Justin-BieberAs any seasoned Tweeter knows, success it isn't about how many followers you have, it's about reach.

Recent figures may put Lady Gaga at the top of the tweeting pile, but teen-pop bubblegum sensation Justin Bieber may well have the edge when it comes to actual influence.

Not to mention a mischievous streak that could cost one tech savvy super fan dearly.

Social media itself has long been trumpeted as a democracy, but as rules are increasingly codified, it's fast becoming apparent that on Twitter some users are more equal than others.

Finding a powerful influencer is the holy grail for most marketers but if it isn't used properly then that same influence can cause an incredible amount of damage, as witnessed when 15 year old Bieber fan Kevin Kristopik recently decided to hack into a Twitter account belonging to a personal friend of Bieber and 'liberate' the singer's personal phone number.

Apparently Bieber decided not to take this on the chin, instead choosing to tweet Kristopik's own number to 4,781,081 followers, along with the message "everyone and anyone call me, or text".

The result?

Over 26,000 calls and messages (and associated data charges) to Kristopik's phone.

While the tweet itself was soon deleted (presumably when Justin's parents/management discovered it), the damage was done, and Kristopik faces a skyrocketing bill as his digits continue to be retweeted and the calls continue.

Bieber himself has been alternately praised and vilified for his actions.

On one hand this raises the issue of personal privacy, and just how much of it a star like Bieber is entitled to expect, but also neatly highlights the spectre of influence.

When dealing with celebrities such as Bieber, can marketers expect consistent professionalism, or is it time we realised we're effectively dealing with off-message broadcasters who may also represent a conflict of interest?

Bieber may be right to take offense at Kristopik’s actions and could of course still step in and pay the bill, passing the incident off as a retaliatory prank. If he or his representatives refuse to do so however, then this could be seen as bullying and will certainly harm the tween sensation's butter-wouldn't-melt image.

Kristopik himself has since apologised and his Twitter account has been deleted.

Matt Owen

Published 24 August, 2010 by Matt Owen

Matt Owen is a marketing consultant based in London. He was previously Head of Social at Econsultancy and currently runs Atomise Marketing. Opinions expressed are author's own.

204 more posts from this author

You might be interested in

Comments (2)


Mike McDonald

Is it a misuse of celebrity influence? Maybe. But I can't really say I feel bad for this Kristopik kid. As much as it's not right for anyone in a position of celebrity to use that power to get revenge, it would seem more improper for said celebrity to have to compensate Kristopik for the flood of calls and messages. Let's not forget that Kristopik was trying to do something illegal himself and violated Bieber's privacy and personal information. 

almost 8 years ago



I do not like that spoiled child, however he fought back with the same weapons, must admire a little. However, the conclusion? Do not mess with celebrities! :)

almost 8 years 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 Digital Pulse newsletter. You will 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.