Nearly Half of Donald Trump's Twitter Followers Are Fake

>This isn't the first time someone has pointed out that a good portion of Trump's Twitter following is fake, but what's interesting is that its fakeness seems to be increasing. In January, journalist Yashar Ali ran an audit on Trump's Twitter account and found that 68 percent of his then-20 million followers were real. Now he's at 30 million followers, but only 51 percent are real, which means of 10 million followers Trump has gained since January, about 8.3 million are fake.

>In April 2016, when Trump was beginning to gain traction as a serious candidate to at least win the Republican presidential nomination, the former reality TV star had a mere 7.58 million followers, only 8 percent of which were fake, according to FiveThirtyEight. It's not surprising that as Trump's global profile has skyrocketed in the past 13 months, so too have the number of bots attached to his Twitter account—but it's astonishing how much the percentage of his followers that are fake has risen.

>So is Trump actually buying new followers? We'll probably never know, but there seems to be nothing more important to Trump than how his fame relates to that of other public figures, and it can't sit well with the president that there are currently 31 accounts with more followers than his. One of those accounts is that of Barack Obama, which boasts a whopping 89 million followers, good for third-most in the world behind Katy Perry and Justin Bieber.

>In case you're wondering, 79 percent of Obama's followers are real.

Is Twitter news even news?

>>145917
It is when the president regularly uses it to address the country.

Asking that's like asking whether radio is actually news while FDR was using it.

>>145911
Anyways this seems odd, but I guess I can see the point? Trumps vanity is definitely not news, it's very old. I mean the guy literally took a bribe from devos. This is kinda small fries, and just another meaningless character attack.

I really wish the left would focus on building a progressive, new dealer coalition instead of forcing every straggler under the establishment party. Shoring up with the same old shit is like riding a half rotten horse int obattle.

Who cares?

>stand by for more top tier journalism as out corresponded is live at a freshly painted wall and watching it dry

>>145942
>Who cares?

I'm curious as to whether someone is paying for them or they are just following him because he is famous, or if the depolarbles are growing their virtual army.

>>145952
It might have been something left over from the campaign apparatus.

News about for accounts. Is this that "fake news" I've heard so much about?

>>146013
Correct, this is the truth, or as Republicans call it, "fake news."

>>145911
Until we officially quantify the likes and follows of a channel or individual as factual peer review it doesn't really matter. The individual should take everything said with a grain of salt and ascertain if it benefits themselves or the "greater good", not really on approval percentages.

>>145911

>Nearly half of [famous person] twitter followers are fake accounts and bots

And this is news because?

Not to bring up Clinton again, but her follower are only 48% real. It's like that with every famous person on that site, nothing to make a fuss about. It's not in your control if bots decide to follow you or not.

TWITTER IS NEWS OK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT

>>146055
It helps to have some common people followed to hide your bots since they violate the terms of use or whatever those rules are. Hell you sometimes catch bots in a loop replying to each other in the comments.
>What a great comment, bot1
>That just had to be said, bot2
>I agree, really smart there, bot1
>What a great comment, bot2

>>146036
Because the president like to brag about his alternative media audience and it turns out that half of his audience is fake.

>>145990
That's still running setting up new accounts?

That could be expensive if the deplorables didn't work for their millionaire master for free.

I assume they aren't being paid.

>>145952
>>145990
They're (the white house staff) is trying to keep president baby happy, duh.

This is just like only showing him praising news, look sir lot of followers, doing great sir.

>>146131
They're not fake, and saying they're fake is fake news.

>>146055
>. It's not in your control if bots decide to follow you or not.
According to the source, bots don't follow people at random, they're paid to do so.
This would imply someone is paying to stroke Trump's ego.
Not really news, I think it's common knowledge Trump is surrounded by reverse-sycophants who manipulate him for their own agendas.
Hardly surprising since his ego, immaturity, unrealistic world-view, lack of reading or serious education, his penchant for Breitbart and Alex Jones level media, along with his apparent desire to believe his own rhetoric all add up to make him an easily-manipulated patsy.

But then again, it does qualify as news (sort of) because a sizable portion of America (his base) refuses to believe this obvious truth, so perhaps it should be reported.

>>146164
>They're not fake
You know because you run half a dozen of them right?

>>145911
>>145912
> implying previous presidents/famous people followers are not bots...

>>146202
Not to defend him but if you ever used Twitter, bots and people just follow you, mostly fake ones. Gf started using it, she had like 5 followers, then 100, then 500, then 1000 and she did nothing relevant.

This is how they advertise themselves (the bots, services), they follow people automatically.
Honestly I don't believe he ever paid for fake followers but since he has a high-profile account, all bots/fake profiles must follow him.

>>146188
>According to the source, bots don't follow people at random, they're paid to do so
But that is bullshit.
Bots exactly follow at random. Well, not random, but try to find relevant tags, famous people, people with already many followers.

This is how they earn money, and "stay alive". (Some people follow them back, they also have follows, so they don't get banned easily.)

>>146163

Sure pal.

>>146548
>>End of post states Obama only had 20% bots, instead of over half

>>145923
Progressive politics is dead. It's failed.

>>145952
Everyone has fake Twitter followers. Trump doesn't need to pay anyone to like him. Remember he broke the blue wall.

>>146154
Deplorable are the growing majority.

>>147015
Liberals like to use twitter, breaking news right there.

>>147016
Progressive politics have been under attack by monied interests for decades now. Right, and left. The right was purged of any progressivism after Bush SR's disabilities act. The left gave it up when they let our capitalist class disregard American workers' rights by outsourcing.

>>146555
No, THAT'S bullshit!

>>146154
There is companies specifically made to operate thousands of accounts. It's a bunch of cellphone hooked up to main computers that are fed information at a massive scale. It's scary

>>147015
The whole report is done by the media citing noname companies. Now I am no US citizen and by no means pro-this, pro-that. But you see my point.

Almost 90% of Obama's followers were bots.
^ This is now the truth. There.

>>147061
>Liberals like to use twitter, breaking news right there.
>I cannot into math
That should just result in more real followers, not less bots by percentage.

>>147101
>The left gave it up when they let our capitalist class disregard American workers' rights by outsourcing.
???
Why are you laying this at the left's feet?
And what particular rights are you talking about?

>>145911

>all tweet-less, picture-less accounts are bots

This is just wrong though. A huge number of social media users sign up with an account, use it for a day, then never use it again. Or just use it but without engaging others on the social media platform.

As an example, the Reddit admins once said that less than 1% of registered accounts ever post a single comment on the entire site.

>>148490
half truth.
there are plenty of dead accounts too, like I had 20 twitters or so just for giveaways once. it only takes one email and it never gets deleted.

and of course one of the first recommends is POTUS and such, which of course you follow to not get banned.

big mistery.
these companies are like Android "security research companies" though.
they make money from shit stories, scaremongering and false news.

> muh EvilRatFucker exploit
> IT IS VEEEERY SERIOUS GUIS DIS TIEM
> ITS GOING TO RAPE UR DOG AND VOMIT ON YOUR SISTER

> days pass
> it's everywhere
> omg omg omg

> ...weeks pass, months pass
> no virus or rogue app ever using this exploit
> phones running 4.x still never had any breach

This fucking shit. Every. Fucking. Time.
Same for AV vendors on PC.
> hurr durr this will infect your grandmother!
... nothing happens.

>>148544
>> it's everywhere
I meant the news here btw. That MMS exploit was in the news here and all that.
Of course no one ever caught it or seen it here.
But oh my, it was soooo serious oh wow.