on some serious linkbait with this post so kudos to you for that, you clearly know your stuff. I wonder if you're ready for the slew of followers you're no-doubt about to get? Will you be following them all back? And if so, how long do you think it'll take before you start preening people from your list because the last 20 tweets in your feed are Retweeting Bittbox's latest texture pack or Abduzeedo's most recent top 30 [insert colour here] websites?

    Personally, I have added you. But that's because SEO and Social Media fall under my broad net of interests and I find the direction of your blog to be quite interesting, I want to see where it goes. I don't expect to be followed back, which wouldn't offend me in the least because after reading through your blog Graphic Design and Branding don't seem to get much coverage.

    Pete
  • Andy
    Twitter's just a great utility for learning - both for related topics, and stuff we never knew we were interested in. Why should we be obliged to follow people who have nothing interesting or useful to say?
  • Andy,

    No one is obliged to follow anyone they find uninteresting. You and "web celebs" should only follow people they find interesting.

    But if you're a BIG-TIME BLOGGER and 11,000 people follow you, but you only find 117 people interesting on the whole internet (not out of your followers, even - but anyone) - I'd say you are have too narrow of a scope / curiosity level to fit in with my kind of crowd.

    And I'd assume you're probably either a closet social media newbie or a narcissist.
  • Andy
    Looking at all the other posts here, it seems that unless people agree with you, you think everyone else must be wrong/stupid. Who's narrow of scope now?
    It gives me great pleasure you leave you and your crowd to get all hot under the collar about nothing at all.
  • Andy,

    I don't think anyone is wrong or stupid.

    This is a blog,a place I write my opinions and perspectives - and people can have a conversation around it.

    If someone wants to argue a point, I'll mull it and explain my own side. Never called anyone stupid.
  • I think you're clueless. Twitter isn't Facebook we don't need it to descent into a stream of "Thanks for the add".

    If I were a celeb with 50K+ followers how much difference would following make to the folks who follow. I'd be just as likely to see their tweet using Tweetie, Twhirl, Tweetdeck regardless of following them or not.
  • Dougie,

    You're right. I'm clueless. Busted!

    *sniffles*
  • UncleJohn
    Twitter is Twitter, you do with it as you wish. There are few guide lines. Me I follow anyone who shows interest in what I do, if some one never @'s me, I assume (for good or worse.) that they are just reading, and not interacting in there own right. Even then if the person looks like some one I DONT want to read often, I dont follow. (IE: Whiners who whine bout nothing, some one who attacks me for no reason since I do not give a reason for anyone in there right mind to attack me..etc.)

    I say follow who you feel to follow, thats the nice thing about twitter.

    What if they auto follow back? Then they use search engines, and groups to only REALLY follow those they like, whats the difference? NONE!

    Sincerely,

    UncleJohn, Social Geek
  • I was going to construct a well thought out reply about how totally mad your suggestion is. But then I saw the link to Dave Gorman's post and he's done a better job than I ever could.

    http://gormano.blogspot.com/2009/03/when-twitte...
  • Ian Brodie,

    I think you mis-interpreted my post to mean "celebrities should follow every one of their followers back or they're heartless and rude."

    Dave Gorman is free to follow or not follow whomever he wants to.

    I'm not suggesting that anyone is obliged to follow anyone back, ever.

    I'm not even really talking about novelists... I'm talking about "Web celebrites" (which Dave clearly has a built in audience from his book publishing, and clearly isn't a web geek with his Blogger blog)

    I'm saying that WEB GEEK 'celebrities' who never follow anyone back - not even other celebrities or interesting A-list people -- have a social media deficiency.

    People who try and get lots of followers and who try just as hard to never follow anyone interesting (to make their numbers look 'influential') aren't on my list.

    Nope.

    .
  • Twirrim
    I don't follow everyone back, though admittedly I'm not a web "celebrity" or such, by even the biggest stretch of the term.

    However if I followed everyone back that follows me It'd twitter completely useless to me except as a way to pass on a message. Any hope to follow people I'm actually interested in, or catch up on tech news or whatever would go out the window.

    All because you have hurt feelings about not being followed back? Sorry ain't happening.
    Yes it's personal, I don't find the tweets of that particular person to be interesting enough to follow, the SNR ratio is way too low, or whatever.
  • Twirm,

    I don't have hurt feelings about people not following me back. I just find WEB GEEKS who try and pose as "big screen" celebrities by never following anyone back - pruning their numbers to look influential - to be lame and increasingly irrelevant to my world.
  • I have to disagree here. Celebrities are PEOPLE too. And like normal people they can't keep up with a Twitter-feed of thousands of people. It's just not humanly possible. (And no, most people don't use TweetDeck or similar hacks to allow groups).

    @ replies and now even @ mentions DO come to their attention as they are naturally filtered. And I know from personal experience that most will reply even if they don't follow you back. The only exception that makes this annoying is when they decide to reply by DM which I then can't reply back to.

    Like everyone else, if you want to have a meaningful stream you can keep up with they too have to be discriminate with who they follow.

    If your input is valuable enough to THEM over time they'll subscribe to it.

    It's really as simple as that. And that's how I see how Twitter SHOULD work.
  • ErikVeland,

    Some people will NEVER subscribe to you, as a rule, no matter what, because they're too busy posing as an 'important celebrity who never follows anyone back'.

    The think that following ANYONE new is a liability,


    And, yes, I think these people don't yet "get" social media in the same way my friends and I do!
  • wideawakewesley
    Brett,

    Have to say, I think you're completely wrong on this. Following for the sake of politeness is pointless, but Dave Gorman puts it better than I can:

    http://gormano.blogspot.com/2009/03/when-twitte...
  • Wideawakewesley,

    This isn't about following people for politeness, or saying you must follow everyone who follows you.

    As it clearly says in the post, this isn't even about real offline celebrities.

    This is about a kind of small-time web geek narcissist who tries to LOOK like a real celebrity by clamoring for followers and being incredibly stingy about who they follow.... including NOT FOLLOWING people they find interesting - for the sake of appearing influential.

    If you haven't run into these people yet, you will soon. And they're the most worthless people on Twitter.
  • michael lamb
    totally agree..... my opinion of them diminishes greatly
    jason calacanis
    brian solis
    michael arrington
    loic lemuer

    the self-titled and self aggrandizing......
  • Hello,

    I found that this article sounded a bit arrogant. Brett, you're stating that you're not here to give lessons, but that's exactly what your post does. What's the use of saying “I’m not here to tell you how to use Twitter or other social media tools” if your post is just about that? You're not telling people what they should do, but you're telling them that they're doing it wrong, that you're not pleased with them, etc. Not sure if that's really different.

    I'd like to challenge your (unworded) definition of social media. In my opinion, social media is what you do with it. Want to use Twitter as a RSS feed for a blog? Fine. Want to interact with only a few people whom you know already? Fine. Want to interact with thousands of people? Fine as well. I don't see any of these uses as superior. Twitter users will chose if they want to follow your Twitter-as-RSS or not, if they want to try to interact or not, etc. You seem to equate “the point of social media” with “using social media to the maximum of its marketing or networking capabilities”. But if people don't want to use Twitter for marketing or heavy networking, but just for discussing with friends, what's the big deal?

    I personnaly use Twitter to chat with friends, and friends of friends I've met once or am likely to meet. Plus a few people I don't know physically but just happend to like their updates (well, actually I can mention only one), and a few Twitter-as-RSS accounts. That amounts to 65 accounts in all. I twice as much followers, and for each follower I've checked out their updates to see if I happen to know them, if they tweet interesting stuff, or if they're spam accounts (I block these). Right now I'm okay with that situation, but if I start getting many more followers I may consider switching to private updates.

    Protecting your updates is a clear sign that you're using Twitter for personnal interactions rather than time-consuming networking. So maybe some celebrities you're aiming at should consider this? But at the same time, protecting your updates might block people you don't want to keep out, just because they won't take the time or will hesitate to send a request.
  • FlorentV,

    I'm not trying to be arrogant, I'm just saying how people who make a big point out of NEVER following anyone back.... while craving as many followers as possible... seem distant and kind of lame to me.

    I use Twitter for networking, but for making connections with people. Not connecting to people who never respond back.
  • @pokervixen
    I think you're applying your rules to Social Media to everyone. I personally follow less than 40% the number of people that follow me and expect that percentage to go down. Not everyone who follows me is someone I want to connect to. I respond to my @'s but it doesn't mean I'll follow the person. Twitter, to me, is a fun distraction, its not my job, I'm not building a brand or a network from it. I'm finding interesting people and sharing my life. Yes, I get it, I'm not a celebrity. I'm not claiming to be.

    My point is, I think there is a lot of celebrities that take that same approach. They follow their friends and a few connections and that's what works for them. Some of those 'web celebrities' who follow everyone, really don't. They follow a few friends via text messages and the rest is a stream, just like the public timeline.

    If you haven't read @wilw's explanation of how he uses twitter, I think you should. http://is.gd/ihF4
  • Pokervixen,

    I'm not applying rules to anyone... nor criticizing you if you don't want to follow everyone back.... you have every right to not follow anyone for any reason or no reason at all.

    I'm just saying that people like @WillW are irrelevant to me, personally, for how I use Twitter. I had no idea who WilW is before I went on Twitter... now he posts a policy saying how he can only interact with a very limited circle of people and he tweets about random stuff... and I'm like 'Cool, but it doesn't sound like a valuable connection for me to nurture. Better to focus on people who could POTENTIALLY be interested me if things go well."

    I'd rather make a "friend" or a "connection" than become someone's anonymous fanboy.

    And Twitter has infinite opportunities for me to do that.

    As for the celebs that follow limited friends and have the rest as a stream.... well of course... lots of people with more than 1,000 folowers do that....but they're still coming across as 'approachable' and not distant. And I like that style better, personally.
  • girlinterrupting
    i was following everyone back...up to 9K+ of them...

    then the damn spammers hit. polluting my stream with auto-DMs.

    then the overly social and overly attention starved start @ing you and throwing twitter tantrums if you don't @ them back.

    so i mass unfollowed everyone and started over. i dropped 1K+ in one day as a result...and you know what? i don't care. because i added back all the folks in the past year and a half that i've had real connections and convo with. that turned out to be 900. so now i've got 8K followers and 900 follow backs. and i'm happy.

    take the opposite stance for a second. not all people join twitter to be web celebrities. and a lot of time i have good info to share b/c of the work i do that gives me access to information and people that folks don't usually have -- and no i'm not talking about some former star trek actor. i'm talking about news about international business, insights for entrepreneurs interested in thinking of expanding to foreign markets. if you were someone who wanted to do so, you'd probably follow me and not get so hung up on if i follow back or not because i'm feeding people good info that is helpful.

    you should take another read at your posts. you yourself kind of come across as whiny about this whole thing. the fact is, people use twitter differently and for different reasons. so you may interpret someone as wanting to be a "web celebrity" if they don't adopt your follow back policy...while that person may simply be using twitter for themselves and not to do a song and dance for strangers in the hopes of making new fake friends who are just out to up their own follower numbers and feel relevant. get over yourself.
  • michael lamb
    awwwwwwwww you had to get in there that there are 8100 people not worth following for you.... boo!
  • Nice post Brett. I wrote a similar critique of celebrities not really 'getting' the social point of Twitter on my blog (Twittercism.com) earlier this week. From research I think the only 'major' celebrity who doesn't follow anybody at all is @alancarr, which is a shame, as he's a funny guy but clearly sees it as more of a soapbox.

    I do agree with your points about being generally new to social media/the internet stand up, and my feeling is as celebrities continue to flock to Twitter, all but the desperate for attention ('re-fame') will likely continue to see a follow count of less than twenty - most of whom are fellow celebrities - more than acceptable.
  • @Sheamus,

    You did an excellent post and I agree that most "real life" celebs use Twitter poorly. I can excuse them.. because they're not web geeks...

    but I find it really questionable when "internet famous" bloggers and "social media stars" never want to follow or interact in the same way. It seems like they ESPECIALLY don't know what it's all about... from my own understanding of social media.

    And I choose not to follow them, usually ;)
  • dcahrakos
    I agree for the most part, but yeah I only follow people i find interesting, so I only expect people who find me interesting to actually follow me...if I follow someone, and they decide to follow me back, awesome..but if they dont it doesnt really matter to me...
  • DrChaos,

    That sounds like a healthy attitude.
  • I follow one sports celeb who seems never care to follow me back and others, one teenage celeb who is super narcistt & anti-social as she only follows 9 people but has more than 240,000 followers!!! BUT I have one 10 Twitter user who followed me back on the same day I followed him and never thought he would kindly did that.

    Anyway, I still think @RyanSeacrest should've followed me back :) coz I'm a big fan of American Idol :p Thanks for the post , Brett. I totally agree with you!
  • GabyBali,

    Glad you agree!
  • I have thought the same things! People who don't ever follow back are basically saying, "No one can teach me anything" and "There is nothing new for me to learn." Why bother with social media, then? Missing the point entirely. Not to mention the point of human existence - we can ALWAYS learn from others. ALWAYS. To think otherwise is nothing short of absolute narcissism.
  • Mommy Perks,

    Unfortunately, Twitter can be a hotbed of "absolute narcissism" people and consciousness...

    3 cheers for keeping it real and remember that people can always teach you something.
  • Great post and SO TRUE!
  • Piera-Jolly Mom,

    Yeahhhhhhhhh!!!! Glad you feel it. Thanks for stopping by.
  • You know, back in 2002, I used to take the same prescriptive tone about blogs. "That's not a real blog", "that's not how you blog" and so forth. I was wrong to do that. Since then, I've tried not to criticize how people use an emerging social tool.

    Why? Because it's emerging. Norms may or may not get established, but who am I to dictate how somebody else uses a brand new thing? After all, in the early days of the telephone, some people thought the appropriate way to answer it was to say "Who is speaking?" as soon as you picked up. If I'd demanded that behaviour, I might look a little silly in retrospect.

    I disagree with you on the topic of blind reciprocal following, but if you're right, then people who are using the tool "the wrong way" will suffer the consequences of that behaviour.
  • Darren,

    I agree that I have no right to tell people how to use Twitter.

    But I do have the right to observe how a certain kind of person.. who wants as many followers as humanly possible while vigilantly niggling over how few people they humanly get away with follow.... seems vain and annoying and increasingly irrelevant to how *I* use social media.

    It seems to have hit a nerve where a lot of other people feel the same way - for now.
  • If you'll permit a link, I was just writing about the tyranny of public Twitter stats, and thought it might be germane:

    http://tr.im/i1oQ

    I guess I have a pretty high follower to followee ratio, but I also hope that I'm not desperate trying to gather followers. In fact, the above post links to a Greasemonkey script my friend made that hides the number of followers (et al), so that I don't obsess over them.

    As others have mentioned in this thread, I think I'd find a Twitter stream of 1800 people pretty useless. I'm glad others feel differently, but that's not how I prefer to use the tool. If that makes me a snob in some users' eyes, so be it. I'd rather have a manageable amount of signal.
  • Veronica
    Amen! But, I'm a nobody to you to according to your criteria. Oh well, I'll get over it quickly. What were we talking about again?
  • Veronica,

    Nobody is a nobody in social media. I'd rather have 20 good friends with only 20 followers each than 200 celebrity friends with 200,000 followers each who never listen or respond.
  • "Because there’s millions of peeps with different, but equally interesting stuff to share."
    Also, millions of peeps who will retweet it so I'll see your posts anyway...
    If there's something that's really WORTH seeing, it'll be seen one way or another.
  • Skweeds,

    Hopefully... maybe.. some "too cool for school" web celeb will read this... some how or another.
  • ShellyKramer
    This is a fabulous article. It made me laugh, all the while nodding my head thinking "you go, Brett." Social media is all about the social part, so when people get their heads all swelled up with their own sense of "big and important-ness (new phrase, just for you), they often lose sight of what its all about. They forget that the people that honor them by the follow should be respected, and treasured. Kind of like a business that takes care of its customers. If you want followers, give them a reason to follow, for pete's sake and by all means acknowledge them. Anything less is unacceptable.

    Great, great job!

    @shellykramer
    (yes, I follow back :)
  • ShellyKramer,

    Thanks for the compliments. I'm glad you liked.

    I'm not trying to be some kind of dictator and tell people they must follow everyone... you should certainly reserve the right to follow or not follow people you deem appropriate...

    I'm just questioning the type of big ego -- that can be found on Twitter -- who craves as many followers as possible while striving to follow as few people as they can humanly get away with.

    Or worse, the people who abruptly ditch ALL their followers for image reasons. Not that cool or socially trustworthy in my book.
  • I have over 15,000 followers and I follow most everyone back. I treat Twitter like a river and jump in when the water looks good. And I do interact as much as I can.

    @jasonmitchener
  • Jason,

    It must take a lot of time... I only have 2,000 friends and it can eat up quite a chunk of the day. Any tips for managing so many followers smoothly?
  • Just don't even attempt to try to read everything, or even 10% of everything. Do try to reply to people that @ you though.
  • This kind of calls other people clueless because they don't behave the same way you do. Or clueless because of other people's actions. That's like saying the Canadiens will lose the Stanley Cup because of debates in the German Parliament - totally irrelevant. I think that's a pretty arbitrary statement, Brett, and I personally disagree.

    For instance, if i want to use Twitter for personal interaction with known acquaintances, why should I bother following miscellaneous people who want to be my friends?
  • @Gab,

    you should follow whomever you want... this blog post is only taking a dig at people who fancy themselves 'professional social media celebrities' yet never, ever want to follow anyone else unless they absolutely have to... lest the change in numbers make them look less influential and rockstar like.

    This is not directed at normal people who use Twitter to keep in touch with friends or who don't want to follow people they aren't interested in... nor is it directed at actual celebrities.

    Just Twitter people who crave followers yet have stingy 'policy' of never following anyone back unless they are inescapably obligated to.
  • I completely agree with you man, I make a point not follow celebs because they don't follow me back therefore I am not interested in them.
    Well I think being a celebrity is pointless anyway.
  • Adrian,

    Totally. I'll go to the Cinemaplex or read People if I want to gaze at celebrities. The pleasure in social media is in CONNECTING with REAL PEOPLE.
  • Well said. I like what you said and will follow you. Thanks, Miss Truly ww.trulyspeaks.com
  • Cheers Miss Truly.... feel free to reply @brettborders
  • br3nda
    my own methods are to have one account in which i follow *most* people back

    i'll follow a web dev or kernel hacker, but not a spammer or a soccer dad i have nothing in common with, judging by the tweets/descriptions

    and then i have another account, which is locked pricate, that i post things like "i'm at this bar, who's gonna join me for a drink".. that one has only ~40 following,people i actually know and care about.

    9/10 tweets go to the public one.

    but i can't follow all 2,000 people on the public one -- my actual friends whom i care about get losts - hence i need the smaller list.


    If you want a tiny clique, then don't do it in public i say
  • br3nda,

    Your reasoning sounds good but the methodology sounds complex - unintentionally schizophrenic! Why not just make a group called 'close friends'? And manage it from one account. Here's how:

    http://socialmediarockstar.com/follow-more-people

    Let me know if you need any help or have any questions.
  • Yes, you're totally right about that. hehe.. Thanks for sharing this.
  • Weez,

    Thanks for joining the conversation!
  • Don
    Thanks for the link to the Tweetdeck tutorial that is going to help me a lot. Haven't taken the time to figure it out, I hate hitting buttons to figure out what they do only to discover I can't undo it.

    I will even follow back "those" marketers and get rich quick guru's, even the "how to get 10,000 followers in a week" dudes and filter them to the Sports section.

    I follow a few celeb's but I'm not really interested. Ron Howard followed me back though. I'd love to talk his ears off but, I keep it light and occasional.

    Tnx, Don
  • Don,

    My friend @RobMcNealy says that MLM and "get rich quick" gurus are great people to follow. They're
    gullible suckers, they'll check out your stuff... and they're easy to sell stuff to ;)
  • I try to follow everyone who follows me. I get tired of the soliloquies on Twitter. There's a lot of people who are narcissists. I don't always respond to "direct messages" but I always hit the reply button.
  • Jolie,

    I follow people and I ditch them if they prove unsavory. Every has the right to make the decision on who to follow... and event limit lots of people... I just get really skeptical when someone's social media skills or philosophy when they don't appear to follow anyone new.
  • I like to follow many people and I don't care who they are; eventually I will spend time following their conversation and get to visit their websites/ blogs; I never fail myself as to always find something interesting about each person; I guess I am playing the game of being; probably I simply love people.

    Again, somehow if I find people not following me back I will automatically fall into the space of making meaning out of it; I normally will get them know I want them to follow me back so we can have a 2 way conversation; I either announce in the public time line or unfollow them using Twitter Karma; Surprisingly they will follow me back.

    So I think time is the factor; Not the people; People are People; Remember the cosmic flows through people through you back to the cosmic! How else can our Higher Self detect what we want if we don't communicate?

    As always; we always want what others have; it's our natural sense of growth; so following more people to me will give me an idea of what I want the Cosmic to deliver me; The faster the better! Sometimes with twitter I get it right after I hit the send and next the home button.
  • Nurul,

    thanks for your conscious reply. I agree that Twitter is the current "hot" manifestation of the quantum, non-local collective consciousness.

    I totally agree that following more people broadens your digital horizons and gives you a better idea of what you want the cosmic to deliver you.

    I enjoy your thinking - please connect on Twitter!
  • gap
    Tell this to The Ellen Show, too.

    She was running around twitter begging for followers.
  • Gap,

    What's her Twittername?
  • Two opinions:

    First, why should I follow you back? Are you interesting? Just because you find me interesting is no reason to get petty because I don't find you interesting. If a WebCeleb followed all 15K followers he had, he'd get... well, he'd get 15K users worth of updates -- ie a flood of stuff that would drown out any use he might have had for Twitter except as a broadcast medium. All because Twitter's filtering tools SUCK, since basically it boils down to "everything please" or "no thanks".

    If you are interesting, I might follow you if I think I might have a conversation with you.

    Second. If you are interesting but I don't think I would have a conversation with you, or I suspect that due to your 15K followers you'd never see my pitiful attempts at conversation, I'll throw the RSS feed of your tweets into my Google Reader. That way I'll see what you say, if you are interesting, and I can dump your RSS feed easily if you get boring.

    So.

    In conclusion: be interesting, and don't get stuck in the trap of equivocating "number of followers" with "importance".

    Look to Star Trek for guidance: "Don't try to be a great man, just be a man and let history come to its own conclusions."

    And yes, I just went there.
  • David Mackintosh,

    I think of Star Trek as having a lot to do with this celeb conundrum. Here's why:

    On the Enterprise, they're traveling though the cosmic universe but they still maintain a very human, terrestrial consciousness with a penchant for drama.

    On Twitter, people (celebrities) have the ability to be generous and effortlessly connect with people... at no real cost to themselves, but they still are bound up in the ideals of appearing elite, distant and influential.
  • John Smith
    Respectfully, one thing you said I disagree with:

    "celebrities have the ability to be generous and effortlessly connect with people... at no real cost to themselves" I disagree with this strongly.

    Just put yourself in their shoes for a second. Imagine you're a celebrity with hundreds of thousands of followers. The cost to you is spending their entire day "effortlessly" connecting with people, as you put it.

    Do you realize they would stop doing what made them a celebrity and do nothing but twitter?

    Just a thought.
  • hmmm interesting.

    i just can't follow that many people. it gets cluttered and then i miss important tweets from my good friends.

    following 150-ish people is plenty for me.
  • Bugsy,

    You should use it in a way that works best for you.

    However, if you want to try and follow more people, it's easy to add your good friends into a group and not miss a single tweet from anyone important, while being able to skim everyone elses.

    Here's how:

    http://socialmediarockstar.com/follow-more-people
  • Right on! It's a little arrogant. If I wanted no interaction I'd check your website that has contact information to some assistants assistant. If your on twitter, well then it's open to conversation. If @JimmyEatWorld can do it so can the rest of them.
  • Mike, you made my night with the Jimmy reference - a band that really does get the concept of connecting with their fans.

    Unlike @dashboardchris - seriously, what's that account all about?
  • Mike M,

    I agree. Everyone is free to use Twitter how they see fit... including using it as a one-way broadcast medium... but it just doesn't look that hip when "web celebrites" use it that way.
  • I love your set up on here

    I am taking note of how every one is presenting their sites

    Impressive stuff

    keep up the fine work
  • Makere,

    Thanks so much... I'm glad you like. There are a lot of blogs out there so it's important to make yours distinct and easy to read, or else people won't take you seriously no matter what you have to say.

    hope to see you back again!
  • great points! ive always hated those people. but its all for marketing sake...


    add me and ill respond to everyone! ;p

    twitter.com/shantkiraz
  • Shant Kiraz,

    Added! Thanks for stopping by.
  • your so right on it hurts
    keep up the good work we are watching @celebritymonkey
  • Glad it hurts, if that's a good thing.

    I always figured that the web would change the way celebrities interact with their flock...

    But human nature doesn't change just because technology does.

    Small-time web celebrites seems to use it to re-enforce the same kind of distance and exclusivity that was necessary offline.. but seems to be no longer required.
  • ibeatcancrtwice
    I love your blog! You express my thoughts beautifully, with just the right mix of humor and honesty. Thank you, and keep it up. I registered, and look forward to more. Also, I will follow your instructions for TweetDeck, a platform I find confusing.
    Jamie
  • Jamie,

    Thanks for subscribing and good luck with Tweetdeck. Hit me up on Twitter if you have any problems (@brettborders) and I will help ya!
  • Verleen
    Brilliant article, thought provoking and you make an indelible point! Thanks.
  • Verleen,

    Thank you so much~! Glad to connect with you!
  • I'd agree with your choices of web celebs with the exception of Guy Kawasaki. Ghost tweets as an RSS feed doesn't really cut it as interaction.
  • Rom
    Funnily enough, it's easy enough to get a tweet from Guy K, he took offense at a tweet of mine today (criticising him for promoting Alltop HuffPo site, I pointed out that all HuffPo posts are available already....at the HuffPo (obvious, really) and suggested he was trying too hard) and fired one back in seconds, telling me I needed to try harder (?!). I doubt that came from a ghost tweeter, was way too defensive.
    Not smart either.
    Getting a follow from him? Meh, who cares? I think he's bigger in his own head than he is on the web (hence the insecure defensiveness of a response to a tweet by someone with less than 200 followers!).
  • Danny Brown,

    Didn't know that.

    I don't think I even follow him on Twitter, but I listed him because he's a famous "web celeb" and advocate of following people back (at least as a gesture.)
  • I hear you and see where you're coming from.

    Problem with Kawasaki is that he's so contradictory. He advocates following as many people back as you can, but doesn't interact properly (ghost tweets for majority of feed).

    He also suggests Twitter is a great business tool but more than 90% of it is inane chatter so it's a waste of time? And that he doesn't think it's unethical to ghost tweet (even though he never disclosed it until called out on it).

    Just seems there are some truly great "rockstars" around more deserving of your recommendation. :)
  • Danny,

    Thanks for the insight.
  • Amen to Amy.

    Social networking is called networking for a reason. I expect anybody following me to be reasonably engaged in what I have to say... maybe he or she will respond, retweet, get involved somehow.

    I'm following around 230 because that's how many I think I can pay real attention to. I want those engagements to be quality interactions. It's networking. It's no longer networking if I follow hundreds or thousands of people, can't keep up with them, and never interact. As some of them tweet less, I'm adding more people who interest me.

    I can't find a good reason to follow someone who doesn't interest me. My time is valuable! And who interests me may change from day to day... nobody should be insulted. :)

    As for a celeb, take @eddieizzard or @jimgaffigan. They don't follow many people. But ask a question @ them, and they're likely to respond to you. @jimgaffigan RT'ed something I said about him yesterday.

    So they are reading and responding where they want to respond. I think that's social, it's media, and it's networking.

    Celebrities are distant. That's what makes them celebrities and not neighbours or co-workers. :) They have the right to keep distance, and choose who they "let in."

    - @aswas aka Debbie :)
  • Debbie,

    Cool points, but I always kinda figured the social web changed the rules a little bit. In the past, there'd be no possible way I could have a connection with Obama or an elite top blogger... but Twitter makes it really easy to connect both ways - if both sides want to.

    Over the years I have been able to "network" and make connections with thousands of people on various social media sites without paying attention to every single one of their updates. I follow the flow for long enough and their patterns and personalities emerge... and the necessary connections get made.
  • I dig, but Twitter isn't the first time we "could" get closer to celebs. Websites, email, texting... celebs didn't really let us much closer. Most celebs don't hang out on their own official or fan message boards.

    I signed up for Todd Barry's Facebook fan page, but he didn't ask me to be his Facebook pal. :) Bands who "friended" my MySpace account probably are not sitting home wondering what's new in Debbie's life today. :)

    I think we're expecting too much of these busy people. Yes, they're not much without fans, but that doesn't mean they have to be my bestest pal. :)

    I think we have taken the idea of "friending" to a place where our expectations are a little out of whack.
  • Debbie,

    I know what you mean about real celebs. They really are busy. Al Gore's got a planet to save. Obama's got a financial mess on his pants.

    This post is directed at "social media marketer celebs" and blogger who have a modest following but try so hard never to follow anyone back, lest they look like a commoner.

    Can't name names, but they're everywhere.
  • My question is, how do you know that they're "trying hard not to follow anyone back?" In my experience, I get new followers all the time, but there's only so many people that a) I'm physically able to handle following (even after setting them up in columns) and b) are posting anything that will genuinely interest or engage me. If they don't interest me, or if their entire tweet stream is @replies or spammy comments, I choose not to follow them. It's not personal, it's not because I consider myself a "web celebrity," it's because frankly, I value quality of connections over quantity.

    Dani Nordin, aka @danigrrl
  • Amen, Brett!
  • Hallelujah, RWRidley!

    Who needs those guys, right?
  • I like how your posts reflect my own responses when considering social media personalities & choices. I often have the same thoughts as you write on your blog.

    There's the celeb who follows many because "I can learn from everyone" or "Everyone's a potential lead" or it's the Twitter math game, but never @s you even if you attempt a conversation.

    There are those who don't follow you but will reply to @s. There's the self-serving RT. The linking machine. The hashtag addict. The effusive. The too-personal. The clueless. The look-at-me.

    It's pretty colorful, and amongst all that color are the primary colors. So value is available, you just have to pick & choose.
  • I like ur description. LOL @ the clueless, the too-personal.
  • Pamir,

    I know the exact feeling... and I think it demonstrates that blogosphere is a non-local, quantum, collective intelligence. You and I are feeling the same tides and processing the same universalinformation... sometimes simultaneously, sometimes a thought fragment in one of us will trigger an epiphany in another. Blogs are the long form, Twitter for the snippets.

    I dig it your observations... I've seen many of those archtypes.. and it's got me thinking into new territories.

    Thanks for spuring me on and participating in the conversation!
  • Good piece, Brett -- although I have a different experience

    In my case, I have nearly 3200 followers on Twitter. I currently follow about 400 people back. Mostly that's because I can't handle following that many people, and I don't want to take on more than I can handle, Twitter becomes useless to me then. And while every day I gain and lose some followers, overall my follower numbers have risen steadily since I joined Twitter.

    I'm not convinced that following people back is the best way to get the "social" out of Twitter. Seems to me it's more important to engage in conversation, especially through @replies (both responding to @ messages I get, and in sending @ replies, including retweets).

    I discover a lot of interesting people to follow by tracking hashtags. Most of them never follow me back, and I don't really care.

    But that's just me. My remarks indicate only my own preference.

    - Amy Gahran
  • Check out this RT on following tons of people effectively--helped me out as I have been getting up to speed last 2 months.

    JesseNewhart@freshlar How To Effectively Follow 15000+ People On Twitter: http://bit.ly/13rmog

    Marc Littmann
    Marc Littmann Wedding and Portrait Photography
    www.littmannweddings/blogspot.com
  • Amy, if you use TweetDeck, you can follow everyone back and still not get lost in a sea of tweets by setting up groups.

    By default, everyone that I follow back because they are following me don't get into a group. I do, however, keep an eye on the unfiltered folks and as soon as someone says something that catches my eye, they go into a group called "of interest." Then, of course, I have groups for friends, celebrities, etc.
  • Amy,

    Everyone has got a way to use the technology that works for them. Personally I just follow people and set up several columns to filter the flow (Colorado friends, SEO people, interesting people). I unfollow or block only the people who are annoying / spammy. Twitter becomes exponentially more interesting to me and I don't find its usefulness diminishes at all. It's even more personal because I filter it for exactly who or what I'm most interested in.

    I guess I just get fed up because there are people I'd like to interact with... but I know that they'll never reply or follow me as a matter of habit or policy, so I feel distant.
  • A. Clarke
    I like your reasoning/ response and understand your feeling distant. I'm glad to see you mentioned setting up columns and wish I knew how you did that.
  • Ha! Following people back only so you can filter them out later with groups? That's just paying them lip service, don't you think?

    Your philosophy is a similar to a communism. Everyone get the same amount, regardless of the quality of what they produce. "Everyone's opinion matters! You are all important!" When in reality, that's just not the case.

    Some people's opinions matter more than others. That can be for a variety of reasons, but they're all valid. In our world there are listeners, and there are speakers. Some people just have more interesting things to say.

    People may choose to follow you for a variety of reasons– they're a fan of your blog, your art, your product, your thinking, etc. But I don't believe that obligates you to listen to thier voice.

    I think many people join twitter just to listen, and its perfectly all right if you don't follow them back. Besides, how can you really listen when you follow so many people?
blog comments powered by Disqus

Warning: main(/home/28407/etc/...) [function.main]: failed to open stream: Permission denied in /nfs/c05/h01/mnt/28407/domains/socialmediarockstar.com/html/wp-content/themes/thesis/footer.php on line 14

Warning: main() [function.include]: Failed opening '/home/28407/etc/...' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/local/php-4.4.8-1/share/pear') in /nfs/c05/h01/mnt/28407/domains/socialmediarockstar.com/html/wp-content/themes/thesis/footer.php on line 14