More than half of Hillary's 3.6m twitter followers are fake or inactive accounts

[LittleBlue]

Although Hillary Clinton boasts a robust 3.6 million Twitter followers, not even a vast right-wing conspiracy would be able to interact with 2 million of them.

According to two popular online measuring tools, no more than 44 per cent of her Twitter fan base consists of real people who are active in using the social media platform. And at least 15 per cent – more than 544,000 – are completely fake.

StatusPeople.com, the oldest publicly available Twitter-auditing tool, reports that 44 per cent of the former secretary of state's followers are 'good'; 15 per cent are 'fake'; and 41 per cent are 'inactive,' meaning that they never tweet or reply to any tweets.

When she was secretary of state, her agency paid $630,000 to bulk up its Facebook likes, but pledged to stop after she left

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3038621/More-2-MILLION-Hillary-Clinton-s-Twitter-followers-fake-never-tweet.html#ixzz3XK08Klo2


Is this true?

[JustAnotherGen]

1. I follow her

And I'm rel.

[bravenak]

68. Me too.

[notadmblnd]

2. So what if it is? I imagine she in not alone in those statistics

I have a twitter acct. I don't use it. Doesn't mean I won't never use it. Will I follow Hillary if I do decide to use it? I don't know

[NYC_SKP]

3. Hillary and Fake in the same sentence? No Way!

I think the vast RW conspiracy has jumped the shark and thrown her under the bus on this one.

Fake Tweets???

Nah Ahhh!!!

[VanillaRhapsody]

29. Boy you believed THAT bullshit in a skinny minute didn't you.....no anti hillary screed you won't!

and even if true...even if every damn one of them were fake....what difference would THAT make when she consistently has a 75% approval rating among Democrats....the real numbers you should be concerned about by the way

[NYC_SKP]

39. There is NOTHING fake about my gal, Hillary!

She is the real deal!

[VanillaRhapsody]

42. And we know YOU believe anything ever said about the woman without even a second thought!

....nuff said!

[840high]

59. Who is "WE"?

[VanillaRhapsody]

63. Everyone who reads it....

[Autumn]

69. The Imperial WE

As in We are not amused

[840high]

107. I'm not "we".

[Autumn]

119. We are us

back at you

[840high]

58. Snort. heehee

[merrily]

105. I saw a post here about how many followers she had within minutes of announcing.

First thing I thought of.

http://gawker.com/5826960/update-only-92-of-newt-gingrichs-twitter-followers-are-fake

No biggie in the scheme of things, but reinforces what people who are not her fans already think of her.

[Newsjock]

4. About the same percentages as for all of Twitter

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2339684/twitter-has-almost-430-million-inactive-users (2014)

ALMOST HALF of Twitter's 974 million registered users have never sent a single tweet, raising doubts as to the firm's claims about its number of active users.

http://www.businessinsider.com/5-of-twitter-monthly-active-users-are-fake-2013-10 (2013)

According to Twitter's S-1 filing this afternoon, we see that the company estimates that less than 5% of its monthly active users are fake.

So, yet again, the Daily Fail is pumping misleading clickbait.

[OKNancy]

5. Thanks for posting... additionally a lot of those monitors are unreliable

I ran one on my twitter and it was way off.

[snooper2]

15. Just 4 per cent of President Barack Obama's Twitter followers, by comparison, are considered fake.

[sufrommich]

20. That was after staffers cleaned it up:

Just 4 per cent of President Barack Obama's Twitter followers, by comparison, are considered fake.

The White House worked overtime to purge most of them after a September 2013 report found that more than half of his followers didn't really exist.

Michelle Obama's Twitter audience is 25 per cent fake, according to StatusPeople, along with 21 per cent of Vice President Joe Biden's.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3038621/More-2-MILLION-Hillary-Clinton-s-Twitter-followers-fake-never-tweet.html#ixzz3XK7Ne1Nv

[hrmjustin]

62. Not according to twitter audit.

https://www.twitteraudit.com/barackobama

[Blue_Adept]

123. Pretty much

Just ran some of the checker apps on my followers (5200) and it claims 13% are fake and 41% overall are inactive. Inactive meant no tweeting on their part for 100 days I think.

I know way too many people who never tweet and just use it to get notifications of various services they follow and to just use a link aggregation tools. So it's one of those nuanced kinds of things to say half aren't real, rather that it's people can't understand the different uses of services like this.

[JaneyVee]

6. There's nothing you can do about it, bots follow.

Whatever your twitter follower number is, minus half. Its a real problem that twitter either can't address or won't address. They are usually spam bots. The more famous, the more bots.

[arcane1]

17. You can also buy Twitter followers in bulk. That's what the Romney campaign did n/t

[JaneyVee]

51. I doubt Hillary would buy or needs to buy followers, besides...

Everyone is onto that scheme and would be exposed.

[bunnies]

7. Im sure they'll be just as much outrage & disgust as when Romney did it.

Any moment now.

[arcane1]

19. I remember DU being skeptical at first, then deciding it's an OK thing to do.

[bunnies]

21. Oh yeah. There were all those threads defending Mitt!

I remember now!!

[JaneyVee]

53. Except there's no proof. You're really putting on a cape for Romney?

Very telling.

[bunnies]

71. Yeah. Thats what Im doing.

[LittleBlue]

98. That was exactly the opposite point of that post. Reread it. nt

[seabeyond]

30. and it was such a big deal, i do not remember ever seeing it on du. go figure. nt

[kelly1mm]

52. If you put "Romney bought twitter" into the google search of DU box at the top of the screen

you get pages and pages of threads about it back in late July, early August 2012.

DU was quite critical in it's response.

[seabeyond]

57. no du was not. go into the threads. half had no more than 10 responses. then almost all the rest

under 20 responses. one thread made it to 60 responses.

that is really a poor showing. so people kept putting it out there, and it kept sinking.

[kelly1mm]

72. I guess we have different personal definitions of what DU being critical is. You say we were not

(and I believe you think that) and I believe we were critical.

However, I think it would be safe to assume that DU will not be critical if Senator Clinton if it turns out her campaign bought twitter followers. I would go so far as to say that I am quite certain that some who ridiculed Romney for buying twitter followers in 2012 will be defending Clinton.

[seabeyond]

73. when you have ten threads half with no more than 10 posts, and most of the rest under 20, that is

a dead subject that continued to sink.

[kelly1mm]

75. Whatever you say. I see many threads with lots of upvotes/coments ridiculing Romney. Just because

it does not get to the level of breastfeeding at Olive Garden, pitt bull dog, or holding doors open for certain genders threads does not mean it was not discussed.

Since you obviously read some of the treads in your research (and thanks for that), do you think that if it is shown that the Clinton campaign bought twitter followers that the same ridicule would be appropriate? If it would be appropriate, do you think she will be ridiculed like Romney was?

[seabeyond]

78. ha... it does not even reach the level of, i made a sandwich for lunch.

i wasnt interested in it way back when, since i started with saying i never saw it on du. i looked at the threads using your search suggestion and looked at how small and uninterested those threads were.

i had no interest in it then, like i have no interest in clinton doing it, whatever it is.

hence, me showing little to no interest in the subject with this subthread.

[kelly1mm]

79. Awesome. Thanks for your reply. nt

[bunnies]

70. huh

Not sure how you missed it.

Heres one. http://www.democraticunderground.com/125164618

[seabeyond]

74. ya,..... all of ten posters. wow, du really worked up over that.

[bunnies]

84. it wasnt the only thread.

I cant believe youre picking this fight.

[seabeyond]

85. no, it wasnt. i did a search. there were a number of threads. as i said. at least half had under 10

posts. the other half were under 20 posters. the biggest thread on the subject hit 60. that is nothing on du and certainly nothing if we are all worked up about it as you and others suggested.

that suggest the opposite. that people were not all that interested and the threads kept sinking, with disinterest.

[bunnies]

87. It wasnt that anyone was all worked up.

It was that he was ridiculed for doing for doing it. Meanwhile, Hillary is excused.

Currently a thread about Hillarys 404 donald duck page has more than 70 recs. Obviously *thats* what interests people. Oh and burrito bowls.

[seabeyond]

90. and there are plenty of people ridiculing hillary, obvious in this thread. mostly.

du did not care about romney and they do not care about hillary.

and i do not even know what you are talking about donald duck comment. probably another thread i am not paying attention to. i am spending way too much of my time, talking about stuff i do not care about.

[bunnies]

95. earlg took the time to make a post about it.

So yeah, DU cared. I too am spending way too much time on garbage. Tis the season I guess.

[seabeyond]

97. and one of his very few fails. it seems there is a need to make it much bigger than what it was...

so party on, about the hypocrisy.

betcha hillary gets as much if not more criticism from her fellow dems, then all the posters in all the threads of romney, combined.

[bunnies]

102. As well she should.

Romney wasnt channeling populist liberals for the purpose of swindling the left. Damn right she deserves more criticism from the liberals HER party has so much disdain for. Sorry we're not quick enough to toe the line.

[seabeyond]

111. really, whatever.

i am not a hillary supporter but i am sure tired of the garbage part of the accusations toward her.

anyway

nite

[demmiblue]

86. And this one posted as the Pic Of The Moment by EarlG:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/101743567

Selective memory or absence from DU, I guess.

[bunnies]

89. No No NO!

Nobody cared! Thats a figment of your imagination. Lay off the shrooms.

[seabeyond]

94. all of 21 people, probably less than making a stink about hillary. nt

[seabeyond]

92. omg... you would think an earlg picture would get over a 100, tons of rec and even that... 21 posts

that is my point. and no. no selective memory. i did not see it at the time, cause i wasnt interested. i did a search as a suggestion by a poster and looking at the threads, they are low count. i have been accurate. this being one of the ones i saw with a mere.... 21 posters. sank and died.

[LittleBlue]

101. Mentioned many times

Have fun reading these
https://www.google.com/search?q=democraticunderground+romney+fake+twitter+accounts&oq=democraticunderground+romney+fake+twitter+accounts&aqs=chrome..69i57.18933j0j4&client=tablet-android-samsung&sourceid=chrome-mobile&espv=1&ie=UTF-8

[seabeyond]

132. do you people not read? how many posts have i stated many OPs, few posts in each of these MANY

OPs cause there is a LACK of interest that romney did this.

that is all i have said from the start.

and LOOK..... ONE poster in that thread. snooze fest.

am i clear yet. or some one gonna make a point with another thread with TWO posters in it.

it is like there were some that were trying to make it a big deal. like some are trying to make it a big deal with hillary.

and it was NOT A FUGGIN BIG DEAL.

can you argue THAT

instead of bring me the many threads, with few posters and saying.... see see see

[LittleBlue]

99. Well well well

You all came with links


Problematic!

[demmiblue]

100. I was correcting a falsehood.

You, on the other hand, are quite obvious.

[upaloopa]

8. How did Hillary set up those fake accounts?

I thought individuals set up their own accounts. How did she inactivate 41% of them? Does she have a little button on her desk that she pushes when she wants to inactivate you?
I am no twitter user so I don't know.
And how does she keep the others active?
How much time in her day does she spend keeping track on her twitter followers?

[arcane1]

12. There are groups that create the accounts and sell them in bulk.

They do it for Facebook too. It's unlikely she herself is out there doing it.

[VanillaRhapsody]

31. Yeah they probably think she created everyone of them herself!!!!!

all night long creating twitter accounts and then following herself!!!!!

[arcane1]

35. Anyone who thinks that is beyond my limited ability to help them

[VanillaRhapsody]

40. Mine too....

those folks usually just evoke slack-jawwed stares from me!

[FSogol]

64. That's why she announced so late, she was busy creating a million twitter accounts.

[VanillaRhapsody]

65. LMFAO!!!!

DUZY!!!!!

[sufrommich]

41. Yep, unless the people buying this also

believe that both Michelle Obama and Joe Biden buy them as the same article claims their numbers are inflated too.

[arcane1]

44. Agreed. I doubt if any of them manage their Twitter accounts themselves.

[LittleBlue]

13. I recall reading that certain groups set them up and sell them in bulk

If someone wants to increase their profile, follows and likes can be bought

[arcane1]

9. It's not unusual, so it's certainly possible.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. This thread make me a little blue.

[LittleBlue]

14. Oh no you dint

Below the belt, sir

[DemocratSinceBirth]

18. Well, you can take some good natured ribbing...

And I will remember that.

[KittyWampus]

11. #1. DOES Hillary Clinton boast about 3.6 million Twitter followers?

#2. 41 % don't tweet or reply but follow others on Twitter. So f*cking what?

#3. the DailyMail is a rightwing rag and that you are posting from it says a lot about you.

[former9thward]

34. Depends on what you define as "boast".

She certainly points out how many followers she has.

https://twitter.com/hillaryclinton

When you have more Facebook fans in Baghdad than any place else something is suspicious.

Clinton is most popular with young Iraqis and Texans on Facebook

Hillary Clinton’s Facebook pages have an unexpected fan base. At least 7 percent of Clinton’s Facebook fans list their hometown as Baghdad, way more than any other city in the world, including in the United States.

Vocativ’s exclusive analysis of Clinton’s Facebook fan statistics yielded a number of surprises. Despite her reputation as an urban Democrat favored by liberal elites, Iraqis and southerners are more likely to be a Facebook fan of Hillary than people living on America’s coasts. And the Democratic candidate for president has one of her largest followings in the great red-state of Texas.

While Chicago and New York City, both with 4 per cent of fans, round out the top three cities for Hillary’s Facebook base, Texas’ four major centers—Houston (3 percent), Dallas (3 percent), Austin (2 percent) and San Antonio (2 percent)—contain more of her Facebook supporters. Los Angeles with 3 percent of her fans, and Philadelphia and Atlanta, each with 2 percent, round out the Top 10 cities for Facebook fans of Hillary.

http://www.vocativ.com/usa/us-politics/hillary-has-more-facebook-fans-in-baghdad-than-any-us-city/

[CreekDog]

46. So what?

So what if some percentage of those who "like" her facebook pages or follow her on Twitter are from here or there?

Everyone on Twitter who has any number of followers has some number of spam or fake followers.

Are you saying she should screen all people and accounts who like her page or follow her on Twitter?

Probably not, your main intention is not to have her do something different but to make it seem like nothing she does will be good enough for you. So thank you for your concern.

[former9thward]

54. I have no concern what so ever.

I don't fawn over people based on the number of followers or likes they have.

But if you state you have millions of followers don't complain if someone checks that.

[dsc]

48. The Bagdad thing is admittedly wierd but the texas cities surely aren't

Houston is the fourth largest US city and all but Austin are in the top ten cities in the country. All four of the Texas cities are liberal bastions in that conservative state with Austin being one of the most liberal cities in the country. It certainly isn't surprising that those cities are in her top ten.

[gratuitous]

16. Twittergate!

Fox has her this time for sure! Unless those meddling kids foil them again.

[AtomicKitten]

22. The Clinton campaign redux epic faceplant already in progress.

[NYC_SKP]

25. ROFL!

[VanillaRhapsody]

32. AS IF!

indeed....

[Politicalboi]

23. BFD!

That means for MOST if not all candidates are just as friendless. We need our government to run sites like gofundme to pick their choice of candidates. NO OUTSIDE money. The one with the best ideas and can pass an essay test on government and it's function and how laws are written and passed, which would disqualify most of the GOP, should be able to run. We'd at least have 47 open seats for those who needed the Iranian government to tell them what our Constitution says.

[TheCowsCameHome]

24. Trey Gowdy will be issuing subpoenas shortly.

[Action_Patrol]

26. Who gives a shit?

[Thinkingabout]

27. Is this source some of the same which writes the tabloids?

[emulatorloo]

81. Yes, is a rightwing rag

[Thinkingabout]

83. Thought so.

[VanillaRhapsody]

28. She has 75% approval ratings among Democrats.....what do YOU think?

[Jester Messiah]

38. Is that with or without sock puppets? [nt]

[VanillaRhapsody]

114. Sock puppets in polls?

and it bookie betting odds as well?

I suppose you are one of those that thinks she stayed up late nights creating fake twitter accounts one by one to follow herself too!

[Jester Messiah]

117. Depends on how the polls are conducted.

Also, you can buy herds of zombie twitter accounts pre-made. Besides, she would have had some poor staffer do it.

[VanillaRhapsody]

118. how about multiple polls with the SAME results???

Oh she had some staffer make up millions of twitter accounts...

[Jester Messiah]

124. Seriously, you can buy them in bulk.

Why is this so far-fetched to you? Here, go educate yourself.

http://buy1000followers.co/

[leftynyc]

120. Is there any particular reason

you spout off right wing talking points on DU?

[Jester Messiah]

125. It's actually left-wing talking points, but I can see why you'd be confused. [nt]

[BlueCaliDem]

129. The fact that average Democrats can't tell the difference, should worry you.

I mean, if you're as ethically strong of a Left-winger as you claim to be.

[Jester Messiah]

131. It worries me a great deal.

Though I would classify myself as anti-corporate, anti-theist, pro-equality, and therefore very much anti-Republican.

[sufrommich]

122. Do you think Michelle Obama and joe Biden did the same? nt

[Jester Messiah]

127. Michelle no, Joe maybe. Michelle hasn't run for anything.

Anyone who has a campaign with a "social media coordinator" has probably invested in at least a few hundred bulk followers. It's just covering your bases, poli-sci 101 in the modern age.

[jberryhill]

113. Yeah, but half of them are fake democrats

[VanillaRhapsody]

115. Fake Democrats? Hmmm perhaps you need to consider that that half if that were the case

and lets just "allow that to pass as fact"....lets follow your premise to its obvious conclusion. If these folks exist in those numbers...then they far outnumber the Far Left....I think you understand what that means about your theory about them being "Fake Democrats" right? (that is if you truly believe what you just said that is)

[jberryhill]

116. Lol

[KamaAina]

33. So now we have Twittergate to go along with Emailgate?

[Jester Messiah]

36. All part of the machine.

It's just a box you check as you get a campaign rolling. I think it's the second or third one under "social media presence." I think we're going to see a campaign from HRC that is very much "by the numbers."

[gollygee]

37. There are lots of fake and inactive Twitter accounts

Another silly thread about Clinton.

[TerrapinFlyer]

43. TwitterGhazi!

someone had to say it.

[pnwmom]

45. Garbage. They're not fake if they're "inactive." They simply prefer to read tweets and not reply. n/

[leftofcool]

47. Twittergate.....FacebookGawzi.........

Who gives a shit?

[Raine1967]

49. I follow her.

I'm not as active on twitter as I once was, but I use it to get information.

[hrmjustin]

50. Half of the presidents followers are fake.

https://www.twitteraudit.com/barackobama

[alcibiades_mystery]

55. Part of the real pleasure of watching Ms. Clinton be sworn in will be the apoplexy of the

hater crowd.

Some will come out as full-fledged trolls, cursing all the way.

Some will pledge to give up on politics, retreating into their pathetic shells.

Others will gripe and "hold feet to fire" or some such, basically continuing on with their usual idiocies.

It's gonna be so fucking entertaining.

[madfloridian]

56. She would need a full-time person just to block the fake accounts.

It's easy to buy twitter followers, but most I know block them immediately.
Not much she can do without using a twitter service or blocking them full time.

[krishnarama]

60. I heard 500,000 Facebook followers.

I wonder how many of that was "bought" by the Clinton campaign - in total honesty?

[Rex]

61. Oh yeah twitter! Where would we be without that social gem!

[madfloridian]

67. I love Twitter.

There is more up to date news and opinion there than here. You can read and post and avoid arguments and attacks unless you just want to join in. Wider views, not as much danger of being called names.

[cyberswede]

66. "...never tweet or reply to any tweets" - so?

I have a Twitter account like that. I follow a bunch of people & read it every day - I'm not "inactive."

I'm interested to learn what constitutes "fake" and how that's determined.

[pnwmom]

91. Exactly. Just because you don't make your own tweets doesn't mean you are any less real.

It's a strange way to define "inactive."

[onenote]

77. Will you work this hard to discredit the Republican nominee?

[Bobbie Jo]

82. Don't count on it. nt

[Oilwellian]

80. We know she planted fake questions in the Iowa audience

during the 2008 campaign. It would be no surprise if she also has fake followers on Twitter.

[pnwmom]

88. The large majority are "inactive" -- meaning people like me. People who follow other people's tweets

but don't tweet their own are counted as inactive.

So what? That doesn't make them fake. They could still be interested in following Hillary, even if they're not tweeting back.

[Beacool]

93. It hasn't been a week yet and I'm already sick of this campaign season.

One inane post after the other. This is the kind of stuff one can read in any RW site. BTW, ever read the comment section of DM? It's a RW rag.

There's not one reason for Hillary supporters to keep posting here. It's a waste of valuable time.

[Kingofalldems]

96. So what should we do now LittleBlue?

Should Hillary just drop out because of an article in the right wing Daily Mail?

[LittleBlue]

112. What you do is up to you. nt

[Novara]

103. Good God.

Who the fuck cares? Will twitter make a damn bit of difference in choosing the next president?

Jesus.

[whatchamacallit]

104. The making of a legend n/t

[merrily]

106. Dunno if it's true or not, but it's been done before.

http://gawker.com/5826960/update-only-92-of-newt-gingrichs-twitter-followers-are-fake

[riversedge]

108. This whole article is about dissing Democrats--no Republicans mentions and Daily went to Iowa today.

to flush out some more shit. I listened to Hillary's forum today--it was good--very informative. Good questions.


Daily Mail Online visited Kirkwood Community College on Monday, the site of the event, and heard from students that the former first lady is a 'control freak' who may be pursuing legal status for illegal immigrants because the Democratic Party needs a new pool of loyal voters.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3038621/More-2-MILLION-Hillary-Clinton-s-Twitter-followers-fake-never-tweet.html#ixzz3XLEoeZif
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[ismnotwasm]

109. The Daily Mail?

Oh wow man.

[jberryhill]

110. Next?

That one doesn't move me.

Try another one.

[leftynyc]

121. Did you really think

posting a bullshit story from a right wing rag was going to change anyone's mind? Think again.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

126. +1

[obnoxiousdrunk]

130. ++1.

[Turbineguy]

128. That's OK

more than two-thirds of republicans are idiots.

[dhill926]

133. IMPEACH!?1!!

Too soon?

[LanternWaste]

134. So will this bit of thrown mayo stick to the wall? If not, on to another outrage...

So will this bit of thrown mayo stick to the wall? If not, on to another creative and righteous outrage... and quickly now, before rational thought, consistency and context sets in.

[NCTraveler]

135. Email and logogate were more impressive.

The mental gymnastics necessary for this one aren't even score worthy. Probably why right wingers think there is logic to it as far as being a negative on Clinton.

[L0oniX]

136. Fake followers? Wow whodathunkit. Are you saying that fake followers identify with Hillary?

If you are then of course I agree.