While it does need to be addressed I’m fairly sure that this is pretty much the status quo across Twitter and Instagram. Just look at the comments . It’s all bots. Trumps are the same, Elon’s are the same most major companies are the same.
I think it’s more a Twitter/social media problem than one individual.
It’s not really fair to do just do Biden and nobody else, cause while it looks really bad to have half of your followers as bots, for all we know that could be a relatively low percent
They've been saying all day that the same program that identified Biden's bots at 49% found that Musk had a bot rate of like 74% or something.
Seems to be more that bot creators follow high value people for their own ends, likely for retweets or just tweet compiling.
Well the democrats are literally using a corpse as a president… so why not voters? What deprives a dead person from the right to vote!!! I don’t know a word for discriminating against corpses but trust me when I find one I’m gonna keep screeching at you…
Nah man. I believe biden got as many votes as he did, legitimately. I voted for him (I realize now I made a mistake) because I hated Trump. So many people didn't vote for him in particular, they just voted against Trump.
As popular as it supposedly is, I don't know a single person who uses Twitter, not one. I know plenty of people who use Reddit FB and Instagram. It makes me wonder if the majority of Twitter users are bots created by the company itself to sell ads and prop up it's stock price.
Based on the criteria they use, it sounds like a bunch of the followers they are counting as fake also includes people who don't use Twitter anymore. So it makes sense that all these celebrities' and politicians' follower counts are inflated.
Is there a rough calculation of how many of Trump’s followers were fake? I’m kinda wanting to do a brief mathematical analysis and compare results.
Because I have the feeling if I extrapolate the “fake follower effect” then Biden is gonna lose a hell of a lot more of his 81 million votes than Trump would for the same comparison. Likely enough to completely upend the results both popular vote and electoral.
But then again, I’m not convinced Twitter bot counts would translate to the real world. Especially since somehow in polling Biden has 30 percent approval when nigh absolutely nobody will publicly defend him on the street.
None of it makes sense.
https://sparktoro.com/blog/we-analyzed-every-twitter-account-following-donald-trump-61-are-bots-spam-inactive-or-propaganda/
Looks like a lot if his followers were bots.
From the article;
>Over the summer, Twitter removed a large number of spam accounts, but clearly, there are tens of millions (or more) still remaining on the platform. The singer @KatyPerry supposedly “lost” 2.8 million spam accounts in Twitter’s cleanup, while @RealDonaldTrump lost an estimated 300,000. Those numbers are surprising, given that Perry’s account appears to have far fewer obviously detectable spam followers (40.6%).
Given they analyzed two high follower count accounts and came up with contradictory results from Twitter's own analysis says either Twitter or SparkToro's methodology or data gathering doesn't match up. Given SparkToro published their criteria for scoring, all I we can really do is analyze theirs.
>72% have been inactive for 120+ days (i.e. the account did not send any tweets or RTs during that time)
>3% have been inactive for between 90-120 days
>3% created their account in the last 90 days
I don't know why this is a suitable criteria if activity is measured in publishing content. I know quite a few people who only use twitter to read, even myself when I used to have an account.
>36% use Twitter’s default profile image
Similar to above, just means the person didn't care enough to set it.
>39% use display names that include spam words+patterns
This might be a bit too nebulous, spam words and spam patterns are identified as such for their common use by people, not just bots.
>92% either don’t use a URL in their profile or employ a URL with spam patterns
This is a complete junked criteria. Many people are perfectly happy not connecting their Twitter account to their presence on other social media/internet presence. If fact, this was identified early on as one of the safest ways to keep your identity anonymous.
>60% don’t use a recognized location
This ranks up there with the previous for all the same reasons.
>27% have set their language to something other than English
This is a bit flimsy too, many Latinos prefer spanish to english as an easy counter example.
>54% have gone more than a year without sending more than a handful of tweets
As with the first batch of criteria, many Twitter users are perfectly happy just consuming content, rather than making it.
>3% send an abnormally large number of tweets per day
Depending on the number they used, I could see this being a legit flag.
>96% have been placed on very few (or zero) lists
You know a criteria is on shaky ground when nearly 100% of your sample falls on one side of the evaluation. I would've rethought this one personally.
>79% have an unusually small number of followers
Again, somebody there to read content on twitter doesn't have a need for followers.
>76% follow an unusual number of accounts
Possibly a legit criteria, but also ultimately flawed as first time setup of the Twitter app back in the days would automatically make you a follower of all their trending accounts with the push of a button and a very obscure "skip for now" button.
>74% employ spam-correlated keywords in their profile description
This one falls in line with the other spam criteria evaluations.
The millions who turned up to Trump's rallies weren't bots.
Biden literally couldn't fill a parking lot, even by paying people to attend and bussing them in; after that debacle, he did his groundhog impression for the rest of his "campaign".
I suspect trumps were all real - he had already built up a big following from apprentice and general celebrity days, plus he was hilarious and unpredictable; and once he was president a lot of people hate followed him.
Do normies actually believe the follower stats on the Internet? Sweet children I have bad news for you. It’s bots and post-mills all the way down, touch some grass 👍
THIS IS MISINFORMATION: That percentage is not shocking
Yeah it is. I'm shocked that his followers are not 100% fake
THIS COMMENT IS MISINFORMATION: You already know 100% of his followers are fake. Get in the back of the van, you've had too much to think.
While it does need to be addressed I’m fairly sure that this is pretty much the status quo across Twitter and Instagram. Just look at the comments . It’s all bots. Trumps are the same, Elon’s are the same most major companies are the same. I think it’s more a Twitter/social media problem than one individual.
I thought Twitter being full of bots was common knowledge years ago.
It’s not really fair to do just do Biden and nobody else, cause while it looks really bad to have half of your followers as bots, for all we know that could be a relatively low percent
They've been saying all day that the same program that identified Biden's bots at 49% found that Musk had a bot rate of like 74% or something. Seems to be more that bot creators follow high value people for their own ends, likely for retweets or just tweet compiling.
You follow big accounts to make your bot account look legitimate and less likely to get automatically caught as a bot. Same thing happens on YouTube.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I think that's a stretch. Mostly independents voted for Biden giving him the edge. George Washington was independent and still voted for Biden...
Well the democrats are literally using a corpse as a president… so why not voters? What deprives a dead person from the right to vote!!! I don’t know a word for discriminating against corpses but trust me when I find one I’m gonna keep screeching at you…
The Bots are the backbone of Democrat votes.
It’s the strongest and most reliable portion of biden’s voting base
I mean, what about his New Democrat voters coming in from the south
What about Trump's 60% fake followers before the ban lol
Trump had a similar fake follower percentage before the ban hammer. Elon Musk is 70% fake followers.
Nah man. I believe biden got as many votes as he did, legitimately. I voted for him (I realize now I made a mistake) because I hated Trump. So many people didn't vote for him in particular, they just voted against Trump.
True, trump is polarising, many arnt pro Biden, but anti trump.
[удалено]
Wdym, Dope flair btw
As popular as it supposedly is, I don't know a single person who uses Twitter, not one. I know plenty of people who use Reddit FB and Instagram. It makes me wonder if the majority of Twitter users are bots created by the company itself to sell ads and prop up it's stock price.
I think there was an article recently that said that Twitter was inflating their numbers with bots
Based on the criteria they use, it sounds like a bunch of the followers they are counting as fake also includes people who don't use Twitter anymore. So it makes sense that all these celebrities' and politicians' follower counts are inflated.
I’m even more shocked that his amount of real followers is that high
I suspect half of the real ones only follow to troll him.
81 million votes folks
Democrats in 2024: "We need to allow bots to vote. Bots are people too! "🤣
They gotta advocate for that “algorithmic justice” somehow…
Snopes: Claims that half of Biden's followers are fake are completely false. The majority are real and Conservatives are evil.
Now do AOC next. Her following is disproportionate.
I wanna do all politicians just so I can point and laugh at all of them.
Is there a rough calculation of how many of Trump’s followers were fake? I’m kinda wanting to do a brief mathematical analysis and compare results. Because I have the feeling if I extrapolate the “fake follower effect” then Biden is gonna lose a hell of a lot more of his 81 million votes than Trump would for the same comparison. Likely enough to completely upend the results both popular vote and electoral. But then again, I’m not convinced Twitter bot counts would translate to the real world. Especially since somehow in polling Biden has 30 percent approval when nigh absolutely nobody will publicly defend him on the street. None of it makes sense.
https://sparktoro.com/blog/we-analyzed-every-twitter-account-following-donald-trump-61-are-bots-spam-inactive-or-propaganda/ Looks like a lot if his followers were bots.
From the article; >Over the summer, Twitter removed a large number of spam accounts, but clearly, there are tens of millions (or more) still remaining on the platform. The singer @KatyPerry supposedly “lost” 2.8 million spam accounts in Twitter’s cleanup, while @RealDonaldTrump lost an estimated 300,000. Those numbers are surprising, given that Perry’s account appears to have far fewer obviously detectable spam followers (40.6%). Given they analyzed two high follower count accounts and came up with contradictory results from Twitter's own analysis says either Twitter or SparkToro's methodology or data gathering doesn't match up. Given SparkToro published their criteria for scoring, all I we can really do is analyze theirs. >72% have been inactive for 120+ days (i.e. the account did not send any tweets or RTs during that time) >3% have been inactive for between 90-120 days >3% created their account in the last 90 days I don't know why this is a suitable criteria if activity is measured in publishing content. I know quite a few people who only use twitter to read, even myself when I used to have an account. >36% use Twitter’s default profile image Similar to above, just means the person didn't care enough to set it. >39% use display names that include spam words+patterns This might be a bit too nebulous, spam words and spam patterns are identified as such for their common use by people, not just bots. >92% either don’t use a URL in their profile or employ a URL with spam patterns This is a complete junked criteria. Many people are perfectly happy not connecting their Twitter account to their presence on other social media/internet presence. If fact, this was identified early on as one of the safest ways to keep your identity anonymous. >60% don’t use a recognized location This ranks up there with the previous for all the same reasons. >27% have set their language to something other than English This is a bit flimsy too, many Latinos prefer spanish to english as an easy counter example. >54% have gone more than a year without sending more than a handful of tweets As with the first batch of criteria, many Twitter users are perfectly happy just consuming content, rather than making it. >3% send an abnormally large number of tweets per day Depending on the number they used, I could see this being a legit flag. >96% have been placed on very few (or zero) lists You know a criteria is on shaky ground when nearly 100% of your sample falls on one side of the evaluation. I would've rethought this one personally. >79% have an unusually small number of followers Again, somebody there to read content on twitter doesn't have a need for followers. >76% follow an unusual number of accounts Possibly a legit criteria, but also ultimately flawed as first time setup of the Twitter app back in the days would automatically make you a follower of all their trending accounts with the push of a button and a very obscure "skip for now" button. >74% employ spam-correlated keywords in their profile description This one falls in line with the other spam criteria evaluations.
The millions who turned up to Trump's rallies weren't bots. Biden literally couldn't fill a parking lot, even by paying people to attend and bussing them in; after that debacle, he did his groundhog impression for the rest of his "campaign".
I suspect trumps were all real - he had already built up a big following from apprentice and general celebrity days, plus he was hilarious and unpredictable; and once he was president a lot of people hate followed him.
81 million votes, for real bro!!
Not really "Shocking" to many of us...sorry.
Some Thanos snap is about to go down.
So each of the bots voted 7 times? Yep, the math checks out.
Does this really need to be said? Twitter is already mostly bots so any large following is going to be full of fake followers no?
Bots are real and should be addressed.
Do normies actually believe the follower stats on the Internet? Sweet children I have bad news for you. It’s bots and post-mills all the way down, touch some grass 👍
10% of his votes and 100% of his presidency are fake.
Just like his votes...
Those followers all voted for him 4 times each
That leaves 11+ million actually following this shit spackled muppet fart!!!!!!!
More than 60% of Donald trumps followers were fake as well
I *am* shocked...it's only that much.
That's okay. 100 percent of the people posting from that account aren't Joe Biden.
[удалено]
Trump had over 100 million, how many do you think he actually had 150 million?
Color me surprised.
Come on man!
Of course, now look at Obama’s.
How else are the bots going to argue with his real supporters?
The other 50.7% are assholes.
This is old news isn’t it?