Mike Dillard UN-FOLLOWS 10,000 People on Twitter?
ByToday I received an email from Mike Dillard, stating that he has had a change of heart regarding his Twitter account. Orignally, Social Media Maven Perry Belcher had convinced him to follow everyone that followed him, out of politeness, and to increase the number of Mike’s followers. but now, Mike is going to UN-FOLLOW 10,000 PEOPLE? That seems crazy.
In Mike’s own words, here is his logic…
And if everyone is just “reciprocal following” everyone, it’s not because they WANT to listen to that person, but because they’re trying to increase their exposure and number of followers…”
In the end, reciprocal following simply dilutes the power of an application like Twitter because it’s a behavior that’s motivated by greed instead of authenticity, just so we can all enjoy the illusion of having more followers…”
OK Mike, I hear what you’re saying, but honestly, I DON’T AGREE. Twitter is a tool for CONNECTING with people. If you only follow the people you know, then how will you network and meet new people? I’ve recently made some great new friends on Twitter. There are some people who have just started following me, that look very interesting to me. They could be future friends, affiliates, business associates, or even JV partners.
OK, I don’t agree with Perry Belcher either. I don’t follow every single person that follows me. Politeness? Rubbish. I follow MOST people that follow me. If they have interesting tweets (posts), and seem to bring VALUE to the community, I want to follow them. I have gotten some great tips, and been directed to some great links by people who I’ve never met. I’ve never even interacted with them on Twitter. Of course, these are the people who make it to my “special” feed on TweetDeck, as I will try to interact with them at some point. These are the people I want to get to know.
As Twitter goes mainstream, there will be a lot of debate on this subject. What are your thoughts?
Shecky
PS Oh yeah…follow me HERE on Twitter
http://twitter.com/ReallyShecky
12 Comments
March 16th, 2009 at 6:07 PM
Jeff,
I have to say that I agree with you on both the Dillard & Belcher points. Seems like Mike is missing the social part of social media. But maybe he’s reach a level with a big enough network and exposure that he can get away with it.
Blue Skies,
Jeff
March 16th, 2009 at 6:09 PM
I get what you’re saying, but I try not to reciprocal follow everyone who follows me. I follow a little over half of my followers, only the ones I have some reason to follow. A lot of people seem to have blind-followed me, or celebs follow me back just because I’m following them, and that seems lame to me, because I know they aren’t actually reading my tweets.
I’d rather have 100 “real” followers than 500 “blind” followers who don’t read my tweets.
March 16th, 2009 at 7:27 PM
I can understand both sides of the issue, however, I recently deleted some celebrities that I as following. They beg for followers and then they follow very few. For example. P.Diddy aka P.Twitty had more than 100,000 followers but was only following less than 50, and they were all celebrities and mucky-mucks. So, I unfollowed him. I feel celebrities and higher ups have enough fan base, e-mail base, Internet-based supporters that they shouldn’t be peddling their fame on Twitter. I’ve termed them as “Twogs,” meaning “Twitter Hogs.” They can go peddle their wares elsewhere. I’m not buying. I’m sure others will begin to feel that way as soon as they realize these celebs don’t give a plug nickel for them, instead, they are using the masses to soothe their puffed-up egos.
Also, Jeff may find that people unfollow him for the same reason. Tweet on people…be my tweets!
March 16th, 2009 at 7:29 PM
Oops, I meant to say “Mike” on that last sentence above. Sorry Jeff!
March 16th, 2009 at 8:14 PM
I’m going to have to disagree with Mike Dillard on that too…
It’s Law of averages…. AND Social proof!
Thanks for the post!
Dbk
March 17th, 2009 at 12:09 AM
You are so bold! I love it!
March 17th, 2009 at 8:18 AM
Major mistake on Mike’s part. He built his business by convincing the masses he was an internet genius and in one simple email he has thrown that out the car window heading to Baja. Regardless of your stature Social Media is a TWO Way street. I think in the long run Mike will see it that way.
Paul
ps great article
March 17th, 2009 at 8:22 AM
Regarding Tim’s comment
“I’d rather have 100 “real” followers than 500 “blind” followers who don’t read my tweets.”
How do you know who is real or who is blind?
March 20th, 2009 at 12:29 AM
Jeff,
I agree with both of your points. I don’t care if Mike is at a “Higher Level”, that just makes him more of an ASS to care less about people that don’t FIRST care about HIS program. Ann Sieg has never and doesn’t use that approach, Mike is a lot more full of himself. Belcher, on the other hand, is using that “I care about EVERYONE” technique (which he really doesn’t) to lead people into HIS marketing funnel. I believe that his approach is to appeal to EVERYONE and go through the numbers, which is equally as lame as what Mike is doing. And as far as P. Twitty goes, he is lamer than ALL the rest of them. A fantastic marketer, but what type of Tweeter wants EVERYONE to follow him but will only follow back his selected list of celebrity buddies? Why doesn’t he just ask people to get down on their knees and bow to him like some of the Obama followers do? A true LEGEND IN HIS OWN MIND. Great post!
Jeff ( the Electrical Soldier of Prosperity )
March 30th, 2009 at 10:29 PM
Hey Jeff,
Agreed, to a large extent. The problem I see is with the auto follow, which causes issues. I am not against following people, by any means. And you summed it up expertly when you said -
” If you only follow the people you know, then how will you network and meet new people? I’ve recently made some great new friends on Twitter.”
How many times have you accepted a friend request on say facebook; you check it out; accept; and then they message asking what you do?
Duh!
Take a minute to look at my profile and AT LEAST know a little about me so you don’t look like an idiot who is just out for numbers!
Yes, making the connections are CRITICAL! And, make sure it isn’t hollow and meaningless. It’s only worthwhile if there is value!
EXPECT Success!
Jackie Ulmer
March 30th, 2009 at 11:28 PM
Some thoughts on followers and following:
The root problem is that in our minds we use the standard definitions for followers and following, but these groups of people have little to do with those definitions. Nor do followers and following have anything to do with the more serious “friends” you might have on Facebook.
Remember, we don’t have to follow someone in order to read their tweets. Either through search or through RSS — we can read lots of tweets from people without adding ourselves to their follower count.
But that’s not the point. Following has nothing to do with listening. It’s about community. It’s about providing an opportunity for having a private, neighborly chat (only mutual followers can DM). It’s about offering a token of recognition, of social connection.
Not following someone who follows you is just rude. It costs you nothing to return the favor. By snubbing people, you only make yourself look like a snob. To not follow is like refusing to shake someone’s hand — you better have a really good reason not to.
Many of the arguments against following so many people come from people who are still using the Twitter website as their primary interface. It’s actually a lousy tool for effectively engaging the twitter community. Move on to something like Tweetdeck which lets you build groups of people you like to listen to more closely, track keywords on every topic you find interesting, and more easily engage in conversation with 1000s of insightful people.
Unless a twitter account is malicious or spam (or you oppose the user on some sort of moral or political grounds), there’s no reason not to follow.
April 23rd, 2009 at 9:16 PM
I think we should follow most people who follow us. I exclude the people who are there to sell porn, and others that make me uncomfortable. But, I follow almost everyone else.
When people like Ashton get 1,000,000 followers, I say, “Big Whoop.” He’s a celebrity. And people like Larry King and Oprah who have a zillion followers, but follow no one, are communicating the same old way: “Them to Us.” It’s no different than watching them on TV.
Now, if those celebrities would actually follow some people and LISTEN to other people, then I would say they are using social media the way it supposed to be used. It should be a two way street.
I have about 3,300 followers, and I can’t come close to reading every tweet. But, once in a while I see something I like, and I’ll start up a conversation with that person. Out of the ocean of tweets, I can scoop up a cup to drink when I want to. The bigger my ocean, the more chance I have of finding someone interesting.
I make no bones about the fact that I am building my social media so that I can do business with my friends. Twitter and Facebook help me build more friendships. I count on the fact when people know and trust me, if the don’t buy from me, they may refer someone else.
A few nights ago, I was goofing with some friends on Twitter. It was silly stuff, and I am sure we were all giggling in front of our respective keyboards. But, a tweet popped up from a woman I didn’t know. I followed her, checked her profile, and read her web site. It turns out we have similar business interests, and I have approached her about maybe doing some business together some day. That’s how social media is supposed to work. I get a possible business connection because I was having fun on Twitter.
And, yes, please, I would love for you to follow me on Twitter:
http://twitter.com/Jaykoch
DM me and tell me you found me from this blog.
jay