Yes, this saying exists and it is also very “inspiring”, true: but it is if it is functional to the objectives that a person pursues with stubbornness. And perhaps it is also a central concept when doing public relations. The online world is not lacking, with many unsuspected social channels inflated by fake users, to make people believe they have authority . The reason? Easy: digital long-windedness that leads, on the one hand, to inflate one’s “numbers” as much as possible and, on the side of the users (and often of those who do digital PR), to immediately observe how many fans, how many followers, how many likes as the only element of quick and visible judgment to identify those worthy of engagement [READ the 4 steps to succeed online, today] Come on, it’s obvious: it’s much easier and more objective to measure quantity than quality.
Celebrities—and more minor personalities
Like bloggers trying to get endorsement deals—have increasingly found their value measured in Facebook fans and Twitter followers, the payments they receive proportionate to their social media clout – Doug Bock Clark – In fact, the reasoning is flawless. I ask you: do you want to enter a totally empty, deserted restaurant? Or do restaurants with lots of people have a better effect on you? How many fake users are there on social networks? The “boundaries of social fake” are impressive and confirmed by several analyses. FACEBOOK recently announced that about 11% of its 1.23 billion monthly active users are fake. Estimates put the number at 120 – 170 million. [READ why companies should invest in Facebook , despite everything] On TWITTER the problem is so acute, even on the user side, that several free tools have sprung up like mushrooms to find fake followers that you may have even unknowingly.
It would appear that the figure of fake
Followers is around 5% to 8.5% , to which all inactive users must be added. Of approximately 300 million subscribers, therefore, the absolute figure of fake users is around 15 to 20 million. INSTAGRAM , on the other hand, took action at the end of 2014 with a “purge” of great proportions that led to the deletion of millions of accounts. The purge, better known as #instapurge , was promptly documented and viewed by the user on Twitter.
It hong kong email list was all documented on a website (now no longer active): in percentage terms, it was curious to see how drugged certain accounts were. The official Instagram channel itself alone lost almost 19 million followers (29%). In general, it is assumed that 10% of accounts are fake, in general (sources at the end of the article). [What to learn from 7 top brands on Instagram?] PINTEREST also went through its own purge in 2012, finding a whopping 20 percent of its top users were fake accounts.
There is no certain data on
AND GOOGLE PLUS ? It seems to have over 2 billion registered users, of which only 0.3% are active (with such percentages, it is useless to even try to distinguish real users from fake users). The problem is common, in short, and involves both Social Media as large companies pursuing profit, and the individual users who populate them.
In fact: > User Side Those who seek visibility online, for business or for glory, ultimately need to make numbers . Period. And since you have to go through numbers, the “easy” ways to achieve them are: Spend money on advertising on social networks , which know very well what the brands and various profiles that sign up are aiming for. Exploit underground “carbonari” services that guarantee streams of fake fans and followers, to drug the account in a few minutes.
On the other hand, the same Digital
With consequent impressive and wild growth of Native Advertising .
> Social Network Side The official statements of the various social media leaders after the purges always sound the same, more or less like this: “We want you to be able to count only on real followers, like you” In reality, beyond the rhetoric, only 2 things summarize key points offer insights and provide matter to the managers of the Social Networks : Maintain a certain “cleanliness” and control over registered users, to avoid “ smearing ” Eliminate the “ underground competitors ” of Advertising platforms, which take away profits from Social Networks. That’s it. There’s a business with a mind-boggling amount of money in filling fans and glorifying pages and celebrities . It’s all about money , as always…
Researchers estimate that the market for fake
Twitter followers was worth between $40 million and $360 million in 2013, and that the market for Facebook spam was worth $87 million to $390 million Source: So what do you have to do to get more fans and followers? The usual valid advice (trite and hackneyed) is that of “quality content”, consistent with the target and editorial objectives. Ok. But bwb directory in terms of promotional investment, does it make sense to buy fans? Here’s what happens when you buy fans and followers… Natural engagement is lowered, because they are not users who interact.
There is a risk of losing credibility, even if, speaking , several considerations could be madein addition to the fact that there are fan purchasing services that have very little of , offering premium services and sophisticated targeting.