It's very unlikely someone bought them for him to make him look bad. Instead, a lot of the time when fake followers are created they are programmed to look 'normal' by following other accounts and engaging. Otherwise a single follow target can be a real outlier and easier to triangulate.
source: worked in spam for a long time.
Also, 10k accounts is like $5-$10 for most 'in the business'. There are a lot of services that sell for this upwards of $50-$100 though. We're not talking about a lot of investment.
I don't think they're saying it never happens, but I've heard similar reports to OC.
It's a measure taken to normalize the accounts— it muddies the water. That way, they look more like average personal accounts than obviously paid-for followers. The costs on the click-farm side is averaged out so they just have the "clickers" or bots follow a huge variety of people and companies while also putting the most backing to the accounts belonging to whoever hired them.
This was way more interesting than I thought it would be.
"This is neither a bug nor isolated to my account. Twitter’s entire platform is propped up by misleading/inflated follower/following counts, which include accounts Twitter themselves have identified as “suspected spam accounts” (and have been identified as such for years)."
I never knew that Twitter did that “suspected spam accounts” accounts thing.
Also... he calls this an "attack", which seems like the wrong word to use somehow. They bots don't seem to be attacking him, they just follow him. Probably doesn't matter much, but I kept waiting for an "attack" to happen, but then it became obvious they're just following him.
Why have follower count anyway, I'm perfectly happy not knowing if someone with a username of monsieurbanana is a regularly commenter with a huge following or not; I know you can look at a profile to get an idea of someone's participation, participation count is a much more important or useful metric anyhow.
True, it's a solidly proven game mechanic that taps into feeding the ego mind - not inherently bad, however can be out of balance, "constantly on" or made prominent vs. simply a tool in a toolkit.
It's similar to Amazon reviews-- if a lot of them are fake people think "well this product sucks actually, they just bought reviews." or at least "I don't actually know if this is any good"
Take it to an entertainer/journalist/politician and it's "well this person sucks actually, they aren't really anyone important and their opinion on things doesn't matter".
Well the fake bots will post fake comments and spammy links and stuff too, so it's right in front of you for the most part.
I dunno, I poke around in followers a little bit but it's usually to the tune of "what other developers follow this person? I might want to follow them too". Not that I use twitter much so eh. Maybe that only really works on the smaller accounts I usually look at. S:
I had an Airbnb guest who left our apartment a mess. I left a review that reflected that, and this person harassed my wife and I to get Airbnb to remove the review. Upon looking this person up, I found they had tens of thousands of fake Instagram followers. While not a clear indicator that I'd be dealing with a troubled individual, it was interesting to see the correlation.
When I'm buying or selling music equipment on Craigslist, if the value of the item is in the hundreds or thousands, I'll definitely do some social media research before meeting up in person, and I don't think it's ever been a make-or-break kind of thing, but it helps paint a picture of who I'll be dealing with.
I'd be more embarrassed for writing on Forbes. do you have any idea how easy it is to get an article on there? $100 will buy a guest post from a ton of contributors, normally done for SEO value or fake PR landscape.
Twitter doesn't seem much different to me now than it did five years ago except that US politics is getting mentioned more. The idea that some people have fake followers and that makes them look bad isn't new.
A year or so ago, it was trending in Norway to post that you would donate 1kr (~.1usd) per like, and then challenge your friends to do the same. I bought a friend thousand likes for a few bucks.
So in essence, I donated 100usd for about 10usd, haha
To play devil's advocate briefly, assume that Twitter decided to delete all accounts it flagged as spam/bot accounts tomorrow. What would the long term fallout be? It's unlikely that people selling follower counts would simply go away, just become a more active adversary. By putting bots simply behind a quality filter (a pseudo shadow-ban), they avoid an escalating arms race in bot account creation.
The real fix here is to stop showing follower counts completely, since they're trash.
Yes but not so much for this in particular. If I want to make a bunch of fake Twitter followers I would just generate new accounts and generate some fake tweets. It would take a lot more work to hack someone's account (who then might also notice it's hacked and try to take it back).
App permissions can still be a problem, but usually that is usually centered more around identity theft.
I'm not sure how that would work in the context of Twitter. Spoofing an email sender is trivial (well, it was before SPF, DKIM and friends). On Twitter the equivalent would be to make an account behave like a bot so that it got flagged but I don't see how you could do that without getting its credentials.
> My desire to maintain a clean/legit Twitter following was driven by necessity. I didn’t want to lose out on any work because of the appearance that I was falsely representing my reach/influence.
Run a twitter follower list API call for all followers with the quality filter on. Save the list to a database
Then run the same call with a the quality filter off and tag each new follower as a bot.
Then block the bots ?
Of course I realize that he's not a developer, but that would basically fix his problem and is not too hard to create.
edit: I now saw at twitteraudit.com that you can use it to block followers too. I guess that he didn't mind THAT much then contrary to the quoted statement above.
A few years ago when I realized this was possible I bought myself, a few friends from high school / college, and a few small companies I like a bunch of followers. (50K each roughly)
For me it was mostly so people would ask how I got so many followers and I could tell the silly story. Buying them for my friends was fun because they would end up tweeting about it and I could watch them try to figure it out before telling them. For the small companies I actually knew the CEO/CTO's and ended up talking about it later on. They came out the best because their accounts were flooded with fake followers but after people saw they had 50K followers real people started following them. I believe one of the companies is close to 150K followers now. If only a third of that is real it's still a lot more than they would have had before.
I looked recently and it seems to be more difficult to do now.
Oh she's already there. I hope this shows her how pointless they really are. If she looks into her new followers she will see a bunch of odd sounding names that all follow roughly the same number of people and have no posts so it's pretty clear something is going on.
I had a facebook page which had 4K followers, it around 2 years to reach that much people. But one day the page likes Jumped to 12K ,It was targeted by a guy to make us look bad. I lost interest after this knowing that my audience are fake bots.
This is nothing in the grand scheme of social media account selling/trading. Go to any social media account marketplace and look through, you can buy any of the thousands of accounts that are for sale. People will spend literally thousands of dollars on accounts that have "original" handles, think dictionary defined one word handles. Then you have people who will spend money on accounts that have thousands of fake followers, because of how easy it is to game these platforms for views and followers. In my eyes it really ruins the fun of cool handles, because people are literally making livings off of scoping up as many of these accounts as they can and reselling them.
Want to get karma on reddit? Go to one of the endless amount of subs dedicated to karma farming and make clickbait posts. Turn around and sell the account to any of the political trolls that love to harvest those accounts.
Want to get followers on twitter/facebook/instagram/xbox/psn? Set your profile picture to that of any model you can find, claim it's you, then post nothing but clickbait and fake giveaway promotions. Turn around and sell it to the low self esteem teenagers who crave internet attention because they can't get it irl.
Granted you don't see much youtube account selling, I'd say mostly because since the platform is so old, a majority of the original account handle owners are long gone from the platform. You do still see it in some aspect though, especially on Fortnite channels. A bunch of seemingly original account names come out of nowhere and get a few hundred k subs in a short spam by posting clickbait fortnite vids? Not a coincidence. Most of those accounts are bought.
Then you have people who lurk through platforms and try an harvest as many original accounts as they can. I'm not sure how they do it, maybe just guessing?
The people who sell these accounts know how desperate some people are for them, that's why so much effort goes in to collecting these accounts. Just look at what happened with the xbox gamertag refresh, that was a disaster. What was meant to be an opportunity for anyone to get a cool gt,turned into bots harvesting thousands of accounts within seconds of them being released, then sold off.
A driving factor behind this behavior is that their is no effort to stop this. Instagram I believe tried to crack down, but what can you do really? You can't be suspicious of various IPs logging in, that's normal behavior even when it's truly malicious. The only way I can think to catch the selling of accounts would be to have an AI look at the behavior and flag drastic changes. Have an account that's normally on a west coast USA IP that posts cute cat photos that suddenly has a Europe location IP and it flooding its feed with clickbait? Probably a new owner.
In reality though, the amount of people who care about this is very minimal. It's a small niche of that consists of mostly teenagers/young adults who grew up in the digital/video game centric age. The need to impress others by having a cool online identity is paramount here.
EDIT: To give examples, I should include some prices. Want a 1 letter instagram account? It'll run you between $10,000-$50,000 if you can find someone selling. Want a 2 letter twitter handle? it'll cost you a few hundred/thousand depending on the letters. Want a two letter xbox gt? it'll cost you a few thousand. Want an original gmail account? It'll cost a few thousand. 3 letter accounts of most of the social media platforms range from a few hundred to a few thousand depending on if it's actually a word, looks cool, or if it's just a random assortment of characters and letters.
Rich no-name dudes get themselves a birthday trend (sometimes worldwide) albeit briefly. Given that Twitter has personnel manually looking at trends it shouldn't be hard for them to immediately kill that trend. I've often seen them go on for hours and started by accounts which follow the standard bot template in their bio.
Of course of this were a trend about wiki leaks twitter is quick to suppress. I know people in the US like to pick political sides but they're slowly "progressing" themselves towards 1984 by supporting this.
source: worked in spam for a long time.
Also, 10k accounts is like $5-$10 for most 'in the business'. There are a lot of services that sell for this upwards of $50-$100 though. We're not talking about a lot of investment.