Well, I'm not ashamed of my modest 1450 followers. There you have it. But I get it. When you have something to sell, whether it be a book or face cream, how wide you cast your net is important. Going door-to-door won't cut it anymore. But does social media really work? Most of my followers and those I follow, are fellow writers who are doing the same thing: hoping to cast their line out and snag a reader. However, are they really my audience? I'm not so sure. Anyway, I'm still hung up on this follower business. Our self-worth seems to be getting wrapped up in how many followers we have on Twitter and Facebook, as if we're not any good as writers if our followers don't rival that of a Taylor Swift concert.
It's a number; don't let it define you.
With that said, I'm not anti-Twitter and here's why:
I find fascinating articles about all kinds of things (that I may subsequently tweet, retweet, and tag as a "favorite.")
I can trash talk during the NHL playoff using #NHLPlayoffs and #StanleyCup (talking about hockey is optional).
I can create lists of Tweeps based on my interests, such as, music, art, criminology, science and celebrities (no, I'm not a Belieber). I'm talking about celebs who have interesting things to say (Russell Brand, Nathan Fillion, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, and yes, Monica Lewinski).
And where else can you read what the Dalai Lama is up to---in 140 characters or less?
Otherwise, to me, Twitter is one big popularity contest, and sure, the popular kids get all the glory, but I'm content hanging back and doing my thing. Isn't that what everyone's all tweeting about anyway---what they're working on? I'll gladly focus on what I love to do, rather than what number is on the
How do you feel about the emphasis placed on the number of social media followers? (Yes, I know most agents/editors insist upon a large social media following, but what do YOU think?)