Good blog post on the Guardian today, on social media (Bobbie Johnson "I've had it with social media") and the incessant chatter it creates. One elements of that, particularly with Twitter, is celebrities. Who follows these people and why on earth would you do it?
Johnson's problem isn't really with the celeb angle (but it is mine), his was more taking issue with the endless talk about "social media going mainstream"every time some "event" happens where it gets massively Tweeted or the pic was taken with an iPhone. The latest incident to get this treatment being Batman actor Christian Bale's hissy fit. An odd one considering that unlike the Hudson River crash Bale's outburst happened last summer, but just leaked out via an MP3 or something - personally I couldn't care a less (although waiting with bated breath for Terminator 4...maybe not baited, I'm guessing you can't be baited for too long).
I digress, he has a point though, but one of the things that really find quite bizarre with the whole social media thing is the endless writing about and obsessing about celebrities and their usage of social media. This is particularly bad on Twitter (well it is all the rage) where there are endless Tweets and ReTweets of the musings of Stephen Fry and others. I just don't care, honest to god, I don't and why would anyone?
More to the point, why would 103,000 plus people? Stephen Fry is the most followed person in the UK, followed by Jonathan Ross (Wossy) with almost 50,000 followers. Then there is JohnCleese, more than 45,000, and Phillip Schofield (schofe) 20,000 plus - that's really weird. Whatever the attraction is I don't want to know. Personally I find these statistics a little depressing. There is a list of the top 50 celebs that someone has blogged (although some must be fakes - Demi Moore -Mrs Kutcher? Lol).
Do people really like Stephen Fry? Is he that interesting. My interest in Fry stops at 'Blackadder'. My interest in celebrity is confined to movies I like and the writers I read. Whether they go for a walk or take a crap is, well, not in the least bit interesting. Well as uninteresting in learning that somone I follow tells me "off for coffee". Yeah, you and a billion others.
I use Twitter for work, I pick up good links, and I don't care one iota what Wossy or Fry have to say or why I would want to tell anyone. I just don't get it. Is it simply to feel closer, connected, to the world of celebrity? Buy yourself a copy of Heat.This simply feels more like the ever spreading celebrity virus that it seems now must exist in all areas of life. No exceptions, no get out clauses. And yeah, I realise, that this might come off as bah humbug, but, hey, I don't mind (honest). So take your best shot.
Follow me on Twitter
Oh get a life. It's fun following Stephen Fry. He's amusing. That's why we do it. Remember fun? There is no deeper reason - your suggestion that it might be to get closer to a celebrity is way off. It's fun. Go on, give it a try.
Following a celebrity that you admire on Twitter is just an extension of the entertainment they provide on TV, it is a new medium to reach out to audiences. I think it is a great use of the service and Stephen Fry and Jonathan Ross are showing that they are ahead of the curve in thinking up new ways to reach their audiences. Maybe a celebrity you do like will start to Twitter and you'll appreciate it. I like Vince Donofrio, but he doesn't Twitter.
Sounds like a geek fight to me. Why don't you take the ball and go home and leave the other nerds to their frivolous fun. Meanwhile I'll carry on ignoring it.
Hmm, I can see both sides to this story here. Twitter is a great way for celebs to communicate with their fans and for their fans to feel like they are getting something back - never has it been possible to feel such a part of a celebrities life.
However, it really does have to be a celebrity you're interested in. I followed the ramblings of Stephen Fry for a short while on Twitter and aside from not getting what most of his Tweets were about, he also filled up my Twitter feed with his constant postings!
Twitter - great comms tool - YES.
Great for following your most loved celeb - YES.
Great for following any old celeb - DEFINITELY NOT!
Twitter @JocelynKirby
Yeah, other people following Stephen Fry says he posts a lot - like a bot (i know he's the real deal), but Philip Schofield?? That's bizarre.
I twittered my comment to this blog
I started following Stephen Fry just to see what all the fuss was about. He's amusing enough and (despite the frequency of his tweeting) I'll probably keep following.
Despite having been on Twitter for some time, I'm still not sure what it's for. For some folks, like you, Gordon, it's a good way to get interesting stuff out to people that you know will be interested. For others it's just random chatter. The good thing is that Twitter doesn't really care what you talk about. If you don't like somebody's ramblings, just stop following.
One thing that is interesting for the celebrities is that their Twittering raises expectations. I'm still waiting for Barack Obama who hasn't tweeted since his inauguration.
Obama hasn't Tweeted since? That's disappointing to hear, especially now he has his Blackberry replacement the NSA souped up Sectera Edge - yours from all good stockists of General Dynamics products for £2,342.
Pingback from Aside from sickness, today has been full of fabulous things. « Steph Hamill
Pingback from Why would you follow a Celebrity on Twitter | The Black Ball
What's the point of asking why anyone would care about Tweeting celebrities? It's like me asking why anyone likes rugby - I don't see the point in it but thousands do, and clearly they like it for reasons I don't necessarily understand.
Twitter allows people to connect with their fav celebes and discover that they are just real people...
Celebs ! ...are real people? If only they knew themselves
Unlike @stephenfry, @BarackObama isn't really Barack (account is more of a RSS feed) so this American voter does not really care if "he" hasn't twittered lately. Because "he" never did. They are not using the platform properly, imho. But other pols are. Lots of examples, but in the UK check:
http://tweetminster.co.uk/
I agree with @GordonM in that one doesn't need to care about celebrities. Frankly, I think twitter is of much more value to them than us; you can see how excited @stephenfry, @Wossy, et al, are to be a part of this still underground community and talk one on one @ the "real" people. Of course, there is something to be said for the insider (ephemeral) thrill in knowing that at this very minute the real Shaquille O'Neal is wandering the streets of SF trying to visit the real twitter HQ:
twitter.com/.../1178050931
Ok, maybe it's just me here following Shaq... Anyway, what the obsessing about celebrities does do, perhaps, is allow some people to dismiss twitter as a passing fad, rather than try to understand the serious microblogging evolution in the greater social media/blogging revolution. Think Heat magazine vs printing press. There are as many ways twitter can be of value as they are ways different kinds of blogs can be of value. We can all find our own.
For marketing peeps, here are a few good examples of brands finding ways (via individuals) to connect directly with their public. Am not sure this ever really happened pre twitter, but I do know it is only the beginning.
http://twitter.com/ScottMonty
http://twitter.com/dogstrust
twitter.com/innocentdrinks
twitter.com/comcastcares
You'll find more. Please share which brands you think are really doing a great job out there.
http://twitter.com/CandaceKuss
The man / woman on the street have for years attempted to get as close to their favourite celebs as possible, and in doing so feel a sense of belonging.
Twitter is just the latest mechanic for "getting close" and being part of a group.
Knowing all this, as you obviously do, my question to you is - why are you so surprised?
I heard the Today Programme this morning talking about Stephen Fry Twittering while stuck in a lift at centrepoint. I'm not sure why.
in the future, are we all going to have '@' in front of our names?
It is the fawning that gets me. As that what it is. Celeb fawning. Back fawnist
Stephen Fry understands the power of the conversation. This is something that many do not, especially people with ATL and even DM backgrounds. Most can't grasp the amount of touchpoints that digital can create between consumers, brands and 'slebs.
Fry also understands the strategic use of Twitter and technology, something many planners and strategists do not get.
And, of course, he's a damn good and funny writer.
The only difference between electing to follow Stephen Fry on Twitter and reading a column such as yours is the character count.
Both, largely, are viewpoints and therefore nothing more than distractions to our days. We are not necessarily richer for reading these things, but we may smile or have a viewpoint firmed up by doing so.
What Twitter does reveal more than other social media is the sickening sycophancy people display towards 'slebs - and that even 'slebs display to each other. This fawning behaviour is, I believe, the heart of the matter.
And why buy Heat, where your relationship with a 'sleb is defined by the editorial. At least with Twitter, you're direct in your contact.
It has fast become the case that complaining about people following celebrities is as commonplace as people liking the idea that they have another avenue to interact with someone they admire.
As a charity, there is good reason to follow a celebrity; we have been politely able to ask one to help us out with a fundraising event and received a positive response, which is great. But it's not just a professional approach. We follow them because they're funny, because they give us an insight into a world we don't inhabit and because we're fans of theirs. So how use Twitter both personally and professionally has a lot to do with whether you can see any value in following a celebrity.
Anyway, the beauty of Twitter is that it allows you to opt out of hearing much of what you don't want to hear. Not interested in a celebrity? Don't read their feed. YOU'RE not interested, but others are - why does that offend? If followers get a bit soppy over a celebrity so what? You can stop following them. Followers come and go with such regularity on Twitter they'll probably never even notice you're gone. And if others clearly join solely to spam some celeb with their commentary, then don't follow them in the first place; they'll get bored and leave soon enough anyway.
For me the most exciting 'name' on Twitter is Neil Gaiman, because I read his books and want to know what he's doing next. It's easy to assume people only follow in order to fawn (and some do, and it's a bit irritating, but easily ignored) but some just follow to get news.
I know your opinion is not rare (even the Daily Mail got in there)- I just can't understand why, in the opt-out-and-block world of Twitter it would upset people to see others following someone they're not interested in.
Barry Bulsara
Guess it's just a bit of fun. It can be intriguing for average Joe to know the day in the life of a celebrity. Stephen Fry's tweet are most definately amusing. I've got to admit I joined to see what the fuss was about and I kinda of do see why people use it now.
Followng Stephen Fry is a good entry level for Twitter newbies. Once you start to get the hang of it and begin to understand Tweets potential power (for brand organistions to listen, learn and engage with consumers) then just opt out.
See examples of brands that are getting good at Twittering: (brandexperiencetalk.blogspot.com/.../brands-should-invest-in-working-out-how.html
Yes people like Stephen Fry, he's brilliant. It's you that is wrong
I agree it's fun, but not for long imho
i"m with Gordon on this one. Rather like Facebook, Twitter has gone down the hierarchy of communication. Poorer rather than richer. Also, it encourages talents like SF to be constantly "on". Their best work (er, like good ads, everybody???) takes time, concentration and an IDEA. Twittering is just what it says on the tin.
Well put Rick.
Are we not all twittering on this blog?
If you had been in any doubt this weekend must have cleared it up. It was kind of amazing. I don't
If celebs are promoting themselves then maybe they should pay? Get rid of a few of the wasters.
Hello,
I somewhat agree with what you have to say. I think the key is reading through the steam of someone that started following you before you decide to follow them.
Just as you would look at the stream and bio information to determine if it is spam, the same can be said about following someone. I'll usually scroll through a couple of pages of their stream before deciding if I'll follow them. If all they have to talk about is how good their grill cheese sandwich was for lunch, I probably won't follow them.
http://www.marblehost.com
@Marble Host I think that's top advice. I look at few pages also. I'm not interested in endless personal tweets or vast amount of tweets generally - just good quality ones - clearly everyone has their take on this.
I've been intrigued by Stephen Fry's obsession with Twitter for some time now. My suspicions
I blogged a couple of months ago asking why would you follow a celebrity on Twitter? No surprise, but
Having sifted the rumour mill this morning, I'm not sure if there are any gold nuggets there. It
I haven't got into twitter, as I have too much going on in my own life to worry about someone else's. Hmmmm, maybe my life would make an interesting twitter, now thats a thought!
I realise some of us spend way too much time talking about Twitter and celebrities. What can I say? It's
Everyone seems to have gone Twitter crazy. Is it a craze or here to stay? They say social media communication will reduce tradional email communication.
If you haven't realized it by now Twitter is hear to stay.
I can't believe that people think its going away.
Twitter is firmly in the minds of everyone now, celebrity twitter, marketing twitter, latest news twitter and free speech promotion that you might not be able to find elsewhere.
Twitter is firmly in everyones minds with celebrities, marketing and the latest news and free speech being promoted.
I have a lot of time for Stephen Fry, but not so much I'd waste some following his twittering. Or anybody else's for that matter. who gives a monkey's what people ar banally doing.
Only twits twitter
(is this more than 140 characters?)
I don't really follow personally but I can understand why. It's the same reason why people likes reading gossip magazines. People want to know what is happening with their fav personalities. Somehow, by knowing what they are doing, it makes the personalities more "human" and that they are just like everyone else. It's also a way for the stars to keep their fans updated and to hype up their latest release or whatever.
I don't get it too. Some of my friends logged in everyday to see what their favorite stars are doing. Me, I got better things to do.
I actually follow Beyonce on Twitter. Call me pathetic or what but I totally adore her and I don't see anything wrong with that.
It's quite fun and amusing to follow a celebrity, me and my friends were doing the same and the reason for that is because we love and idolized that celebrity such as Beyonce, Ryan Seacrest and many more. I don't see anything wrong with that too.
good post))
Gordon Macmillan
Blogging for:
Member since: 03 Jun 2008
Last login: 20 Nov 2009
Total Posts: 1,616
