Heartache by the Numbers: Twitter & Influence Poll

Heartache by the Numbers: Twitter & Influence Poll

Summary: My bud and CRM thought leader Brent Leary posted on the fallacy of assuming the number of Twitter followers equals real influence in any way early last week.  This got me to thinking.

SHARE:

My bud and CRM thought leader Brent Leary posted on the fallacy of assuming the number of Twitter followers equals real influence in any way early last week.  This got me to thinking. What do you all think of the level of influence that a tweeter has? So I devised this rather unscientific poll and really would like you to answer the poll and provide some feedback in comments on your choice. I think the debate over whether Twitter followers = influence is not only a valid discussion but an important one.  So speak up, let me know.  Fill out the survey, write comments in the Talkback section.

Oh, yeah, do me a favor and spread the word. Tweet it. Retweet it. That might even resolve the question.

[poll id="7"]

Topics: Enterprise Software, CXO, Software, Social Enterprise

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

3 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • No, for other reasons

    Basically, I used this answer as an aggregate.
    1. You don't need a lot of people to have influence. Money, power, and a command of social psychology is actually better.

    2. Basically Twitter is banal to point of actually having a negative affect. So far for everything I have followed or has followed me, none of it was intelligent, insightful, wise, or even useful. It is a chat program where nobody really says anything meaningful on it.

    3. Influence is part physical presence, part social psychological skill, and part group think. Twitter is to anonymous to bring in the immediacy of influence. A really good example of influence is an old woman going up to a line at the ladies room and crying with real tears in her eyes saying, "Please I am sick can you please let me in first?" It doesn't matter if the old woman is really sick or not, most people would let her get in the front of the line. That is influence. You had to see, hear, and feel sorry for the woman before you would let her get her way. Good advertising can also to this remotely but it has to be really good because it really doesn't have a physical immediacy. But it can and has been done. Twitter isn't that sophisticated. About the only thing it has going for it is group think and most of the thinkers in the group are not tweeting about serious stuff.

    Also the most of the people living in western style countries have a resistance (not immunity) to commercial influence. Just cause some athlete does something or seemingly buys something doesn't have the same power as it did the first years of television. It still does have some effect but you can't bet your business on an old Tiger Woods (before the fall).
    mr1972
  • RE: Heartache by the Numbers: Twitter & Influence Poll

    Good poll.
    I think the first option should say "YES - Because it is
    **currently** the most influential social channel" :-)
    Darayush
  • RE: Heartache by the Numbers: Twitter & Influence Poll

    I think we need to redefine the role of "influencers".
    Traditionally, influencers are considered to be the few whose opinion counts. Social media is letting the "masses" give their opinion and their opinion is beginning to carry "influence". For years companies led customers by the nose and involved them in product decisions only when forced to do so. Today, through social networking the table has been turned and now customers are driving the direction of products and finally of companies who are being forced to put the customer back into CRM
    ychange