If you use Twitter as part of your personal or company marketing, Frances over at Edublog asks interesting questions: “When potential contacts are researching you on Twitter, will they judge you by the people who follow you? Should you therefore invest time in checking your follower lists and blocking the spammers, scammers and pornbots following you? Does it reflect poorly on you if they are there?”
First, my usual word of warning: nobody really knows yet.
No matter how impressive the social media guru or digital strategy expert, this is still shortly-after-dawn in the Age of Social Media and nobody really knows anything for certain yet. Social Media was born as a means of subversive online communication — it only recently and reluctantly began to bend to the will of marketers. The industry is still developing the methodologies that will one day tell us for sure the answers to these big social media questions.
In the meantime (as Quasimodo said to the archdeacon) I have my hunches. Here they are.
Relax, don’t do it
No, I don’t think a follower list full of spambots and pornbots reflects poorly on you. I don’t think you should prune your follower lists. I believe, in most cases, people will not judge you by the calibre of people following you on Twitter.
If someone does judge you on the kinds of people who follow you on Twitter, it’ll vary greatly by age, industry and nationality. You won’t find the same standards applying in Paris as you do in Texas, or between tweens and seniors. Twitter is a very international community and there’s no easy way to track location or demographics of the people who view your Twitter profile unless they also choose to follow you.
So why worry about unmeasurable opinions of people you can’t identify?
There are more productive things you can be doing
For most of us, the investment required to curate our follower list will not equal whatever return we get from having a ‘clean’ follower list or the risk we take by not having a ‘clean’ follower list. (This may not be true for conservative politicians, church leaders and captains of industry.) I have 1,700 or so followers currently and I’m not even going to try to keep so many followers in line. The spambots and pornbots will eventually wither and die from neglect if Twitter’s own anti-abuse team don’t get to them first.
You won’t see me saying this often…
Let’s take a leaf from the pages of Old Media History. If you own a television set, TV networks can’t stop you watching their programming. There is no ‘block’ button on the control panel at your local TV station. Yet the demographic composition of a TV audience is essential to the success of a television when courting advertisers.
How do they change their audience composition? Through means much more subtle and yet even more effective than a ‘block follower’ button. They use programming changes to change the content being broadcast and when it is broadcast. And they use audience research to learn more about not just who their audience is, but what sort of content they need to offer in order to reach the audience they aspire to.
What is the Twitter equivalent of ‘programming changes’? Change what you say, change when you say it. Change what you reply to, and how rapidly you reply to it. Encourage interaction with the followers you aspire to have more of. Seek less interaction with pornbots. Respond less often to phishing scams. Please, for all our sakes!
‘Audience research’ on Twitter is not dissimilar to TV: time-consuming, inaccurate and prone to erroneous conclusions. But it’s still worth a try. Pick a follower who typifies your ideal audience. Take note of who they follow and what they reply to. Mimic. Repeat.
No undo
Remember, I’m making this up as I go along, based on what I observe every day and what I can find in my hunch bag, but here’s the big take-away: I am not a fan of the ‘block’ button. If you decide to block followers who your business contacts won’t approve of, what next? Because there’s no ‘undo’.
What if you’ve just blocked someone still finding their way around social media etiquette the hard way? What if that person might have become a valuable business contact or customer if you’d just given them another chance? Even if you keep following them after blocking them to see if they turn over a new leaf, you’ve sent them a message: you don’t want them following you. It’s a small thing to not follow someone, but a very large thing to not let them follow you. There’s no undo.
No wonder TV sets don’t have a ‘block viewer’ button.
Alan Jones is Chief Hindsight Officer at Doing Words. Since 1995, he has consulted to early-stage companies and new product development teams, helping with online strategy for communications, product development and marketing. He also has hands-on experience founding and co-founding web and mobile startups, as well as senior management experience in larger companies including Yahoo!, News Digital Media and Microsoft.
Are you wasting your money on online marketing?
Want an ad like this?Does online marketing get you confused? Are you properly exploiting social media? Do you understand search engine optimisation? Is your website delivering you enough business? If you answered Yes to any of these questions, it might be time to get some help.

View Comments
Marnie B
March 11th, 2010 at 1:30 pm
In all honesty, if someone judges you by who is following you, I don’t believe they understand how Twitter works: people follow you because THEY are interested in YOU – not the other way around.
[Reply]
Daryl Reply:
March 11th, 2010 at 1:56 pm
Well count me amongst the naive… I am definitely interested in some twitteres, because of ‘who’ is following them… the start of the evaluation begins thus:
* hmmmm, ‘interesting person A’ is following ‘potential interesting person B’ — I wonder why? Maybe I’ll check em out.
… and the rest writes itself
[Reply]
Daryl
March 11th, 2010 at 1:40 pm
Hey I agree with the sentiment here… yet something, in someways people ‘are judged’ by their followers… but from the bottom up.
For example: at the moment, my favourite activity in twitter is to go and checkout people that look interesting, and then see who ‘they follow’. I usually pick one person in particular, and investigate most of the people the have on their ‘following’ list… from there, the chain begins, rinse and repeat.
So if this pattern were true of other twitteres, which I’m sure might well be, one might do very well developing a ‘followership’, depending on the quality of the followers ‘one’ already has.
So in line with the ‘more productive things’ that a twitterer might be doing… one of those things would certainly be attracting more ‘quality’ followers, and benefiting from the flow of ‘better’ traffic that comes by this path.
[Reply]
Ian Lyons
March 12th, 2010 at 1:20 pm
There’s a quite a new feature introduced by Twitter late last year which I think will prove to be exceptionally powerful – the ability for people to group other people into lists – and for you to see where you have been listed.
Think of it as your personal brand – as defined by your audience. If you find yourself in lists with the words important or influential, then you’re probably delivering value. Here’s some great analysis using this methodology: http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/analysis_influencers_still_signing_up_followers_dont_equal_lists.php?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+readwriteweb+%28ReadWriteWeb%29
If on the other hand you start turning up on lists with the term “douche bag”, then perhaps it’s time for a programming change
[Reply]