Why Twitter’s Who To Follow is missing the point

It’s very good of Twitter to keep on suggesting that we follow Jonathan Ross, isn’t it? Not to mention some chap called Stephen Fry.

Who To Follow is such an odd little feature to introduce because it goes against the principles of social media that have made Twitter so successful in the first place. As we know, gone are the one-size-fits-all shouty marketing messages that you simply block out, and in are recommendations from people you trust. Here’s three reasons why it’s missing the point.

Twitter doesn’t know you
I want to follow people I can learn from, engage with and who make me laugh. A key way of finding these people is through recommendations and retweets from people I’ve conversed with several times and whose opinion I’ve come to respect. The enduring Follow Friday hashtag already has this covered.

The law of diminishing returns
The more followers a person has, the less opportunity they have to respond to all the messages they receive. This leaves the assembled masses with that slightly peculiar feeling that they’ve been snubbed by someone off the telly who a couple of years ago they would never have thought of chatting with anyway. And the celeb Twitterer only has time to concentrate on the people they were friends with before they signed up. So why only highlight the people who already have substantial numbers of followers, when this doesn’t offer increased value for either side?

A two-tier social network?
One of the problems with promoting the people who already have a high follower count is that it reinforces the idea that there should be some sort of Twitter elite, which again goes against the spirit of a medium where, say, a stay-at-home mum or lorry driver’s posts can offer just as much wit and worth as one of the comedians, politicians and journalists Twitter is now so keen for us to follow.