All weekend I’ve been thinking about the following limit—2,000—that Twitter now uses. Those seasoned tweeters already following more than 2,000 are grandfathered in to continue doing so, which establishes a disparity, but I don’t think I could follow more than 2,000, so I’m good with the rule. Its main function is to prevent spammers from running amok. And I’m good with that too. You can still amass as hefty a legion of followers as you are able, so the followers category seems fair.
But something doesn’t feel quite right…something of the pit-of-my-stomach variety.
Then Monday, when I got in front of a monitor and got the computer firing on all cylinders, I found a news item in Social Median about the Twitter Elite.
Suddenly that ache in the pit of my stomach flared. Words like inequity and imbalance came to mind. Realities, like one third of the world’s wealth is controlled by less than 1% of its population, made me gasp as if I was finding out for the first time.
I mean, I understand why there is a Twitter Elite. The Community Participation Pyramid shows that same elite exists for the entire internet.
Even so, it still concerns me. So this blog posting is switching gears and taking on a new title and scope:
3 Reasons the Twitter Elite and Internet Elitism Can Be Very Bad
I’ve already written, in a somewhat irreverent style, about the ranking of Twitter users. It’s nearly the same as predicting lottery results based on the last results. Now this Twitter Elite ranking has many tweeters that I follow and admire (@pistachio, @shelisrael, @chrisbrogan, @missrogue), so it’s not entirely amiss. However, things always seem to turn out poorly when the power is in the hands of only a few.
Here are but three reasons that internet elitism should be carefully watched.
1. Demographic Representation: This reality can be looked at from many angles. To keep it simple, look at the Twitter Elite list and note where they are in the world. USA, USA, USA, USA, and (oh yeah) Australia, UK, and Canada. I am not surprised since the numbers on internet usage overall are, in parallel, American heavy. But if you are a business seeking consumer feedback or a consumer looking for business reviews, I doubt the sample is representative.
2. Control of Info (Searches): Much of the input that generates search engine results is data regarding how many other sites link to each destination. Since 0.1% of internet participation links up the web, it is more than likely, for the remaining 99.9% of users, that the search results are not relevant.
3. Quality Diminishes or Content Conforms: I don’t know which happens first. Maybe quality diminishes because content conforms. Or maybe quality disappears and then everyone conforms content to make it look like quality. Any way you slice it, when only a few set standards, those standards make generic look exciting.
Perhaps the best way to change the imbalance is to participate. Comment today! Blog tomorrow! Tweet every hour! Follow me on Twitter: @tweric!
(Perhaps commenting would take too long, so at least click the star rating below. When you do, everyone wins.)
