Guido has a rather eloquent analysis piece on the case against Twitter which notes that difference between those politicos on Twitter who have large following but also have a large following list.Essentially, Alastair Campebll and Derek Draper have very large Twitter followings, but they have acheived it by following lots of other people and relying on reciprocation. Meanwhile, John Prescott is following hardly anyone but being followed by a large number.
Exhibit C: Twitter F2F ratiosGuido's post is somewhat inspired by Rachel Sylvester's piece in today's Times which slates Twitter as nothing more than a means for politicians to feel that they are "wiv it". Personally I use Twitter to post links to this blog or to pass comment on things that can be done in 144 characters rather than wasting time on a blog post.
John Prescott 1,410 Followers, 29 Following - 48.62
Iain Dale 2,499 Followers, 152 Following - 16.44
Tom Watson 2,518 Followers, 909 Following - 2.77
Alastair Campbell 2,567 Followers, 2,088 Following - 1.23
Derek Draper 2,918 Followers, 2,836 Following - 1.02
I also have issues of course about identity and believe that my Twitter friends are my friends in real life too oh yes!
NOTE: For the record my Twitter ratio is currently 11.52. Go me! Now I must tweet this post! Please also remember that Twitter is not a competition *
* Link found via errr... Twitter.
4 comments:
Well I found this post quickly because you Tweeted about it. I normally kind of use it as a live news feed more than anything else - and often hear really interesting stories that I wouldn't have found any other way.
I just don't understand people who complain about other people using Twitter. Since you choose who you follow, if you don't like reading some people's tweets you don't have to.
So what's Guido's own ratio?
To paraphrase the late great Frankie Howerd. "Twitter ye not!" Why haven't these people something more useful to be doing?
Wondering what deal Dizzy is on to get an whole extra 4 characters.
Post a Comment