Twitter is full of SPAM and they know it!
Last Update: April 06, 2012
I use Twitter, but I use it with a purpose. Same with everyone that uses Twitter.
However, a good deal of Twitter users are fake and have been created for the purpose of spamming. That is right, approximately 60% of all traffic on twitter is spam, and Twitter is fed up.
They have recently filed a lawsuit against FIVE different entities that are participating in the facilitation of spam. This includes three Twitter automated companies:
- TweetAttacks
- TweetAdder
- TweetBuddy
And has specific two individuals:
- James Lucero
- Garland Harris
If you are involved with any of these companies, now is a good time to back off. Your spam is being watch and there are likely going to be "flow through" reprecussions to the users utilizing these services to spam Twitter.
To me, this is no surprise...
Being relatively active in twitter for the last 3 months (after "playing" with it for some time), I have found that most people on there are promoting, not engaging or interacting. I would say close to 95% of people are using Twitter wrong...it is very evident when you look at someone with 100,000 followers, yet they can't get a single person to engage on their conversation.
People enter the Twitterspehere with selfish intentions, intentions that lead to little engagement and little benefit. If you are planning on making a presence in twitter, you need to consider this. If you are not being real, not offering any value, and are just posting links, good luck ever getting people to engage or care when you have something important to say. It simply won't happen!
If Twitter wins this case, it is going to send a message to people posting automated junk in Twitter, you are being watched and you are going to be held liable for your actions. Twitter is on to you! Will be interesting to see how this case pans out...
What are your thoughts?
Join the Discussion
BIS
Premium
Hi Kyle - Twitter is a typical reflection of social interaction that you see in social networks and online forums as well as what we experience off line in our day to day work, business and social lives.
You see:-
1. Users who give the impression they are interacting but cleverly bring everything back to themselves.
2. Users who appear to sit back and just observe what goes on.
3. Users who only speak to people in their 'goup' - could be friends, family, profession, work colleagues, product types ... and even withint these groups there are even smaller groups.
4.Users who never interact but simply promote - and often the content is very good.
5.Users who never interact and promote rubbish (though this could be subjective)
6. Users who want to be silly and controversial
7. Users who are trolls and are giving many internet users a bad name
8. Users who want to grow their brand but also genuinely want to share and will share not just their own stuff but will share any good stuff.
9 Users who just use it for social chatting about anything and having fun
10 Users who use it to interact with their customers
These are just a few examples and users may be a combination of these or use it in a way I haven't mentioned
So it's not really surprising that Twitter has such problems. Many people start to use it and don't understand how to use it to its best effect and are therefore disappointed.
I have used Twitter for nearly 2 years (and I have trained others to use Twitter) so I know it can work and be used well - but like all one's endavours you have to be realistic and understand what you're working with.
I'm not sure that I would agree with you that '95% use it wrong' because people use it for different reasons and I don't think it's that easy to quantify
It will be interesting to see the result of the court cases but whatever the outcome, I'm not really expecting a revolution in the way Twitter is used.
For many of the millions who use Twitter the court case will mean nothing and they will continue in their own sweet way with the good and the bad, That's human nature after all!
You see:-
1. Users who give the impression they are interacting but cleverly bring everything back to themselves.
2. Users who appear to sit back and just observe what goes on.
3. Users who only speak to people in their 'goup' - could be friends, family, profession, work colleagues, product types ... and even withint these groups there are even smaller groups.
4.Users who never interact but simply promote - and often the content is very good.
5.Users who never interact and promote rubbish (though this could be subjective)
6. Users who want to be silly and controversial
7. Users who are trolls and are giving many internet users a bad name
8. Users who want to grow their brand but also genuinely want to share and will share not just their own stuff but will share any good stuff.
9 Users who just use it for social chatting about anything and having fun
10 Users who use it to interact with their customers
These are just a few examples and users may be a combination of these or use it in a way I haven't mentioned
So it's not really surprising that Twitter has such problems. Many people start to use it and don't understand how to use it to its best effect and are therefore disappointed.
I have used Twitter for nearly 2 years (and I have trained others to use Twitter) so I know it can work and be used well - but like all one's endavours you have to be realistic and understand what you're working with.
I'm not sure that I would agree with you that '95% use it wrong' because people use it for different reasons and I don't think it's that easy to quantify
It will be interesting to see the result of the court cases but whatever the outcome, I'm not really expecting a revolution in the way Twitter is used.
For many of the millions who use Twitter the court case will mean nothing and they will continue in their own sweet way with the good and the bad, That's human nature after all!
kyle
Premium Plus
Maybe I said that wrong, 95% of the people are doing so are doing so for selfish only reasons. I know and can appreciate that people ultimately have business only goals with twitter, but those that are the most successful are those that can actually engage their visitors whether it be through content they link to, content they "tweet" about, or relationships they create (which automatically leads to engagement).
The automated "spam" that Twitter is referring to is no different than anything else automated, they work, they generate sales...but at the end of the day, you can earn money doing a lot of things and it depends how you want to represent yourself. Spam email earns money...and so does robbing banks.
Twitter is in the wrong because they cannot get control of their technology. The spammer is wrong because they are spamming their system. The winner really is not going to be the average Twitter user in this case.
The automated "spam" that Twitter is referring to is no different than anything else automated, they work, they generate sales...but at the end of the day, you can earn money doing a lot of things and it depends how you want to represent yourself. Spam email earns money...and so does robbing banks.
Twitter is in the wrong because they cannot get control of their technology. The spammer is wrong because they are spamming their system. The winner really is not going to be the average Twitter user in this case.
PotPieGirl
Premium
I just read thru the court documents of the filed lawsuit and WOW! I'm very interested to see how this all plays out because I think it will be a landmark decision which could open the 'flood gates' for more lawsuits such as this.
I think it's pretty common knowledge that once a site gets popular and shows even the slightest potential for traffic/earnings, the site/program WILL get abused. Why didn't Twitter do something proactive to prevent this from happening? I don't think simply having some Terms of Service is good enough - not when it comes to spamming (spammers don't care about rules...lol)
If Twitter actually collects damages from this lawsuit, then who's to say that FaceBook won't start filing...or Pinterest...or Google....or HubPages....or BlogSpot.....or YouTube...and on and on.
Heck, if Twitter gets paid then I guess *I* could start filing suit against those that spam my blog comments, right? Thing is, I know that when you run a blog, the spammers will come. Therefor, I do the best I can to employ certain measures to fight it...and yes, sometimes I have to PAY for things to fight the spammers. I think I would be laughed out of the courtroom for trying to file a suit like that.
I'm just thinking outloud, but I really do think this case is something we should keep a close eye on.
Thanks for sharing this with us!
Jennifer
~PotPieGirl
I think it's pretty common knowledge that once a site gets popular and shows even the slightest potential for traffic/earnings, the site/program WILL get abused. Why didn't Twitter do something proactive to prevent this from happening? I don't think simply having some Terms of Service is good enough - not when it comes to spamming (spammers don't care about rules...lol)
If Twitter actually collects damages from this lawsuit, then who's to say that FaceBook won't start filing...or Pinterest...or Google....or HubPages....or BlogSpot.....or YouTube...and on and on.
Heck, if Twitter gets paid then I guess *I* could start filing suit against those that spam my blog comments, right? Thing is, I know that when you run a blog, the spammers will come. Therefor, I do the best I can to employ certain measures to fight it...and yes, sometimes I have to PAY for things to fight the spammers. I think I would be laughed out of the courtroom for trying to file a suit like that.
I'm just thinking outloud, but I really do think this case is something we should keep a close eye on.
Thanks for sharing this with us!
Jennifer
~PotPieGirl
kyle
Premium Plus
I can see where you are coming from Jennifer, where does this start and where does this end. I think this is more of an issue because of the scale of what is happening. Yes, Twitter has an API and yes they have internal spam algorithms. But these companies and individuals are using technology to game the system for the purpose of spam.
Blog spam I suppose is a bit different in the sense that it is dealing with an individual (peer to peer), but I could see some legal implications with the companies that provide auto commenting services if Twitter does win this case.
Yes, Twitter brought this on themselves, automation is OK, but blatant spam is not OK...if it was, email spam would not be a crime (which it is). Facebook will be next chopping down services that are spamming their system, but it is a bit different game there as it is far less of a spam network because people tend to be "real" on Facebook.
Blog spam I suppose is a bit different in the sense that it is dealing with an individual (peer to peer), but I could see some legal implications with the companies that provide auto commenting services if Twitter does win this case.
Yes, Twitter brought this on themselves, automation is OK, but blatant spam is not OK...if it was, email spam would not be a crime (which it is). Facebook will be next chopping down services that are spamming their system, but it is a bit different game there as it is far less of a spam network because people tend to be "real" on Facebook.
Countrygirl47
Premium
This is good to know because I wondered why there was no interaction on twitter. Because I only started using it about 3 or 4 months ago myself I assumed it was not a social network. I really did not know what to make of twitter. Your article helps clear things up. Thanks Kyle.
kyle
Premium Plus
Yeah, the problem is that such a high percentage of the tweets submitted to twitter are from applications externally...meaning, that most of Twitters activity is a result of computer programs, not actual human interaction and engagement.
People do engage on Twitter, but you have to work hard to create an engaging network of Twitter friends/followers...and you have to avoid following these people that are automating their junk Twitter feeds.
People do engage on Twitter, but you have to work hard to create an engaging network of Twitter friends/followers...and you have to avoid following these people that are automating their junk Twitter feeds.
Alex CH
Premium
That's really interesting Kyle and you are 100% right! Twitter is rammed with spam nowadays infact it has been for quite some time. Saying that, I have been using TweetAttacks for a long time now and can't live without it. I am managing all my Twitter accounts which are connected to my sites and I consider myself to be just scratching a surface. Because I use TA for re-tweeting only. Re-tweeting (I have discovered) is one of the best seo/ranking principles there is, and there's simply no argument about it.
As you probably know, If someone re-tweets your tweet and someone re-tweets their (your old tweet), potential is astronomical, so multiply that by 20 or 50. Most of my sites have a good PR and top Google positions based solely on Twitter and re-tweets. Naturally, basic SEO variety was included in all of my sites but this method pumped them sky high.
I program TweetAttacks once a month to totally randomly, without any pattern, using good proxies, re-tweets my new and old tweets from 40+ accounts. Now that's cool. And it just goes and magic happens, crazy but true.
However, things are never that straight forward and they do come to the surface when SE NukeX, TweetAttacks and other tools are used by idiots. This is nothing new and things will never change, they will be simply presented in a new shiner package.
Alex
As you probably know, If someone re-tweets your tweet and someone re-tweets their (your old tweet), potential is astronomical, so multiply that by 20 or 50. Most of my sites have a good PR and top Google positions based solely on Twitter and re-tweets. Naturally, basic SEO variety was included in all of my sites but this method pumped them sky high.
I program TweetAttacks once a month to totally randomly, without any pattern, using good proxies, re-tweets my new and old tweets from 40+ accounts. Now that's cool. And it just goes and magic happens, crazy but true.
However, things are never that straight forward and they do come to the surface when SE NukeX, TweetAttacks and other tools are used by idiots. This is nothing new and things will never change, they will be simply presented in a new shiner package.
Alex
kyle
Premium Plus
Yeah, anytime you have an open API like this and very little controls as to what defines are real user, things are going to get gamed. Like you said, you have 40 accounts...that should not be OK within a system unless you have 40 businesses (I am not necessarily saying I am against it), but this is the reason many networks like Facebook are verifying authenticity of a user through text messages and other mediums that allow them to prove (to a much higher degree) that you are real.
I think this will set a precedence if Twitter wins for other services like TweetAttack that try to enter the market.
I think this will set a precedence if Twitter wins for other services like TweetAttack that try to enter the market.
Alex CH
Premium
Good point Kyle. Use your tools of the trade in a right manner and you have nothing to worry about. All of my Twitter accounts were left to mature first for a good few months collaborating within certain interest/community before taking any action ultimately gaining descent following. As your business empire grows bigger, it's all about leverage (someone once said)....
Thanks
Alex
Thanks
Alex
Kyle's Posts
719 posts
0 comments
0 likes
8 comments
3 likes
0 comments
0 likes
2 comments
0 likes
3 comments
0 likes
0 comments
0 likes
0 comments
0 likes
0 comments
0 likes
0 comments
0 likes
0 comments
0 likes