Local social-media consultant Chris Brogan reports on the reactions he got when he unfollowed the equivalent of much of Worcester on Twitter.
As an outside observer, I have a different take on his experience.
Who follows 131,000 people to begin with? As he points out, when you follow that many people, then you're not "seeing" any of their individual tweets. So, why is he so surprised when others don't read what he wrote about unfollowing everyone as a warning? If he's going to follow people as if that's some sort of status symbol within the great Twitter experiment and not an actual means of getting information from the people he's following, then the reciprocity he later comments definitely already exists. Yet, he goes on to somewhat shun those people who are going to unfollow him solely because he unfollowed them.
Well, you can't have it both ways. Either you follow people because you want to see what they have to say (he clearly doesn't for most individual cases) or you follow them because it's some sort of social connection that has nothing to do with what they have to say (at which point you would fully expect them to reciprocate if you unfollow them...social connection destroyed).
And the media was happy to comply.
As someone who works in marketing, I can confirm that yes, 99% of marketers are completely full of themselves.
Attention whore? Well sure!
Great in-depth response from the hub reading crowd. : )
(You're proving my point.)
Why were you following 130K people on twitter? Were you genuinely interested in what these people are posting to twitter? I can barely find 100 people whose tweets I would care about reading.