The Great Twitter Debate: Should You Follow Back?
By Annie Neugebauer | November 8, 2014 |
photo by Gerry Balding
Apparently I’m a glutton for punishment, because if there’s one topic that could be considered controversial about the usage of Twitter, it’s this one. When someone new follows you, should you follow them back?
Some say yes, of course; it’s rude not to. Some say no, why should I? Twitter isn’t meant to be reciprocal. Others (like me) land somewhere in the middle. And still others are baffled, overwhelmed, or totally undecided.
Today I’m going to break down each school of thought in hopes of putting things in perspective, and maybe helping the undecided figure out where they stand. I am not – I repeat – I am not trying to convince anyone of one method over another. I’ve seen people use each of the options below to great success, so I suspect the answer lies less in “which is the best overall” and more in “which is the best fit for you.”
Team Followback
The plan: Follow back everyone who follows you, barring spambots. These people usually end up with a higher number of “following” than “followers.”
The goal: Build a high number of followers. Be inclusive. Maintain a wide pool of people to interact with.
The detractors: Many social media instructors teach that a “good ratio” is part of building a platform as a writer. If you follow everyone who follows you and then some, you look like a fan instead of someone to be a fan of.
The reasoning: This school of thought believes that following back is common courtesy. It costs you nothing, so there’s no reason not to. If you expect people to follow you, you have to be willing to return the favor.
Some supporters of this method also argue that it’s just smart to acknowledge fans/readers. If someone follows you and you follow back, it’s like a tip of the hat for their attention. Happy fans are good fans, after all.
Every Tweep for Him/Herself
The plan: Follow only people who offer you value – connections, prestige, information, entertainment, etc. These people usually end up with a lower number of “following” than “followers.”
The goal: Build an impressive ratio. Create your social media presence to carry a high amount of influence.
The detractors: Opponents of this method point out that it makes users look like snobs. Authors risk annoying readers with their elitism – especially today’s readers, who expect a certain level of interaction with their favorite authors.
The reasoning: This school of thought believes that an artist’s time is of the utmost value. No one is making you follow, so it’s unreasonable to be offended if you aren’t followed back. If an author wants to find great content in a limited amount of time, keeping a tight following list helps them get back to the truly important stuff faster – writing books.
This school also argues that Twitter isn’t designed to be reciprocal. Unlike platforms that have “friends,” which is a connection that must be approved by both parties, Twitter uses “follows” so anyone can follow anyone else. These users often don’t think of themselves as elitists; they think of themselves as practical. I follow who I want, and you follow who you want, and if those don’t match up, that’s okay.
The Compromise
[pullquote]I believe in my time and its value, yes, but I also believe in being considerate and making genuine connections with others.[/pullquote] The plan: Follow the people who offer you value, plus some of the people who follow you. Also follow anyone who follows you and strikes up a conversation. These people’s following/follower ratios vary, but usually end up with following numbers somewhere over half their followers but less than all.
The Goal: Be welcoming but not just another follower. Balance inclusiveness with a presence that signifies quality and importance.
The detractors: There’s space for detractors of both schools of thought for this compromise. If you don’t follow every person, you still run the risk of losing potential readers. And if you let your ratio become lopsided toward following, you still run the risk of looking like a follower instead of someone with something to offer. Striking the right balance can be tricky.
The reasoning: This school of thought happens to be my school of thought, and it’s one I’ve settled on after listening to very smart people argue for both sides.
For me, there are two main problems with team followback’s plan. The primary one is time. Social media networking is valuable, but not as valuable as my writing time. It’s so easy to get sucked into the rabbit hole of Twitter, and that rabbit hole gets deeper and deeper the more people you follow. Making and utilizing lists can help counteract that, but only to a limited degree, because making and maintaining lists takes time in and of itself. Looking at new followers and checking out their profiles every time you get online sucks up time as well.
The second drawback to following everyone who follows you is the ratio. I do not believe in letting numbers rule your social media – I think that’s a great way to suck every ounce of fun out of things – but I do believe there’s truth to the idea of ratios making first impressions. Personally, I’m more impressed by someone who has 1,000 followers if they’re only following 500 than someone with 20,000 who’s following 25,000. Of course, first impressions aren’t everything, but I do think a healthy ratio signals to new readers that you’re someone who offers value to others.
That said, I dislike both snobbery and rudeness. I believe in my time and its value, yes, but I also believe in being considerate and making genuine connections with others. If someone takes the time to follow me and strike up a conversation, I think it’s rude to ignore them. And almost always (unless I’ve found them offensive or otherwise off-putting in some way), I follow them back. They’ve demonstrated a clear intention to make a connection with me, and isn’t that value?
That’s the thought process that has led me to my current policy. I follow who I want to follow: people who look interesting, teach me things, entertain me, etc. Every once in a while, I glance at my new followers and follow the people who catch my eye in some way. And I check out everyone who @ mentions me, and almost always follow them back. I’m sure I’ve lost more than a few people who got annoyed when I didn’t follow back, but are those really the type of followers I want anyway? People only in it to boost their own numbers? As it is, I follow a manageable number of people so I can focus my social media time on building authentic connections rather than just a big number. It’s not a perfect system, but so far it’s worked pretty well for me.
You can follow me on Twitter @AnnieNeugebauer. As you know, I don’t automatically follow back, but if you say hi or mention finding me here at Writer Unboxed, I certainly will! I’m also happy to answer your Twitter questions as best I can.
[Note: I’ll be a little slower than usual in responding to your comments here, but I will get back to you when I can.] It’s time to weigh in, and I know you all have strong opinions on this matter. How do you decide when to follow back? Has your system changed over time? Questions, thoughts, and passionate rants alike are welcome below. ;)
Annie Neugebauer is a two-time Bram Stoker Award-nominated author with work appearing and forthcoming in more than a hundred publications, including magazines such as Cemetery Dance, Apex, and Black Static, as well as anthologies such as Year’s Best Hardcore Horror Volumes 3 & 4 and #1 Amazon bestsellers Killing It Softly & Fire. She’s a member of the Horror Writers Association and a columnist for Writer Unboxed and LitReactor. She’s represented by Alec Shane of Writers House. She lives in Texas with two crazy cute cats and a husband who’s exceptionally well-prepared for the zombie apocalypse. You can visit her at www.AnnieNeugebauer.com for news, poems, organizational tools for writers, and more.
For me, to follow back or not to follow back is a toss of the coin, for the most part. I normally don’t follow back those who are advertising the sell of followers. Telling people to follow back as a common courtesy is just another way to convince people to follow back. If you are a serious social media wanna be, keep your following to a minimum, because it’s hard to keep up with everyone, if you are trying to connect. If you just want to have large numbers, it might help some to follow back (ONLY A LITTLE).
I wouldn’t be concerned about being rude. People use the word rude like the body needs water. Whether people want to admit it or not, often times, people are using the word rude as a means of persuasion. Now, if you put please follow me on your Twitter Page, and you don’t thank people for the follow or follow them back, then I can entertain the accusation of rudeness.
But, per the perspective of many people who observe my actions, I’m considered to be a pretty rude (insert profane word here) individual, so maybe my take on rudeness is skewed.
DAMMIT! *smile*
Haha, your response made me smile, Brian. :) I don’t know that asking for followers is rude so much as… dare I say it?… tacky. It just feels desperate to me, which is never appealing when looking for new connections. I suppose “rude” can be used as a form of persuasion, but I don’t think it always is. Courtesy is just a small form of kindness, in my opinion. That said, everyone has their own version of what’s courteous and what’s just silly, so I guess we’re back to that whole “one size does not fit all” thing again.
No. Being rude is not a form of persuasion. Calling someone else rude is sometimes a form of persuasion. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Example: “Annie that was very rude of you not to follow me back after I followed you.” So, you respond by following me, because you don’t want to be rude. That’s what I was trying to convey. Sorry about that, I’m a fledgling writer.
Again, persuasion, by calling myself a fledgling writer, I’m persuading you to be lenient with my writing and communication.
I understood! That was my bad; I short-handed what you’d already said, so no excuses necessary (unless they’re on my part). ;) And yes, I agree. That particular type of accusation is not just a form of “persuasion,” but a form of manipulation. I don’t think anyone has any business calling someone out directly for something like that. They have every right to think it’s rude, of course, and to move on, but to accuse someone of such seems counterproductive at best. I mean really, what good could come of that?
It seems that the meaning of a “follow” has been lessening since the day social media was invented. It shouldn’t be courtesy–people should only be expected to “follow back” if the original person’s page interests them. I tried to go along with this idea for a while and ended up with a page cluttered by spam and constant self-promotion. Nah.
You’re not the only person to think this way! I think part of the difference in mindset comes in with people who use one platform over another more often. Facebook, for example, started as a reciprocal-only media, so people who started there and became used to “friends” before “followers” became popular might have a harder time accepting the shift.
It’s up to you.
Follow back, or not follow back … it’s your Twitter feed.
I follow interesting people, who are interesting to me … or those who I want to form a closer relationship (business, personal, etc…) with.
I do not simply “follow back” on the sole basis of someone “following me.” I (try to) carefully curate my Twitter account.
Building an artificially “high” Twitter following / follower number translates into a very “loose” set of connections, IMO. But for other people, that is their decided use of Twitter, and they are most certainly entitled to pursue that by all means.
I do the same, Joseph! I agree; a high number is deceptive, but if that’s how some people want to use Twitter, that’s their right.
Great article that invites some thought and reflection. Getting followers is like candy, it feels good but only briefly. What I enjoy most are active followers that interact and even criticize my material. I also work to reject accounts that broadcast profanity and views that are morally opposed to my own.
Thanks so much, David! Candy is a pretty good analogy – especially for the number-monger followers. At some point you realize you can’t survive on sugar alone and strike out to form some more substantial connections.
I would follow back more, but Twitter won’t let me. I’ve run up against the dreaded 2,000 follows barrier, meaning I can’t follow any more people until they follow me. (I have 1,664 followers.) How do I fix this?
Here’s my feed: https://twitter.com/Joe_Follansbee
@Joe_Follansbee
Joe, to fix that you’ll most likely need to weed out some of the people you’re following. You could start with the people who’ve turned out to be uninteresting to you, etc. There are a few apps that help you figure out how to pare it down. Here’s one of my favorites: https://www.justunfollow.com/. You can also help by getting more people to follow you, which is easier said than done. I recommend starting conversations and building connections. If you strike up a good talk with someone new, they’ll most likely follow you back. Good luck!
I have a horrible Twitter ratio. I follow way more people than follow me. But I don’t follow back everyone who follows me, and if it looks like a spambot, I actually block it, even though I know it hurts my ratio. I probably should pay attention to that and limited my following, but the way I see it I want followers who click the button because they like something they’ve seen me write or say. And if you are only looking at my Twitter numbers, then don’t bother.
That said, everyone is welcome to check out my website. Just click on my name above.
Jen, if you’re happy with that method of doing things, that’s great for you! It’s your Twitter account and you can run it any way you want. :)
I think it’s important to note that you can have a conversation with someone on Twitter without following them, and without them following you, simply by participating in ongoing conversations which usually take place via trending hashtags.
Some of the best conversations I’ve had on Twitter have been with people I don’t follow, but who found something I said that spoke to them through a specific hashtag. Often these people follow me, sometimes I follow them, but neither action is necessary for good conversation.
I recently went through my following list and unfollowed anyone who wasn’t posting things I was actually interested in reading or who didn’t seem like someone I would want to have a conversation with. I lost a bunch of followers in the romance writing genre, but I don’t really need other romance authors in my feed unless I’m actually interested in their books or their conversations.
Within two weeks I had gained back more than the followers I had lost, simply by participating in conversations that were important to me, posting to hashtags that I felt passionate about and really trying to engage with the people who I do follow – which was so much easier when I didn’t have to wade through pages and pages of stuff I didn’t care about to get to the good stuff.
That’s a great point, Bex! You can indeed have conversations with people you aren’t following, though I’ll admit that if that goes on for a while and the person still doesn’t follow me (back), I find it awkward. Pushing follow is just so easy, and it doesn’t cost anything. And the whole reason we’re here is to build new connections, so if I’m having a great conversation and still not pushing that button, it seems off to me. (But that might just be me.) Good for you for shucking the clutter and focusing on quality. And thanks very much for your thoughtful comment!
“Personally, I’m more impressed by someone who has 1,000 followers if they’re only following 500 than someone with 20,000 who’s following 25,000.”
THIS! Me too. And I actually use the exact same routine you do. I don’t auto follow back. I used to and my twitter feed was a bloody mess. So I went and culled all the followback people and the people who only ever tweet promo. Finally, I was able to interact with people! Now, I announce a few times per month that I don’t follow back but I’d be happy to have a conversation with you if you want, and then I follow these people. I want to interact with real people on Twitter.
And honestly, if a reader is going to be mad that I didn’t follow them back then I don’t want them following me anyway. I don’t OWE anybody anything. I write my books and I give them to the world. If they find me interesting, they’re welcome to follow and interact with me (and like I said, I usually follow them back).
It makes such a huge difference, doesn’t it? I’ve also reached a point where over-promoters get unfollowed. I just don’t have time to wade through constant advertisements, especially if they’re for something I’m simply not interested in. It’s made my Twitter browsing much more pleasant!
An interesting article followed by an interesting discussion.
Social networking can take over life if you let it. It’s important to have some kind of strategy to ensure it doesn’t. After all, our focus should be on our writing. And you don’t need to explain this strategy to anyone else–it just has to make sense to you.
Thank you, Leanne! It sure can. I agree that we don’t have to explain our strategies, although it can be fun to talk shop. That’s actually why I’m not a fan of the “I don’t auto follow back” type disclaimer tweets or notes in profiles. They really don’t seem necessary to me, so they become a type of virtual clutter. But to each his/her own!
I follow a system similar to yours, too, Annie – be social, have fun, in a way that feels comfortable.
I was following an author who kept her numbers about equal until she reached 50,000. Then she unfollowed 49,000. That kind of behavior is common among people who consider themselves “influencers” and use Twitter as a podium.
I’ve never understood it. It takes away the social and just leaves the media.
Good grief. That type of behavior is just completely unacceptable. I see that sometimes too, and as soon as I notice it I unfollow the person. How tacky can you get? I think those people have their priorities way off.
Annie:
Interesting article. Although I’ve belonged to Twitter since 2010, I’ve only actively used it for the last few months. I’ve found the most satisfaction when I’ve actually conversed with another Twitter follower. I think you make choices – do you want many acquaintances or a few good friends? I’d opt for a smaller Twitter circle with meaningful interaction, rather than aiming for popularity. Thanks for writing your perspective.
Thank you! Yes, good conversation is the best part of Twitter, in my opinion. I want a few good friends AND many acquaintances, though. ;) Is everything to much to ask?
Honestly I never really thought that much about it. I follow accounts that I want to see in my feed. If someone follows me and they have an interesting account, then I will follow them, but 9 times out of 10 I am just glad that someone finds my feed interesting and leave it at that. If I followed everyone who followed me, my feed would quickly turn unwieldy and likely would discourage me from keeping up. Or else I’d have to spend a lot of time managing lists or muting lots of people. No, I think I’ll just keep on keeping on. It’s not like I expect people to follow me back! I’m just happy when I get the occasional RT or even a reply from someone I enjoy!
I think you have a wonderful attitude, Nora. Being grounded and grateful is something we could all strive for, I think. Thanks so much for the reminder.
I always check, when someone follows me. What is their presence on Twitter and if they are posting something inappropriate or rude, something I don’t want to be either associated with, or look at on my feed.
For most part, I follow people that interest me and whose news I am genuinely happy to see.
I used to follow everyone who followed me, but I go through my followers list once in a while, check and unfollow appropriately.
I know its not always cool, but I rather have less followers with more substance than ton of bad ones.
That’s a great system! I used to do that too, but at some point I got behind on checking out each new person. Once I quite being vigilant about it, I actually discovered that I was a lot more relaxed and happy. That’s just me though; obviously not everyone would feel that way. I’m glad you’ve got a system that works well for you. It sounds like you’re doing well with it.
Your strategy is sound, and one I’ve embraced too. Following everyone just yields lots of noise, goofy icons, occasional inflammatory garbage and no way to siphon the decent from the barrage of bad.
When I follow back, it’s because my follower’s interests align with mine in some way. I never follow back someone who has 100K + followers, either, on the assumption that s/he’s auto-building a Twitter empire.
I use lists relentlessly to get a grip on my followers and to quickly get to the lines of thought I expect to find there. For example, a few of my lists are “Creativity, Writing, Life;” “Art Meets Tech;” “All Austin All the Time;” and I keep a small private list just for favorites who cross all categories and tweet irregularly, so I don’t lose track of them in the shuffle.
Thanks, Jann! I rarely follow anyone with such a huge following either. I assume they’re either number-mongering or are already famous, and I don’t generally follow famous people unless I’m *already* interested in them. Lists can be a wonderful tool if you can get a system down and stick to it. I’ve tried a few times to do extensive lists, but I always give up on maintaining them eventually. I have 3-4 lists that I actually use regularly, like “favorites” and such; everything else is a rarity. I appreciate your comment!
Annie, your article gave me the kick I needed to clear things out. I’ve been on Twitter for several years and I was using it like a newspaper. Now I want to use it for really digging in and connecting with other writers and readers as I focus on my dream of having my work published. So, I’ve pared down my list of follows and will probably lose followers, but I like how you put it: “I follow a manageable number of people so I can focus my social media time on building authentic connections rather than just a big number.” That’s going to be my goal. Thanks for the great advice.
I’m so happy to hear that, Darla! I think you’ll really feel a change as you build new connections. I wish you the very best.
I don’t see it as rude to not follow back, as I don’t expect anyone I follow to follow me. Making connections is the best part of tweeting to me an I gear my experience toward that.
I suppose I’m a compromiser trending toward being strict about who I follow. A follower is only valuable to me if they are actually interested in interesting, and people who follow only because they want to be followed are not showing a genuine interet in my opinion.
If someone interacts with me a time or two and then follows me, they’ve shown their interest already and I’ll almost certainly follow back.
So, if someone follows me but I’ve never heard I or interjected with them before then I do a few things to decide.
First, I check their bio to see if our interests might match.
Second, I check their numbers — if they follow 10,000+ users with fewer or equal followers, then it’s likely the have an auto follow policy and expect the same, which is not interesting to me. They follow so many people they are unlikely to be able to interact on a regular basis. But that’s not my final judgement.
Third, I scroll through some of their tweet, checking to see what they post about, looking especially to make sure it’s not all commercial and if they have @ replies in their feed, showing that they interact with people on a regular basis. If they do, I’m more likely to follow.
The fourth thing I do, regardless of the above is to send an @ tweet to whomever it is thanking them for following and to start an interaction. I may also comment on an interesting tweet they sent. If they tweet back, I’m even more likely to say yes.
I’m more than happy to follow people who are interesting in conversing. Where I can follow and comment on their tweets and hopefully have them do the same with mine sometimes. If people stop following because I don’t automatically follow back, then it just tells me they didn’t care that much in the first place.
That’s pretty much how I do things too, Andrea. The main difference is that I no longer take the time to scope out all of my new followers to make a decision. I used to do that, and I think it’s a great idea, but along the way I decided that time-wise something had to give. I’d rather spend my Twitter time talking to the people I’m already following than looking through profiles each time I get on, so the screening process went out the window. (I’ll still look through every once in a while if I get the urge.) The other difference is that I follow (back) anyone who talks to me. I think of it as a good faith effort to connect more. And if they turn out to be the type of person with poor content or icky behavior down the line, I’ll probably end up unfollowing later. Thanks for sharing your methods!
I like what Andrea said about the criteria of “interested and interesting.” I also check out the person by looking at the first page of tweets. If it’s all “check out my book” then no. If there’s a human there, not a commercial, then yes. One thing Andrea said I would not do is thank a person for following. I say just dive in an interact. And if you’re not going to follow the person back they probably don’t want or need the thanks. My two cents! Anyway, like you Annie, I follow back anyone who I’ve interacted with on Twitter or elsewhere and anyone who seems like a genuine person. And by “person” I mean, not a promotion machine.
I totally agree with all of that, Nina. Figures that we’d have the same process. :) I do think it’s a little awkward to thank someone for following if you’re not going to follow back; it’s like pointing that out. I don’t tend to thank people for following unless they’re either someone big I know is busy or maybe if I want to acknowledge them but can’t think of anything else to say. Thanks for adding your thoughts!
Eh . . . I’m on Twitter probably a grand total of a half hour a week.
I get notices people are following me, and I check . . .
I get writers following me whenever I post anything about writing (funny thing, they all have books, magazines, or other merchandize they want to sell or advertise.)
I get photographers following me whenever I post anything about photography (funny thing, they all have books, magazines, or other merchandize they want to sell or advertise).
I get women following me who . . . well, they too have stuff to sell (those get blocked as soon as I get a notice).
I have 61 followers, of which I have interacted with four; maybe five.
I follow 262 people or organizations, of which I personally have interacted with four, maybe five.
Here’s the thing . . . there are lots of very interesting people I would love to interact with; smart people; people with interesting personalities and life stories.
I go to their profile, and they have 357,671 followers (the more popular have 357, 673 followers).
I’m fairly smart (or so I tell myself), and I can work out the odds of me ever interacting with anyone I’m interested in are less than me winning the lottery (some may question the math, but I’m including the volume of tweets).
Add one other important factor. Take, for instance, Nathan Fillion or Felicia Day (well, don’t actually take them; kidnapping is illegal in most states). They seem like incredible people, the kind one would be privileged and lucky to know . . . and I have to believe they have all sorts of individuals looking to connect with them not just because they are interesting and incredible people, but because they could be a gateway to one’s own “break” and notoriety.
I mean, name dropping is the perfect substitute for actually having a life of one’s own.
The bottom line, they are not likely to engage with just anyone. Even if they do, they are personalities whose livelihood depends on “being out there”.
Maybe you hit the odds, and they throw a nod your way . . . BUT . . . do they really give two shits about you, or is that just what their agent is telling them to do? (pick some nobody and smile at them, and the world will think you grand for shining a brief spotlight on a nobody’s life)
No . . . I ain’t going down that path. I rather deal with real people, and as far as I can tell, there is a dearth of real people on Twitter; everyone is either selling something, wanting to sell you something, or wanting you to know what kind of breakfast sandwich they had . . . as they were having breakfast with (enter currently semi-popular dude or dudette here).
The badge everyone wants, what’s been sold as a prize to shoot for is “how many followers do you have?”
So, do I follow anyone who follows me? Only if they actually “speak to and with me”. The way I see it, everyone else is the equivalent of a person standing on a street corner handing out fliers. It’s a one-way interaction I have zero interest in.
And it works out . . . no one has any actual interest in me. Life is as it should be.
A few things strike me after reading your comment. The first is that many, many famous people *do* respond to most if not all of their tweets. So if you’re just in it for interaction, and a bit of a thrill, it might be worth it. Your odds aren’t quite as long as you might think. On the other hand, if you just want something from them, then I have to agree; it’s not worth your time or effort. They have too many people who want to use their advantage anyway. Also, there are many worthwhile people who aren’t famous and have a smaller number of followers. Those people are far more likely to respond, and I’ve made many solid, fantastic friends and acquaintances this way. The internet can and often does seem cold and distancing, but there’s a real person behind (almost) every avatar, and those real people often have much to offer beyond “something to offer” in a tactical sense. You just have to be willing to put the time into finding them. (And if you aren’t, that’s fine too!)
I should make it clear upfront . . . I would never, and have never, made personal contact with anyone for the purpose of wanting something from them.
As for the “thrill” bit, also not something that is either a want or need.
Really, the only reason to make contact with a “personality” would be related to something they did. When I first got on Twitter, I followed the FireFly cast. They not only seem like genuine people, but interesting as well . . . let’s say they tweet something; within 30 seconds, they have a bunch of re-tweets and responses. It seems pointless to add one more. There is no physical way they could answer them all.
But, that was in the olden days . . . now it’s even more difficult to have responses.
And, I should be honest about one thing . . . twitter is not something I am actively on for any significant amount of time. When I am, I do respond to interesting things, favor (like) tweets that are interesting, and try to interact. The result is the same every time, and expected, 0.01% responses (that 0.01% is because “Writers Beware” actually answered one of my questions – I nearly fell off my chair).
On the other hand, everything I do (writing and photography) passes through twitter (and then to facebook). Given the amount of daily tweets, I don’t expect frequent interest by anyone, but I’m kind of surprised at zero interaction (other than new follows from people who either write or take photographs and have stuff to sell or promote). I just don’t think people take the time to look at stuff that requires more than a 20-seconds attention span.
The same in Facebook. My “regulars” might acknowledge the post, but that’s about it.
The blog is the only place I have made connections (lot’s of followers, but when I say connections, I mean actual interactions with people, maybe 10-15 people). Not many, but solid.
One thing, though . . . if I ever make it big (or medium, or small, or even tiny), I do plan on doing what you claim people do (and for which I have zero evidence) I will answer every communication I ever get.
With that, thanks for answering.
Sorry! I didn’t mean to imply that you were trying to get something out of celebrities, just that some people do. And I also didn’t mean “thrill” in a negative way; I personally get a thrill when one of my favorite authors replies to my tweet, even if it’s just to say thank you! That’s one of my favorite things about Twitter — that it makes people accessible who wouldn’t be otherwise.
I’m sorry that you’ve run into so many unresponsive people, though. My experience has been different than that. Extremely famous people don’t usually have time, but others generally have for me. As with most things, you tend to get out what you put in. Maybe you’re seeking a lack of interaction because you’re not on it much yourself? Many people don’t go seeking others out but are happy to engage when approached with nice conversation.
Then again, you might just not like or need Twitter. If you’ve had some good results on your blog, you might rather focus your energy/effort there. Every platform is different, so I always suggest people run with one or two that feels most natural to them. Good luck with it!
I really enjoyed reading this well-written article. I’m not that savvy with Twitter (although I’ve had an account for a few years) yet, but, I do know that many of the people who followed me when I started seemed to do so to increase their numbers. I write crime fiction and I get “follows” from many mystery writers who have 5K or more followers. I’ve always assumed they were just trying to increase their numbers of follows and not actually interested in me or my work. So, I rarely follow them back now. When I first started with Twitter, I was overjoyed every time I got a follower… until I realized that many of them simply self-promote their books or speaking events constantly. I don’t understand how writers have the time to post ten tweets every day! Nowadays, I follow only 30 people – and have only 56 followers. The 30 people I follow provide interesting and useful content, and I like their opinions on things.
Thanks so much, Jennifer! I think a tight, active following is a great way to go. As to having time to tweet: I’ve found that once you make it a habit, it’s pretty easy to come up with 1-5 tweets a day. (And really, they only take a minute each.) I imagine those who tweet more often have slowly built up to a higher presence. Like anything, if you ingrain it in your life it can become second nature. Whether that’s a good or bad thing is up for grabs. If you don’t want a larger presence, one trick is to set a timer for the same time every day to remind you to tweet. I like to keep one document for random thoughts I have to make into tweets later. Thanks for you comment!
Thanks, Annie! Your Twitter-thoughts help me as I bumble into the venue. My fear of being rude has been wrestling with my fear of being overwhelmed & sucked into a vortex containing Justin Bieber. What you’ve said here, as well as the thoughtful comments following, relieves my mind.
I’ll also look forward to exploring this site — it looks like a wealth of interest.
Much appreciated!
Forest
Critter Artist
(And yes, I went and followed you!)
Awesome! Thank you so much, Forest. I’m happy that my posts have eased the anxiety a bit. I definitely understand the fear of being rude/making a misstep. (And lol to the Justin Bieber vortex.) Yes, definitely do check out the whole of Writer Unboxed; it’s chock-full of great resources. And if you’re interested, you can see the list of all of my Twitter posts here: https://staging-writerunboxed.kinsta.cloud/author/annien/. Feel free to send me any questions for Ask Annie, and good luck with your new venture. :)