JetBlue Airways has 1.4 million followers on Twitter.
… and Southwest Airlines has 877,000 followers.
The state of Utah has 3,400 followers.
…and the state of Massachusetts has 1,300 followers.
The Los Angeles Fire Department has 6,600 followers.
… and the San Francisco Police Department has 1,100 followers.
Britney Spears has 3.8 million followers.
…and Queen Latifah has 255,000 followers.
Kevin Spacey has 1.4 million followers.
…and John Cleese has 272,800 followers.
Queen Rania Al Abdullah of Jordan has 1 million followers.
…and Prime Minister Stephen Harper of Canada has 22,000 followers.
In the greater scheme of learning, sharing, enhancing, networking, and collaborating, there are many annoying Twitter tactics — but the one that bugs me the most is when people try to amass the most number of followers.
I don’t care how many followers you have. Do you?
The sooner the display of followers can be stricken from Twitter user profiles, the more organic tweeting will become. Thoughts?
Related posts:
{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }
I can see where having lots of followers would be a bad idea for celebrities, especially if they tweet about their daily activities. Don’t you know that the paparazzi would just love to have a heads up about where their favorite targets (Britney?) are at a given time!
I agree with Zachary that a following, no matter how small, who knows you, converses with you and really pays attention is really what twitter should be about. It’s a real shame that so many use it just to send spam.
It is fun to know that a person can have more followers than some state governments and most police and fire departments.
There is some usefulness in so-called spam, which you could equate with direct mail you receive by postal mail. If nothing else, you can get ideas from it to repurpose into other things.
But beyond Zachary’s point, the engagement is something for you to do. You should see your own followers; why should everyone else?
Amen Ari, Amen!
The quantity of Twitter followers should never overshadow their quality. From day 1, our LAFD social media offerings have focused on the degree of engagement rather than silly metrics. When someone adopts and then preaches a message – or better yet a lifestyle helping others (even strangers) “lead safer, healthier and more productive lives”, we scored a bullseye – and a better world.
Thanks Ari, for your often thoughtful writings. The Los Angeles Fire Department is humbled to appear among a roster of such infamous entities and personalities.
Brian
The humility is all mine, graced by the LAFD in these comments, Brian.
Who’s to say that these or other accounts are following people for the point of amassing as many followers as possible? Do you know the strategies and thinking that goes behind their use of Twitter and how/who they connect with or have the possibility of connecting with?
The thing is, every person/brand has their own reasoning as to who they follow and their own happenings (celebrity being one and a skewed example to look at in the first place) as to why they have as many followers as they do. I just think you’re beating a dead horse with the talk of followers and what not, where the importance today is on the strategies, the how, the action – on SM as a whole, not just Twitter.
So why do you care? Why not focus on what you’re doing and how you’re helping move needles for your own growth and the organizations you work for?
Hmm. I write about people and organizations who follow you — and you comment about those you follow. I suppose the two actions are interconnected but that’s not my point, which is that the number of those who follow you should only be important to you. Those are your potential customers, not mine; and therein lies why I care.