{{ searchResult.published_at | date:'d MMMM yyyy' }}

Loading ...
Loading ...

Enter a search term such as “mobile analytics” or browse our content using the filters above.


That’s not only a poor Scrabble score but we also couldn’t find any results matching “”.
Check your spelling or try broadening your search.


Sorry about this, there is a problem with our search at the moment.
Please try again later.

It is almost one year since we launched our Twitter experiment, in a bid to get closer to our community.

Now, it is time for a bit of a spring clean, and one of the things we are going to do is to start from scratch with Twitter, in terms of who we’re following. I’ll explain why…

The Econsultancy Twitter experiment

Back in March 2009 we did two things, pretty much on a whim, to openly embrace feedback by displaying tweets on our site. A dangerous move, some said, but it has worked out well, and helps keep us on our toes.

Firstly, we integrated real time mentions of Econsultancy (on Twitter) onto our homepage, by displaying the most recent tweets that were directed at – or talked about – our brand (or the content we produce). You can still see it in action if you check out our homepage.

The second thing we did was to create and insert a small piece of code to seek out retweets of our blog articles. We labelled this ‘Twitter Buzz’ and positioned it in the right sidebar adjacent to our posts. Again, this remains in place and we’ll finesse the code this year to improve what we display.

Both of these things have been widely praised and helped us to shine a light on community feedback, be it good or bad (the nature of social media means it is rarely indifferent, and a retweet is essentially a recommendation of sorts).

The upshot here is that while many of us were using Twitter as individuals, we wanted to do more with it as a company. And in the past year we’ve enjoyed a lot of success, felt the love, have been occasionally slapped down, and have seen first hand what social media can do for a media organisation like ours.

Moving ahead

We try to monitor, measure and review everything we do. This extends to our web platform, our subscription model, our free and paid-for content, our internal processes, our training courses, our events, and a bunch of other areas. Now and again we’ll launch something new, or tweak something old, or kill something altogether. 

In 2010 we’re planning a number of changes to our website. We’re working on lots of new subscriber-access content, to help internet professionals to work smarter, rather than harder. We’ve set up a new consultancy division, to provide bespoke advice to businesses that need guidance with their digital strategy. We’re going to launch Econsultancy Labs, to develop some cool web and mobile projects. 

And we want to get our social house in order too...

Social change

We’re currently working on a new homepage, to try to simplify our subscription / paid-content proposition, and to outline the other things that we do in a clearer way (things like Training and Events). As part of this move to reclaim the prime, above-the-fold page estate for the important messaging, we will reposition our Twitter feed (and other social media content). Econsultancy-related tweets shouldn’t really be the first thing a visitor sees when they land on our homepage for the first time.

At the end of 2009 we also decided to unfollow all of the 19,000 people we have been following on Twitter. If this applies to you please don’t take it personally. We set up an auto-follow rule when we first started out on Twitter, and - frankly - it’s got a little bit out of control.

Seven reasons why we’re starting from scratch with Twitter

  1. It is impractical to follow 19,000 people. Too much noise has rendered our @econsultancy Twitter account unusable.
  2. It looks spammy to have 19,000 followers and to follow 19,000 people, but we don't use Hummingbird or any pyramid software tools to grow our follower count. Our Twitter presence has grown organically.
  3. It will avoid spam followers who follow just to be followed back. When follower / following numbers are so closely correlated it can attract spammers, who often leave shortly afterwards. Software tools look for these accounts too, which makes the problem even worse.
  4. We are easy to contact. As a media brand we have a contact page and can be individually contacted by email with relative ease. As such following people simply to open up direct messaging isn’t so important. And besides…
  5. Our DM spam is out of control. Seriously. It’s a mess. The amount of bullshit messages sent via automatic DM is just insane. We’re done with it.
  6. We encourage public discussion and continue to monitor and reply to @econsultancy tweets.
  7. It's an experiment in real time SEO. I wrote about some of the ranking factors for real time SEO, and I think follower-to-following ratios might come into play. We’re not overly concerned about this right now, but real time search may become a much bigger deal in the future, and we’d like to be in line with best practice as and when this happens. In any event, I'm keen to see if this makes any kind of difference to our current real time results.

Ultimately, we simply want to start from scratch. We will be manually – and gradually - re-following media folks, friendly guru types, and various industry people.


A batch unfollow manoeuvre like this is not without its dangers. In particular, there are two things that might happen:

Account suspension. Twitter’s terms of service suggest that mass-unfollowing is a red flag event. This kind of ‘aggressive follower churn’ means that is is likely that we will be flagged as a spammer, when in fact the opposite is true. We are doing this in part to eliminate spam, and to make our Twitter account usable again.

Mass follower bailout. Some followers may choose to unfollow us, as a result of this decision. We hope our cherished Twitter followers will remain tuned in, to receive our updates and notifications of new blog posts, research, surveys, events, and irregular ‘beer o’clock’ announcements. If people choose to leave then that’s ok too. Like I said, it’s nothing personal, it’s just that you cannot actively ‘follow’ anyone when you’re watching 19,000 other people.

Both are risks we’re prepared to take, if only to see what happens (Econsultancy is essentially an office full of highly curious people). If our account is suspended then we hope Twitter will understand our reasons for doing this, and that we'll be back with you soon! And we feel that Twitter isn’t about the sheer quantity of followers that you can amass, but about the quality and relevance of those followers. If we continue to create compelling content then - hopefully - we’ll continue to grow our Twitter account organically in the months and years to come. 

In any event, the script is whirring away and within a few hours our 'following' count will fall to zero. We're watching and learning along the way...

Any thoughts?

Chris Lake

Published 14 January, 2010 by Chris Lake

Chris Lake is CEO at EmpiricalProof, and former Director of Content at Econsultancy. Follow him on Twitter, Google+ or connect via Linkedin.

582 more posts from this author

Comments (40)

Save or Cancel


Interesting. I have two accounts through Twitter, an "Automated" account linked to my blog which simply posts a tweet per blog post, and my main one I do all my networking.

I am a follower, and will continue to follow. I've got no qualms in you following me or not (do think there's something odd about companies as a group following you). For a person who I interact with, I would be offended, but for a website, I've no complaints (and the people who do complain are probably those who just push thier posts onto people).

Personally I'd much rather see an account like this just broadcast posts/interesting links, rather than engage in discussions with people.

over 6 years ago


Nigel Cooper

Good plan - the only people who will unfollow you are those that only follow for followers anyway - and you're right, you can't follow 19,000 people and have any useful dialogue with them, and you're unlikely to be able to sift out the decent, relevant tweets from the white noise.

over 6 years ago



Chris, totally understandable, but why stop there? This is what Robert Scoble and others have already done.

Why not start totally from scratch, and ditch all the people who are following YOU too? Otherwise, you might still have some spammers following you but not really paying attention to anything you say.

Now that would be different ;-)

over 6 years ago



To avoid being flagged as a spammer, why not just hit up @biz.  You're a big enough 'name' to do such I would say.


over 6 years ago


Melanie Russell, Director at tictoc Family Ltd

Totally understand why you're doing this, and will be watching with interest! Twitter is only useful if it's usabie - and following 19,000 people makes it unusable, therefore less useful. What's really interesting is: is there a number of people you follow beyond which Twitter becomes unwieldy? I wonder what that magic number is?! Let us know if you find it!

over 6 years ago

Ciaran Norris

Ciaran Norris, Chief Digital Officer at Mindshare

Very interesting. I think I think the move should probably be applauded whilst at the same time possibly disagreeing with it.

I guess it comes down to what you're looking to use the @econsultancy profile for. If it's mainly as a content push tool, a la @guardiantech, then I'd suggest it might not be such a good idea. Whilst it will kill the spam bots (at least temporarily), it might also, as you suggest, annoy some people. And if they no longer see your tweets, that reduces your reach.

Then again, if you really want to use it to increase dialogue, blah, blah, blah, it probably makes sense. But isn't that what individual authors should use their own profiles for? I'd certainly be more likely to send an @ to you, or Jake, or Ashley, than I would to the econsultancy profile.

Either way, I'm fascinated to see what happens, and hope that you might find it in your heart to follow me :)

over 6 years ago


George Rosier, Product Manager at Spark New Zealand

I assume by 'subscribers' you mean paid ones? :)

over 6 years ago

Chris Lake

Chris Lake, CEO at Empirical Proof

Thanks for all of the feedback. So far we've lost 57 followers! Bon voyage!

@Rich - Innovative for sure, but I might have more trouble convincing my colleagues that yours is a good idea!

@beenglazier - not sure we're big or important enough to get on @biz's radar, but I will give Twitter the heads up. Good idea.

@Ciaran - hmmm, you're kinda right, as per usual. Although while you and I know one another, other folks don't know me and might direct tweets at @econsultancy rather than @lakey. Food for thought though. We'll see how it plays out. And you'll be re-followed as we'll re-follow all guest bloggers. Result!

@George Rosier - hey George... yes, 'subscribers' = paying members with access to our research, as opposed to free (bronze) member accounts.

I'll post an update with some observations in due course...

over 6 years ago

Adam Tudor

Adam Tudor, Senior Digital Marketing Manager at The Black Hole

Totally agree with Ciaran here - it really comes down to what you want to use the profile for.  I usually find engaging with individuals from a company to be more interesting than simply connecting with the company profile itself.  You can build a good rapport with someone, and you personally remember them, being able to catch up at conferences and suchlike.  With a corporate profile you don't usually know who you're talking to, and with the amount of content Econsultancy publish, it might seem better to simply use the profile as a news / info feed.  Either way, I don't think there's a particular right or wrong way to do it however - it's just down to personal preference.

over 6 years ago



Surely the big question is: why follow them all in the first place?  A bit short sighted?

over 6 years ago

Chris Lake

Chris Lake, CEO at Empirical Proof

@Graham - in hindsight yes, you're quite right. I guess we didn't realise how messy it would get. A lesson learned.

over 6 years ago


Rich Baker Digital Engagement

I'm surprised that you didn't stop the autofollow earlier. In the early days I can understand why you might - why wait until 19,000 before stopping?

Links to a recent post about buying twitter followers on my site - if you are interested its here http://bit.ly/6NunaZ

Raises the question though - when do you have too many followers? Is there a number? 

over 6 years ago



Sorry, but I disgree with the majority. And I don't buy into your lame WHY I AM UNFOLLOWING YOU....You, like many other orgs/cos/major personalities built your reputation not just on your content on twitter but also on the value of the content supplied by your followers. Someone said, "Why did you bother to amass such a following to begin with?" YOU: "Good question" Real  answer: To USE twitter to build your profile in order for you fatten your "paid" subscriber rolls.

Really, folks. At least be honest. You used your followers. Now that you've reached a critical mass of sorts for your subscription business, you can drop all but the paying and might-be-paying or high profile names that will draw attention to your *paid business*

Look about you at all the other thriving Twitter businesses that interact and enjoy the Twitter experience. Yes there are spammers and "irritants"- but there are means to deal wit these. 

You represent the worst of Twitter. I hope you decide to leave entirely and set up shop o n a medium more appropriate for a mere tool,like  FaceBook.

over 6 years ago

Ciaran Norris

Ciaran Norris, Chief Digital Officer at Mindshare

@jnc - I don't work for econsultancy (though I have provided guest blogs for them) and as such please don't take this as an official response to your comment, instead as that of someone who has been using the site for the best part of 5 years.

econsultancy was around, with a very succesful busines model (providing excellent content to its subscribers/readers/attendees at its events/people downloading their guides) before Twitter was even a glint in Ev's eyes (it started in 1999). And, as far as I understand it, it has been making money for most of this time (something Twitter hasn't really done yet). This is not a business built on Twitter - it's a business built on content & community.

I don't doubt that many of the people who work from econsultancy have taken inspiration from things they've found on Twitter, but who hasn't? That doesn't make them cynical or anything of the sort. It makes them intelligent & connected.

I'm guessing that you've never visited the site before and only did so because this story has presumably been retweeted into your sphere of reference. I suggest that you hang around a bit more and actually get a feel for what they offer before you start shooting off such extreme, and ill thought out, views.

over 6 years ago


Danny Whatmough

...and to add to Ciaran's point, I believe that Econsultancy has been very open in the past about the traffic (and conversions) it receives through Twitter. I seem to remember that it is not a vast amount in the grand scheme of things.

So I would guess that Econsultancy probably feels it can achieve more from Twitter by 'properly' engaging with it's audience rather than blanket following.

It's a really interesting experiment and, yet again, I appreciate their honest and openness...

over 6 years ago


Andy Beard

So what you are effectively saying is the biggest problem was DM spam... but you haven't yet discovered one of the many ways to proactively opt-out of automated DMs from services such as Socialtoo

I get maybe 2 automated DMs a week and I am following tons of people.

over 6 years ago

Chris Lake

Chris Lake, CEO at Empirical Proof

@Jinc - I understand why you've come to that conclusion, but it is misplaced. The fact is that the person who set up our Twitter account also set up an autofollow rule, and we never challenged it. Throughout 2009 I became increasingly uneasy with the rule and with hindsight, as a media brand, I wish we hadn't done it in the first place. 

We do use Twitter to push out our *free* content, and it helps us to see what works and what doesn't. People follow us and retweet our articles because they must find the content in some way valuable / useful. And we increased our investment in *free* blog content since joining Twitter as a company in 2008. 

Ultimately yes, some Twitter followers have subscribed to Econsultancy, but we didn't join Twitter - or autofollow people - in order to sell to people, but just to extend reach and participation, and to try to prove our worth.

Incidentally, our subscription business predated our activity on Twitter by six years, and hasn't yet reached a critical mass. In that sense, Twitter isn't make or break for our business.

@Andy - the DM spam is a noisefest, but all of the reasons mentioned above played a part in us choosing this route. I think, as a publisher, it makes sense for us to do it. I don't think it would work so well for an individual though. Anyway, if it backfires for whatever reason then I'll hold my hands up. We'll find out any which way. We used SocialToo for the autofollow rule, as I did to process the batch unfollow.

over 6 years ago


Duncan Birch

Why not just use tweetdeck and filter out the noise?

over 6 years ago



Love the "work off a clean slate" concept! It's definitely a bold and revolutionary move. I think that's the way to go with many serious users' accounts that are infiltrated by spammers and spamming messages.

For me, Twitter has been the ultimate resource-sharing and learning experience. I wouldn't have known as much as I do today about every topic under the sky of marketing and research disciplines has it not been for Twitter. It's not about the number of tweets or twitter followers, it's about knowledge empowerment and getting the right information at one's finger-tip.

over 6 years ago


Milo Yiannopoulos

Sorry, but this is disingenuous in the extreme and simply will not do.


over 6 years ago


Lance Wiggs

Well it worked - sort of.

I'd never heard of you guys, and now I have. Well done, you are getting the word out. 

Meanwhile you left unsaid that Twitter is a conversational, not a broadcast medium. It means getting involved with your followers, and being smart about who you follow back and having real conversations. That takes work and commitment, so it's a good move to start again and only follow those that you want to listen to.

The question remains - how many of those 19000 are real?

over 6 years ago


Anthony Sharot

I have to say that I support Econsutlancy's stance on this issue.

The biggest threat to Twitter is that it getting taken over by noise and spam, an issue exasperated by auto-following. If everybody was more selective that would probably help considerably.

Further, if what you tweet is actually relevant and interesting, you'll (probably) be re-followed anyway, and that link might carry more weight next time.

Sour grapes aside, it seems like a sensible move, as does redesigning the homepage. It's ironic that Econsutlancy has struggled with homepage designs more than most issues, perhaps due to the wide audience and range of services catered for.

The current Twitter-dominated design was presumably a desperate (but ultimately successful?) attempt to regain lost ground after the troubled site migration.

So, 'Long Live Econsultancy' for leading by example, even if does mean that they unfollow our Twitter account (@marketappeal) for a while.

over 6 years ago


Allen MacCannell

A serious Twitterer will look at the timeline of someone who unfollows them to see what might have been the reason for the unfollow.

First thing this morning I saw what Econsultancy did and my heart slightly sank (you have to be thick skinned on Twitter because anyone with 2000+ followers is going to lose one good one per week and this is only half the time because you tweeted something they found boring, irrelevant or didn't agree with - most of the time it is a glitch or that dreaded Tweepi program that seems to think my accounts are non-interactive).

Still, with Econsultancy I wondered why these guys didn't like my last few tweets about email subject line phrases that can get you banned as a spammer.

I wondered if the examples of phrases that can get your email address flagged as spam were picked up by a Twitter tool that thought I was Twitter spamming with those phrases.

But 5 seconds later I saw in their timeline that they did it to 19000 people and I did not unfollow back (mathematically, anyone following more than 2000 people needs to unfollow those who don't unfollow back or Twitter will not let them follow new people and grow).

Notice that I am making the mostly correct assumption that a serious Twitterer will KNOW, almost immediately, that the unfollow happened.

In that respect she or he shares a lot with spammers, who automate an immediate unfollow of those who unfollow them.

Some points:

1) Please don't expect people to publicly grovel for you to take them back by saying "Please follow me back" or "I Subscribe now Follow Me Back Dammit". We not only have our pride, but we have our branding and content to consider. A Twitter timeline at 9AM EST is like a freshly printed newspaper. Serious Twitters care about how that newspaper reads to others. All someone should have to do is RT you or write to you about anything to show their interactivity. If your unfollow software cannot automatically refollow everyone who does this, it is trash.

2) I totally agree about DMs. I wish there was a flush tool for those that say "thank you" in them or at least "thank you for the follow" or "Thank you for follow" with variations of that outrageous nonsense. Some tools flush all DMs that have a link, which can be a good idea except the Validation DMs have those and one must be on the lookout for validation DMs.

3) I want to reiiterate that if your unfollow tool doesn't have a mechanism for refollowing those who have mentioned you, the tool is a piece of garbage and you probably shouldn't have used it.

We won't be doing something so drastic but it will be interesting to see what happens.

Our policy is to block followers whose last tweet was spam as we manually follow new followers back. If we see spam in our timeline, we will check the timeline of the spammer. If they say something interesting for every 4 spam tweets, I actually do not unfollow or block, but enough spammers fail to say anything interesting so I block about 10 accounts per day.

over 6 years ago

Ciaran Norris

Ciaran Norris, Chief Digital Officer at Mindshare

Wow. Mr Teacup really is getting to know Mrs Storm, isn't he?

@milo - read your post, and I'm afraid it's not worth a full response, other than to say that your implication that econsultancy somehow spammed Twitter is laughable.

@allen - I'm afraid that when I hear people talk about 'serious' Twitter users, I get a little nervous, just like people who litter their profile bio with phrases like guru. I've been using Twitter, reasonably seriously, since 2007, and yet I wouldn't have a bloody clue if someone unfollowed me, just as I've given up trying to keep track of who follows me. If it's interesting, I'll follow. And I really don't think that they're expecting anyone to grovel to be refollowed. Except for me.

I rather feel that a few people need to put this into context and maybe take a breath.

over 6 years ago


Andrew Liddell, Ecommerce Business MGR at Personal

Handbags anyone? 

over 6 years ago



I have read somewhere on your blog maybe a post on 'how to use twitter'.
And I remember reading that one should follow all their followers.
I didn't think it made sense at all, and it looks like you are giving me reason.

I don't follow you on twitter, but I have subscribed to your posts and I read them with a lot of interest.

over 6 years ago

Amy Thibodeau

Amy Thibodeau, Marketing Executive at Box UK

This is a great debate.

I don't necessary believe that there is one right way and one wrong way to engage in social media so although I don't agree with what Econsultancy has done, I am interested in the results.

The biggest issue that I have with this is that I believe Twitter is about relationships and relationships are a two way street. I am not interested in people who use social media to talk at me, but rather to talk with me and I believe that the basis of this conversation is a relationship - you follow me, I follow you. If I'm not interested in what someone has to say or if I think they are spam, I don't follow them back because I don't want the relationship. 

Econsultancy is a leader in digital marketing and as someone who works in the field, again, I think good digital marketing is most often about building relationships, community and engagement. As such it surprises me that you would make the decision to only follow subscribers - it seems short sighted, especially if you want to reach people outside of the scope of your membership. But you've got people talking so, depending on your perspective, maybe you've achieved what you were after.

I love Twitter, but in addition to the spammers, perhaps my greatest disappointment is that I see it being taken over by celebrities and celebrity wanna-be's who just see it as another soap box to talk at people as opposed to seizing the opportunity to really engage.

I'm sure you will eventually be following me back because I am a paying subscriber. In the meantime I have unfollowed you as I don't think you've been a good citizen in 'my' portion of the online community.

You guys should really think about holding a public debate on this though - there are some interesting thoughts here. :)

over 6 years ago

Ciaran Norris

Ciaran Norris, Chief Digital Officer at Mindshare

@amy - you make some very interesting points. I definitely agree that there aren't really any right or wrong ways, just differences of opinion.

I may have read this wrong, but I don't think econsultancy have said that they will only follow subscribers, rather that they will automatically refollow subscribers, and build the rest of the list organically, based on who they find interesting.

I also agree that Twitter works best when it's based on dialogue, but disagree that this means their decision to unfollow was a bad one. My understanding is that they've done this for precisely the reason that they can't maintain a dialogue with so many people, and this will enable them to make better use of the service.

Either way, it's definitely an interesting move and one which we'll all be watching closely.

over 6 years ago

Chris Hyland

Chris Hyland, Client Director at 4Ps Marketing

Commendable, brave, questionable (insert your stance here)! Either way its  created a  PR buzz... I say good luck to you!

Look forward to hearing the results in a few months time??

over 6 years ago



IMHO I believe this was a pretty reasonable move, and I am only surprised it didnt come sooner. Those who interact with econsultancy would / or should continue, after all if its just the vanity of being followed that spurs followers, then its not really an honest interaction is it? I dont follow everybody that talks to me, and with over 2K followers AND and active user since 2007 I can understand the reasons.

over 6 years ago

Henry Elliss

Henry Elliss, Digital Marketing Director at Tamar

As I blogged on here last year, I don't see any reason why anyone should feel obliged to follow anyone else - so long as you're responding to @messages and replies, what difference does it make? With all the new features such as Twitter lists, you could still be following 19,000 people (via lists) and they'd not be able to DM you or any of the other "benefits" of following - but would they still feel hurt? 

Having said that, I'd LOVE you to follow me back, ha ha ha

over 6 years ago


Lisa Halabi

I love this idea of starting afresh. I'm interested to see what happens with this little experiment.  It reminds me of clearing out unused clothes from your wardbrode - makes finding something suitable much easier.

over 6 years ago



"It is impractical to follow 19,000 people."

That is why one uses Tweetdeck or Seeismic to follow people by putting them into proper groups like Twrash, $ubscribers, Gurus, Hollywood..

over 6 years ago

Tony Thornby

Tony Thornby, Senior Internet Consultant at Living Streams (Internet) Consultancy

Direct conversation can only take place in Twitter if there is reciprocal following.  So it's very egotistical to build a position where you have masses more followers than you are following - and just as bad to create such a position by mass unfollowing.

If you don't want to build relationship with someone or they spam you - they can always be blocked.

You have offered no explanation why having balanced following and follower numbers look spammy.

Personally the practice that I hate the most is people who follow, wait to be followed-back and then unfollow.  Not quite what econsultancy has done - but very close to it.

Well mannered behaviour would have been to identify "media folks, friendly guru types and various industry people" as you went along". To paraphrase a well known phrase, I am not an experiment, I am a human being.

over 6 years ago


Conrad Swailes

Social Media has many different places for different types of conversations. Choosing where you have certain types of conversations is key. Its everyones choice to do it how they want so nobody is wrong. Twitter for me is a place to meet people informally and chat about anything including work, London, Rugby or whatever. Like an open space full of interesting people. If i really want to talk serious or about specifics this isnt the place for it. This is an open space not a closed community. This is the beauty about it in my opinion. I still enjoy twitter and talk frequently and even meet people for coffee from it. I welcome anyone who wants to follow and chat and has something interesting to say. I didnt even notice you unfollowed me but welcome you to follow me again ! Im not offended honest ! Good luck with your new account ! Any digital marketing or social media graduates out their who want to tweet about careers with me you know where i am ! 

over 6 years ago


Kerala Tour Packages

I really love this idea . I'm very much interested to see what happens with this little experiment.  thanks.....

about 6 years ago


Clark Mackey

Well, it has been almost a year since this post went up and you've 29,047 followers on Twitter as of 12/22/2010.  Would you mind updating this post (or the comments) with more about how the experiment evolved during last year? Did it work as linkbait? As PR stunt? As practical relationship builder? How quickly did you get back to 19,000 followers? Just curious - I'm seeing this post for the first time.  I guess that makes it a win as linkbait.

almost 6 years ago



You guys are ahead of the times! At the end of 2010 Google confirmed they listen to social media signals, and having a bunch of junk followers can damage your rankings... So well done for predicting the future :)

@Clark - I'd be interested on this response also.


over 5 years ago

Pete Austin

Pete Austin, CINO at Fresh Relevance

Good move. How about running an online contest (for glory not prizes) to guess the number of rapid unfollowers? My entry is 67% quit within a week.

over 1 year ago

Graham Charlton

Graham Charlton, Editor in Chief at ClickZ Global

Hi Pete, this post is from a while back. The experiment worked, as we have more than 200k followers now, and it's much easier to manage. No idea how many unfollowed at the time, but I think we made the right decision.

over 1 year ago

Save or Cancel

Enjoying this article?

Get more just like this, delivered to your inbox.

Keep up to date with the latest analysis, inspiration and learning from the Econsultancy blog with our free Daily Pulse newsletter. Each weekday, you ll receive a hand-picked digest of the latest and greatest articles, as well as snippets of new market data, best practice guides and trends research.