Less is More – The Value in Following Fewer on Twitter
What follows will be viewed by many as heresy. So be it. Read at your own peril. I am ever the heretic on the fringe of technology. I sort of like that about me.
There’s this theme that’s been running in my head for several years now. Maybe if I set the stage I can give you some context.
Several years back there was a hot new technology you may have heard of called RSS. It enabled subscribing to blog and news feeds. We still use it a lot. Back in the day, I managed the RSS feeds I subscribed to pretty closely. I still do.
In stark contrast Robert Scoble bragged about how he read 1200+ feeds a day.I argued amicably with Robert that he wasn’t reading. I described his approach as that of being a baleen whale sucking down krill. Every now and again most of what passed by would get stuck in his craw and get noticed, but most was meaningless, tasteless, I’d argue valueless swill.
My how times change. Now we’re having the same discussion for over a year about Twitter followers and following. What goes around comes around. I’ve been on Twitter for a while now. I’m user #1097, so while not in the first 100, I joined Twitter July 15, 2006. At last count I follow 153 people, have 494 followers and have tweeted 8,939 times. I have a little experience with Twitter as a social tool.
Today Scoble’s approach has changed. At the moment he follows 85,498 people and has 77,773 followers on Twitter. I no longer try to reason with Robert about the fallacy that this is a network. It simply isn’t. It’s a deluge of noise, with little gems buried deep in the tweetstream. I know Robert believes he gains value in following so many people. I’ll argue he misses far more than he catches and that he’d catch more of higher value if he reduced the noise.
I view Twitter as a social tool for maintaining my network. My network is a group of people I follow, interact and engage with. I don’t follow people I don’t know personally or engage with directly at some level. I don’t follow companies on Twitter, although I do follow a few companies where I know the person behind the Twitter. I don’t follow people with thousands of followers unless I know them personally or interact with them regularly. Yes, I follow @Scobleizer. I know and interact with Robert.
There’s a group of people online who we refer to as the A-list. I’ll leave you to decide who they are because your A-list isn’t my A-list. It’s a personal list. I will argue that once someone thinks they’ve made the A-list, somewhere a kitten dies and they leave that list. And every time I see someone mention their status in that mindset, I mourn the kitten.
I’ve also discovered that following these high profile, high volume twitterers really has one effect. It increases the noise level, thereby reducing the likelihood I’ll see something valuable. There’s a better way.
Two years ago at Etel, Stowe Boyd (@stoweboyd) gave a compelling talk about our attention as a resouce and the deluge of information. The gist of Stowe’s talk was that rather than attempt to catch everything important in the infostream, we can dip our cup into this Niagara Falls of conversation when we choose and take away what we like. If something is truly important or of value, there is no cause for alarm. It will come around again. And again.
If @A-lister says something notable, I no longer worry if I’ll see it. If it’s noteworthy, I have faith in my network, people I know and interact with, will catch it, retweet it, and I’ll never miss a conversation that matters to me. The rise of the retweet approach strengthens this and makes it even easier. And the new Retweet app for iPhone/iPod makes it simple to go dip my cup into the retweet stream any time I want to see what’s being talked about.
The human brain can only maintain a finite set of friends, whatever we call our social network. I have no interest in following more people that I can actually pay attention to. So if you follow me on Twitter, and I don’t know you or we’ve not interacted, odds are high that I won’t follow you back. Why would I. You’re not part of my network and that’s who I engage with on Twitter.
I’m also the harsh master of blocking followers on Twitter. If you follow 10,000 people, you won’t know or care that I block you. If you’re a corporation, you aren’t social. If you’re a collector, you are a drain on the system rather than a fountain of information. And, it’s easy enough to drop someone from following you if you’d prefer they not. You don’t even have to ask them.
I’m often asked what the harm is in letting anyone who wants to follow. Put simply, I want to share and interact with my network. Sometimes I’m online simply expressing my love for @SherylBreuker, the most wonderful woman God ever put on this earth. Sometimes I’m cranky and expressing doubts about a product or calling bullshit on someone. Sometimes I say deeply insightful things (Ok, that’s a delusion, but allow me to delude myself).
I have value. What I say has value to my friends and followers, but I choose who I really want to engage with. And I choose with whom I want to share those nuggets of wisdom (ok brain farts).
I am a seasoned technologist with 30+ years in the tech sector. There’s a small amount of business acumen, digital common sense and experience behind what I say. If a corporation, news feed, high profile entity wants the information in my brain, I offer consultative services. I have some minor control over what I give away for free and to whom I give it.
I follow people because they have value for me. The people I follow matter to me and talk about things I’m interested in. The people who follow me also matter to me in a different way. I’m quite open and free with ideas and thoughts. This blog is wide open. Anyone can come read, criticize or comment.
The bottom line is I have value. Just as I only follow those who interest me, I also prefer a limited set of followers. If someone follows 100 people and chooses me, my value is arguably 1% of their network (please forgive the oversimplification unless it’s just your nature to nitpick the obvious). If someone follows 85,000 people and adds me, my value is dimished to nearer .001%.
Why would I choose to devalue myself that way?
Why do you?
I’m a telecom guy with a background in networks. A deep background in networks. I understand signal-to-noise ratio really well. I want to hear clear signals from the voices I listen to. I want the people listening to me to hear me clearly too. One day I might say something that’s pure genius in 140 characters. If that ever happens, I hope someone hears it and retweets it.
on April 2nd, 2009 at 6:17 pm
I completely agree Ken. Social Networks have become a wasteland of 140 character bite text noise pollution.
I’m finding a far greater satisfaction in having a smaller number of high quality minds whose tweets are thoughtful, encouraging, provoking, and relevant than I ever did having an impossibly large list of people who had very little of value to add to the fabric of the online community.
I congratulate you for having the wisdom to know that quality ALWAYS trumps quantity even in the numbers based world of social networks. BTW: I completely think that it is primarily men who keep obsessive watch over their following and followers numbers. It’s all about the proverbial phallus size.
on April 3rd, 2009 at 3:12 am
A very good piece. Well written and I agree with most (all?) of the content.
Actually – I believe that it is not the number that is the issue here, it is the quality of the people you follow. This may seems like a no-brainer for old timers for (non-verbal) communication – but it is really not a no-brainer for a lot of people. I have seen the same of Facebook – people collect contacts. Even on LinkedIn some people collect contacts.
In principle I do agree with Ken that quality trumps quantity any time of day. However, there are exception to the rule. I do follow a very few people that are following a couple of thousands people. My reason for following these people are not that I need them to listen to what I have to say. I really do not care if people listen to what I have to say – it is not important for me personally. I do follow these people simply because they provide high quality content.
On the other hand – if people decide to follow me I do sincerely hope that it is because that I contribute good content. That is fine with me. It does not boost my ego – it does not boost my self confidence (yes – I know I am an arrogant pri*k). I contribute because I seriously believe that I have something worth reading. If not, I rather shut up.
One issue is the current crop of Twitter clients (in lack of a better word). Most (all?) clients do not support something as simple as filtering. Unless there are filtering capabilities built into those clients sooner or later people will move on to less crowded services. If I had such capabilities today I could have filters for “friends and family” and then work related matters (which is my primary reason why I use Twitter). I can not ditch my friends and families from my Twitter feed. I also refuse to have more than one Twitter account.
And yes – I do follow Ken on Twitter because I do find his content worth while.
\Ruben
on April 3rd, 2009 at 8:09 am
Scott – I don’t think it’s a wasteland at all, but I do feel the noise floor is very high, making it a challenge to find the real value for each of us.
I’m not sure I agree about it being men who pay close attention to numbers. I wouldn’t have thought so, but hadn’t ever really considered it. Something Sheryl said made me wonder. I hope maybe she’ll weigh in with thoughts on the gender dynamic.
Ruben – You make a great point about filtering. For many people that’s a huge struggle, and managing multiple Twitter accounts seems like far too much work. Grouping and filtering could provide great power.
I too do follow a tiny set of people who I don’t interact with often but who say things I might want to hear firsthand. There’s value in that too, but it’s a different value for me than social engagement.
Thanks for the kind words fellas.
on April 5th, 2009 at 7:18 am
Ken,
At last I actually got around to reading your post and I do believe you are correct in most points – I don’t have a solid opinion on the blocking part of it.
Only thing is that twitter is something different to different people, each using it in a way that suits him best. I prefer your approach of quality over quantity rather than the mass following one.
Tsahi
on April 5th, 2009 at 7:16 pm
Its your Twitter account and you are free to use it however you wish so I have no problem with that. Due to the nature of our business (The worlds largest new media event) I believe we are required to follow the thousands of people who follow me/us out of respect and to “walk the walk” of new media. And I believe it ads tremendous value to our business and to me personally.
It is important to mention I check out every follower and eliminate spammers and noisemakers. Yes it is daunting and I don’t think that is realistic for most people with a large group of followers.
The fire hose of info can be daunting but that’s where tools like tweetdeck come in.
You make some very good points but it seems you view Twitter much more as a social network than as a microblogging tool and to me it is both.
Did you ever limit the number of people who were allowed to read your RSS feed?
Do you refuse to allow people to comment or link to your blog simply because you don’t know them, or they have too many readers to their own blog?
I can’t imagine why you would. Unless your business involves secrecy I think you want people to find your content.
Limiting your network on pure social networks like LinkedIn and Facebook makes much more since to me than limiting who can follow you on Twitter.
on April 5th, 2009 at 7:46 pm
Thank you for a thoughtful post.
Last Friday I began pruning my Twitter account. At the time I was following some 5200 folks. Today I’m at 2100, and for the first time in ages I can scan the tweetstream and see something that is not just interesting (an increasingly low bar in a noise-laden environment) but also useful or meaningful or engaging.
I confess to having fallen prey to the notion that following a heap of people and being followed in return would be good for biz as well as for my ego. Instead, it just made me feel sleazy and confused.
“There’s a group of people online who we refer to as the A-list. I’ll leave you to decide who they are because your A-list isn’t my A-list. It’s a personal list. I will argue that once someone thinks they’ve made the A-list, somewhere a kitten dies and they leave that list. And every time I see someone mention their status in that mindset, I mourn the kitten.”
That makes sense to me both rationally and emotionally. What was I thinking?
And… I do appreciate happy accident, the random/synchronistic (either or both?) encounter with something very funny or wise or useful that can occur when I follow widely.
And then I notice that the re-tweet is a perfectly adequate mechanism for cross-pollination.
Anyway — plenty of food for thought. Again, thank you.
on April 5th, 2009 at 7:49 pm
Rick,
First and foremost thank you for sharing another perspective. You’re exemplifying the very best of the medium engaging, and I respect and appreciate it so very much.
We were out and a flurry of tweets mentioning this post came in. I think it’s one of the best examples of how we all learn new thoughts by sharing and talking. It’s very cool.
I don’t begin to claim my approach is the only approach or the right one. It’s what works for me, but I’ve honed that after ten years blogging, thirty years writing and being in the middle of the evolution from my unique place. Everyone has to find their own best way to use the tools.
First, you’re right. I absolutely use Twitter as a social tool, not a micro-blog. I haven’t ranted on microblogging, but I still use RSS and read things that catch my eye with more substance than I personally find in a tweet where content is further shortened by including a URL. That’s not to say I don’t click a lot. I do. But I use it and see it as a social media engagement tool rather than a news distribution tool. It can be used both ways. That’s just my personal preference.
Maybe it’s a semantic difference in whether the “new media” is a news fedd or a social tool. Or in how each of us use it. I certainly applaud your work and use of the tool. And my hat’s off to you for investing the effort it requires to weed out the spammers and noisemakers. That’s a daunting task with 500 followers. I can only imagine the effort it must take. That you’ve found a way to use Twitter as both is a testament to your commitment to making the most of the tools in a way that works for you.
Yes it’s a firehose. Or drinking from Niagara.
You asked if I limted people in RSS feeds. No. That to me is the medium where I do open to unlimited. My medium of choice for that sort of engagement. But I’ve certainly used spam blocking tools and other mechanisms that exists in that more mature blogging medium than in Twitter.
I guess that simply means I choose blogging as a medium for sharing substance like this post. I choose Twitter as a medium for maintaining my social, business and personal network, as you said, for social network. Facebook presents, in my view, a more comprehensive blend of the two, but as long as it remains a fairly walled garden, some artificial limitations will remain on its usefullness (again, just my view).
It’s all a matter of different styles and each of us finding what suits our particular needs and how we choose to interact. I think it’s important that each and every one of us find our own way to best use the tools available to enhance and improve our lives. What works for you or me may still be entirely different than works for someone else. Sheryl and I live a very active life online, with many friends and followers who ask often how we do it. For us, business is social, news is social, life is social. We focus on how people are impacted. For us, business is very personal.
And while I don’t as a rule go follow people, I’m following you. You engaged openly and directly in valuable conversation. I respect and appreciate that more than anything in the people I meet online.
I want this conversation to continue because I know there are more opinions and ideas that neither you or I have considered. So I’m emailing this comment reply to you, and I’ll Twitter about it as well in hopes we see people engaging. I think it’s awesome.
Thank you Rick!
Ken
on April 5th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
Ken, I am so thankful for people like you in the world, people of authentic value. Your post should be shared with every marketer and entrepreneur on twitter trying to build a valuable network. I do agree that there is something to be said for pure mass numbers (if you are just trying to sell to the masses) but if you are on twitter to create a content enriched environment of like minds to improve your life and business goals, then quality vs quantity should be the goal. Reduce the noise and construct a clear channel. Thank you for your insight and inspiration.
All the best,
Jayson
http://twitter.com/askjayson
on April 5th, 2009 at 8:07 pm
This is some mighty fine tasting krill!
on April 5th, 2009 at 8:08 pm
Thank you Ken for a great post. I found myself wanting to agree with just about everything you said hehe but couldn’t resist comparing the way you operate Twitter to the way you operate your Blog.
In the end I think we are both in a rare space. You have been engaged in social media and other aspects of the internet far longer than me or most people and I would not begin to tell you how you should use any new media tool. If it works for you that is what counts.
Your post reminds people of why they use any of these tools in the first place and is so contrary to the hype of more is better. As in most things in life, moderation is the key.
People like Robert are also valuable to the rest of us. I like to call him a human guinea pig. He stretches the limit of how new technologies can be used and we can all either learn from his example and follow his lead or in some cases decide that it is just a little too much for your average human whose life isn’t living and breathing new technology every moment of every day to handle.
You are providing another example of how to use these tools effectively and I applaud it 8).
Sincerely,
Rick
on April 5th, 2009 at 8:10 pm
Hi Ken,
thanks for your thoughtful article. Part of me would like to contain my Twitstream too (and my inbox, come to think of it!). And another part is trying to figure out how to best build an audience/community or whatever you want to call it.
And part of me is delighted with the many serendipitous encounters on Twitter and the people I have connected with through Twitter. So I don’t want to limit things.
True, I do miss a lot of tweets that are passing by too fast. But I also catch plenty that are very interesting, and if I want to follow up on what one of my tweeples has said I can always find them in my @ inbox or PM box and check on their latest info. And that’s what i do.
Sometimes I’wondering if I should start a second twitter account — one for more personal things, but that would probably defeat the purpose — I find it hard enough to keep up with my one account…
Still — it’s good to realize that with Twitter too there’s such as thing as diminishing returns, and that more is not always better and if it is, then only within reason and certain parameters.
But also, as someone has pointed out above, different people have different approaches to socializing and to what’s important to them, so what works for them may or may not work for me and vice versa.
I’m really enjoying Twitter, and of all the social media it’s my favorite. And what has made it so valuable is the ability to connect with people I would have otherwise never met.
Best regards,
Elisabeth
on April 5th, 2009 at 8:32 pm
To further Ken’s sentiments, which not oddly, mirror my own, I’d like to just repeat a couple comments I said on twitter and sort of run with this a bit.
How many times do you think you say something on twitter to someone and not get an answer? I know I say lots of things TO people and get nothing back.
Part of how Ken and I use our twitter stream is as conversation. We actually talk to each of the people who talk to us. We don’t just get to some, but to all!
Why does that matter? Well, it matters to us because we only follow those people we would like to engage with. People who we have been followed by who tweet things of interest, or people who we have seen our connections communicate with regularly and we have found to be fascinating.
If we were using a twitter identity of stardust global ventures we may well do it differently, but when we are representing ourselves, that’s who you get.
Ken and I are just people who wake up in the morning to a bazillion pokes on facebook, friend requests, comments on the blog, retweets etc. If we followed everyone back who followed us without investigation and thought, we would be like so many others and only able to comment to a select few. I don’t want to have to be selective and spend tons of time sifting through to find the most important comments to reply to. I want to engage in conversation with all I have in my feed. That’s why they’re there.
Love this discussion. Ken, you did a GREAT piece of writing with this one and I applaud you as my partner and my…partner!
on April 5th, 2009 at 8:39 pm
You folks are so awesome. You really humble me trying to keep up with all this fabulous conversation.
Robert, I’m answering you first because we go back a long way. Thanks for taking the time to read the post, and yes, I give. If you eat enough krill it does taste good. hehehe too funny.
Jayson, I think I’m just hitting a new stride in my personal ebb and flow of speaking out on things that I feel strongly about. I wrote another post today for marketing pros. I have strong opinions, and a big mouth. And when Sheryl and I speak together, marketers from the old school tremble. She makes them tremble. I make them wet their pants.
We’d like to do more talks at conferences in the next year, so we’ll see.
Rick, just because I’ve been blogging and the like a long time doesn’t mean anything important except that I’ve had some time to hone my tools as I hone my craft. But I’m well aware of the danger that poses too. I can easily get sucked into believing my way is the right way. It isn’t, except for me. We do all have to make the best use of what we have for ourselves. Not to mention there’s such a great way to make new friends.
Molly and Elisabeth, the comments you left feel like validation of the message I was trying to deliver, and Rick provided the great counterpoint balance. The bottom line is we each have to find the best way to use the tools we have for what we want to accomplish. The power of the social media tools is how quickly and easily we can engage with one another to share ideas and learn from each other.
We live in exciting times.
on April 5th, 2009 at 8:42 pm
I am new to Twitter and have been torn since the beginning. As a blogger, I see microblogging/soc med as community building in their own ways. I try to follow people who interact with me and I trim away those as it becomes apparent that they are not interested in knowing me. What is the point otherwise?
I love this article. It’s the best argument I have read yet. Thanks.
on April 7th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Love this article Ken, I think making the distinction b/e noise and a network is important, especially for someone starting to use twitter.
At just over 400 following, and just under 350 followers it’s true, I don’t know everyone and some I wish I didn’t follow, like companies and product pushers that DM u with a pitch just off the intro.
But something’s gotta be done about the autofollow, it becomes a social eye for eye approach to the network. If I don’t follow some troll then automatically Im dropped.
As a matter of good practice I read every Link I RT and check bios before following anyone. But I guess Im in the minority.
I know I shouldn’t care but sometimes I do cause hey! I too want to grow the network, but at what sacrifice or expense, having to follow back a bunch of people that I have no affinity with and that certainly don’t care about the real use and application of SM.
I tried to be selective and even unfollowed a few dozen and down went my followers. I’ll keep trying to see what works.
Some experts say that it’s just socially polite to follow everyone that follows you but that doesn’t make any sense to me.
Anyway, sorry about the rant.
Thanks for the post
claudio
on April 7th, 2009 at 1:57 pm
Claudio,
Thank you for yet another thoughtful insight in this important conversation. I think the key is that there really are no experts. Each of us must figure out how to best manage these social media tools for ourselves. The so-called experts are simply loud voices. The idea of social politeness is, I think, tied to the number of real social contacts we can maintain relationships with in life. I’ve read a number of studies that say that number ranges from 115-150. I don’t believe human social relationships can scale beyond that number and carry the rich depth of engagement that’s important to Sheryl and I.
Naturally we both try to engage more, but I’d rather engage more deeply with fewer myself. I find far more value in being able to give people the kind of attention I hope they give to me.
Thanks!
on April 7th, 2009 at 6:48 pm
Thanks Ken, glad to see I’m not the only one to see that the “king has no clothes on”…looking forward to sharing comments with you.
godspeed!
on April 8th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
Hi Ken,
Thanks for very eloquently articulating my exact thoughts! I was on the same track myself, yesterday: http://starsoid.blogspot.com/2009/04/twials-and-twibulations-of-twitter.html.
I’m glad there are others out there who think in terms of quality rather than quantity.
Cheers,
Anastasia
on April 8th, 2009 at 5:28 pm
Thank you, Ken. Twitter saves me time – only when I keep it focused. But then, If I ware a marketer, I would have different uses for it.
Kudos to Robert Scoble for catching the krill here (see comment above). How does he do that? Or is it compliments to the impersonator for a clever angle?
on April 17th, 2009 at 8:32 am
[...] BTW who the hell are we to tell any of these folks how they should be using social media tools? For a great conversation on this check out this excellent post by Ken Camp. [...]
on April 20th, 2009 at 7:20 am
[...] As a relatively new twitter user, I can testify that following even a “meager” number of 129 “tweeple” (twitter people) is quite hard. True, it brings with it a lot of insights and interactions, but at a cost of interruptions to my daily work. While I am struggling to keep the pace, Ken Camp comes up with a thoughtful post on the value of following fewer people on Twitter: [...]