Web Development Blog
Tutorials and Tips
Subscribe to the Blog
Related Resources
Are you ready to build a new site?
Need help planning your social media campaign?
Visit my services page to learn how I can help you with your next Internet project.
My Twitter following habits aren’t better than yours; they’re just different.
Everyone these days has been offering advice on how to use Twitter. Sometimes that advice is judgmental. But Twitter is a tool than can be wielded in many different ways. There's no one size fits all solution that works for everyone. Last year most of the Twitter advice I saw was focused on practicalities. Instructions were shared on how to use #hashtags to indicate a topic, using RT to ReTweet, when to DM (direct message), where to find people worth following, etc. There was also plenty of advice on Twitter etiquette, but now that seems to have gone past the Emily Post phase.
Now there seems to be more of an inclination to suggest that Twittering "this way" instead of "that way" is the preferred way to behave in the Twitter social sphere. While there are many rules that polite Tweeters should follow, such as not being insulting, others are more subjective and depend on each user's situation. Who we follow and what we Tweet are two subjects that seem to get people worked up. Today I'd like to focus on the "who to follow" debate and whether or not this is an issue of etiquette.
First a few thoughts on manners
Manners allow us to put others at ease. These "polite" rules are designed to smooth interactions between individuals. They provide us with a framework so that we can behave in a manner that makes people comfortable and doesn't cause embarrassment or discord.
If we follow the rules of manner—within our particularly society—then we can all play nicely in the same sandbox without squabbling over each other's toys or making someone cry. In most circumstances, we can follow the same general rules on Twitter that we would in regular society. We just need to think of parallels found in the outside world and keep in mind that Twitter is global.
The international nature of Twitter means we should be considerate of differing social mores. For example, those of us used to an American confrontational style should keep in mind that this style may be discomfiting to our friends in Asia and the Middle East—where the practice of allowing others to "save face" is more common. Those of us tweeting in English should also consider the differences in American and British variants of the language. Avoiding words that have different meanings across the pond can will help us communicate more clearly and in a manner that won't offend.
Must we follow back?
Assuming we've all agreed to play nicely in the Twitter sandbox, what are the rules when it comes to following? I've had people tell me, "I'm not going to follow X. He doesn't follow back his followers, he just wants to build numbers so I'm not going to follow him." Personally if X provides useful information I don't care if he follows me back or not. If X posts self-indulgent marketing garbage, that's a different story, but I don't think we can judge a Tweeter's value by their following policy alone.
What do you think? Is a user's following policy a question of etiquette or personal preference? Must we follow back everyone who follows us? Should we automatically rebuff those who don't?
Some say following back one's followers is the correct and polite thing to do. They accuse the twitterati who follow few, but are followed by many, of being anti-social Twitter snobs who don't want to engage the community but just want the attention. But is that a fair accusation? Does it apply to everyone?
What would Emily Post say?
To get a better sense of whether this is an issue of etiquette, I'd like to compare following habits to two real world situations.
1. Do you send holiday cards to everyone who sends one to you? I don't, but I've never made it a practice to send cards. If I did, I'd draw up a list based on my friends and family. I wouldn't include the paint contractors, real estate agents, printers and others who are hoping to do business with me. Nor would I send one to every person with whom I've made an acquaintance. I'd probably have a set budget for cards and a certain allotment of time to spend on them. Thus I'd focus my finite resources on the people I think would be most happy to hear from me during the holidays.
2. Are we expected to attend every event to which we're invited? Must we invite everyone (who invites us) to all of our own events? No. I'm sure most people would like it if we could attend all of their events. But they also understand that our time is limited, we may have conflicting obligations. Similarly they know that we can't invite them to all of our own parties due to costs, space limitations, different interest groups, etc.
There are many reasons we may choose not to accept an invitation, and it is perfectly acceptable to RSVP in the negative without explaining our reasons. Twitter should be no different.
Twitter Snobs: define them by intentional actions rather than follower ratios
Given that I see no moral or societal obligation for users to follow back their followers, that doesn't mean that we don't see bad follower habits on Twitter. But instead of judging a Tweeter as a snob based on his/her follower/followee ratio, what if we thought instead about intentions.
- Good Twitter Intentions
-
Many popular Tweeters, be they actors or tech celebrities follow few but are followed by many. While some have campaigned on podcasts and T. V. to get more followers, many others have not. These people are followed by many simply because many people like the content they produce.
Such Tweeters follow few others for their own reasons. Often they just want to manage their lists so they can focus on the people who produce the content that is of most interest to them. This could mean that they are only following friends, family, peers in their field or anyone else that seems appropriate.
I have no problem with this. The primary value I get from Twitter is the information shared by my fellow Tweeters. Many of these people feel the same way. If we somehow forced these folks to follow us all back in return, then they'd be stuck sifting through over-crowded Twitter streams wasting time trying to find the information they really want. I see no reason to make their lives more difficult just to appease my ego.
- Bad Twitter Intentions
-
Yes there are Twitter snobs. Some people are online to gain followers rather than to gain information. We see these people following hundreds at a time—with a motive of gaining followers—then quickly unfollowing them all to boost their ratio and seem cool. I would consider this to be bad behavior because they initiated the action—to make people follow them—yet had no intention of continuing the relationship or engaging in conversation.
Such people often provide other clues that can help distinguish them as snobs or spammers. They may have an annoyingly polished profile picture, tweet about their follower count repeatedly, identify themselves as some sort of expert (though you are in their field and have never heard of them) and tweet about themselves or their projects without engaging in conversations or retweeting links from regular people.
Collectively their Twitter usage habits show that their goals are not to engage with the community but instead to promote their product, service or ego.
Let's give the popular tweeps a break.
There's nothing wrong with wanting more followers. For those of us who have something to market, it's helpful to build our follower lists. My Tweeting patterns are mostly about sharing ideas and conversations, but if Tweeting can bring more readers to my blog, or help me find clients in need of my Web services, then a larger following will help. That said, I still prefer to use a targeted approach. I seek out people who share interesting insights and ideas and may also find value in what I share. Conversation comes first, marketing second.
I'm not one of the "popular tweeps" but I think many of them share a similar attitude. Instead of judging them on their followee/follower ratios, let's judge them on how they play in our Twitter sandbox overall. I'm not saying you have to start following these people if it doesn't suit your strategy. But if you're snubbing Tweeters because you think they have snubbed you, you may be missing out on people who really aren't as evil or rude as you think.
Heidi's following policy
I follow back most of the people who follow me, but not all. I get 5-25 requests a day, so I visit each, skim their profile and Tweets, then follow back if they don't seem to be spam, aren't on some popularity quest and share a sufficient variety of Tweets to seem interesting. That said, as my numbers build I am becoming a bit more finicky. I'm beginning to look more closely and not follow people whose Tweets are so narrow in focus or so out of my topic range that we're not likely to converse.
More on Twitter following attitudes
- Ari Herzog: Can You Help My Twitter Growing Pains?*
- Ari Herzog: Why My Twitter Train is Stopping*
- Inside the Minds of Twitter Users
- To Follow or Not to Follow; that is the Question
- Twitter Follow Rules - Who To Follow
* My friend Ari recently experimented with different Twitter following strategies. He'd been following few, then tried following all. That became overwhelming so he went back to following fewer than he had originally. These articles walk us through the process and the issues he considered in making his decision.
Genesis: Follow You Follow Me
Somehow I don't think Twitter was what Phil Collins had in mind.
Comment by Karine Joly — April 29, 2009 @4:17 pm
Comment by Escorial — April 29, 2009 @4:29 pm
Karine,
Thanks for your feedback. I think we all struggle with this, especially as the streams keep growing. I now hesitate before clicking the follow button and review the Tweets more carefully to ensure that the people I'm adding won't just be more noise. With all the requests that come in, I now get excited when I see one is from a real person who has actual conversations!
Tweetdeck is a big help, but I'm sure I'm missing many good Tweets and Tweeps alike. Like you I do try to respond to @replies as well.
Tweetmeme.com offers the retweet button I'm using. I installed it a few weeks ago and so far it seems to be working out pretty well. You can implement it with either javascript or as a WordPress plug-in—which is also rather convenient.
Comment by Heidi — April 29, 2009 @4:29 pm
Comment by George Sackett — April 29, 2009 @5:22 pm
Comment by Michael Stoner — April 29, 2009 @5:40 pm
Escorial, You've got a healthy perspective. Too many let their egos get in the way. It's up to each of us to use Twitter as it fits our lives. (p.s. checked out your site, nice cartoons!)
George, Great point about recommendations. I meet a lot of cool tweeps through friends. Sometimes I'll see that X has written something that looks interesting and sent it to Y, so I'll click through to find out what the conversation was about. Often I'll join in and follow Y in the process. I also discover some cool tweeps during #followfriday. But generally I don't tend to search out batches of people; I just try to discover them organically when possible. Unless I'm looking to broaden a certain segment in which case I may look at a Twitterpack or do a Twellow search and pick out peeps from the group that seem cool.
Michael, I never auto-follow either, it's too risky these days. As George said too many are trying to sell something, or have some odd agenda. I guess you would get odd requests given your name. But even with mine I get some odd ones. For instance why would a fellow who only discusses Monster Truck rallies or pet skunks want to follow me? But worse yet are the social media experts and the folks offering "free girls." Last I heard girls weren't meant to be a tradeable commodity. And if we get past my moral and legal objections it's still bad marketing to target me for such schemes!
It will be interesting to see how Twitter evolves now that more are joining up.
Comment by Heidi — April 29, 2009 @11:44 pm
Comment by Mark Greenfield — April 30, 2009 @4:05 am
Comment by Escorial — April 30, 2009 @11:28 am
Comment by Jeff Hirz — April 30, 2009 @12:00 pm
Comment by Gail Shipley — April 30, 2009 @12:56 pm
Comment by Ron — April 30, 2009 @3:44 pm
Mark, I couldn't agree more. It's much easier to know how to use a tool, whether it be Twitter or a tire iron, if you know what you are trying to accomplish. If more people used Twitter with a concrete goal in mind whether the goal is personal or for business, they'd find themselves getting more out the service. Your having multiple accounts also gives you a broader perspective because you have personal experience using Twitter for different reasons. I expect that gives you far greater insight into how you use each. When I had @casenews I used it quite differently than my personal account.
For that I set up Twitterfeed to automatically post daily news releases, then I sought out people via Twellow and other sources who seemed to have some interest in Case Western Reserve, be they alumni local media, students or others. I followed back all followers who seemed sincere (as in not spammers) then tried to read through their Tweets periodically and reply when appropriate. I wanted the account to be more than just a publishing mechanism. That said, I also wanted to make sure Tweets had a university focus, so I wouldn't reply to discussions of food and movies they way I might on my own account.
Escorial, your experience sounds like my first few days on Pownce, a now defunct micro-blogging service that allowed for long discussion threads, video, photos, etc. "What do I do now?" was my first reaction, but people took me under wing, showed me around and in no time I was devoted to the service. When I finally joined Twitter sometime in 2007, I already knew many people there from Pownce, so they were the first people I followed. This made it easier because we already had a rapport. The trick then was to figure out how to communicate in only 140 characters.
I think the character limit does make it trickier to get to know people on Twitter but I have gotten to know a few folks and then connected with them on Skype, Ning or in person. This makes a big difference. For instance I met a number of folks in higher education first on the University Web Developers site, started following them on Twitter, then met several—including Mark and Karine— at a conference. Many of us also contribute to Blog High Ed so we also read one another's blogs. I've found that I start to get a much better sense of people when I'm also connecting with them in other spaces like blogs and Ning, because there I can see their thoughts more fully flushed out—rather than just the abridged versions found in Tweets. I've had a similar experience with Cleveland Tweeters involved in the Cleveland Social Media Club. We have a Ning site but also meet in person on a monthly basis. Thus when it comes to developing online relationships with peers, colleagues or others, I think Twitter is but one tool I use in conjunction with several others. On it's own, it might not be as powerful, but when Twitter leads me to people's blogs and other resources it acts as a conduit to keep the conversation flowing in a variety of online and offline locales.
Your insight about people demanding some sort of ROI is intriguing. I think we should get a good return on investment from any tool we use—but it doesn't have to be monetary. We can each define our own ROI. For some it may be about selling more widgets, but I think for many of us it is more about having fun, sharing ideas and striking up a conversation.
Comment by Heidi — April 30, 2009 @3:49 pm
Comment by Heidi — April 30, 2009 @3:55 pm
Thanks Jeff,
There were actually some things that I left out, but as my entries tend to be on the long side, I chopped them!
Gail,
I was thinking of our recent Tweets when I wrote this, but then ended up keeping the focus on the more narrow issue of following habits. What I realized from our discussion was the effect our own perspective can have on the way we perceive a particular Tweet.
I had posted a link aimed at educating the people who follow me in hopes of getting more followers so they can build their numbers. These are the people who come off as spam or who don't provide enough information in their profile or Tweets for me to decide if they are worth following. I get several of these each day. But if I were a reader who wasn't getting such requests I can now see how the link could take on a different meaning. In that context it might be read as suggesting that everyone should be trying to acquire followers. The same Tweet could have 2 (possibly more) entirely different interpretations.
I think I'm going to explore this idea more in a future post about meaning and context. We all read things through the eyes of our own experience. The character limits of Twitter can make it quite easy for things to become misconstrued, but I think it also applies to Web content as a whole. As content developers/writers we are challenged to ensure that our words convey the complete picture, not one that is only recognized by those sharing the same perspective. Thanks for your insights!
Comment by Heidi — May 1, 2009 @1:58 pm
Comment by lissa lowe — May 24, 2009 @11:27 pm
Trackback by sprucedecor (lissa lowe) — May 24, 2009 @11:39 pm
Pingback by Welcome to Social Media » Blog Archive » Who do you, how do you #followfriday? — June 1, 2009 @8:12 pm
Comment by gypeSyday — June 4, 2009 @1:23 am
Pingback by » Twitter chats: if you can’t meet in real space, meet in real time. | Web Development Blog: Heidi Adams Cool — July 28, 2009 @11:06 am
Pingback by How Do Creative People Use Twitter? « Fresh Asylum — September 28, 2009 @9:03 pm