(Robert Scoble makes it about him by making it about US)
I’m using the example of The Scobleizer Twitter stream in order to better elucidate the fundamentals of how Twitter streams work. People who meet and follow each other through their mutual following of the popular tech writer, Robert Scoble, (@Scobleizer) are likely to have a set of specific things in common—an interest in emerging technology and insider Silicon Valley news as well as a desire to be among the early adaptors and cutting edge people who are a part of that world. These interests help form the brand of the Scobleizer Twitter stream, which is the subset of users who found and follow one another through their shared following of Scobleizer. The Twitter stream can be thought of as the subset of Scoble’s followers who form the main current of conversation about and in direct response to his tweets. They communicate with one another through “@” replies and retweets in a similar way that the readers of a blog have conversations and debates between themselves in the comments section. Even if the blog author isn’t directly involved in an exchange, his or her thoughts are still being amplified.
There’s a threshold, however, in which the specificity of the Twitter stream brand gets watered down and looses whatever it is that made it unique. This would happen if the people following Scobleizer have a large number of other people in common with one another that they found and followed outside of the Scoble Stream. If these other Twitter streams are also about emerging technology, then the overlap of streams forms a larger stream (AKA a fluid machine) within the larger Twitter river. But if the other shared Twitter streams are about a wide variety of subjects then the Twitter stream changes from a large group of people who found each other through their specific shared interests into a large group of people who found each other through a myriad of interests. What was once a strong current expands into a tepid bay.
Just because you attract a huge amount of followers doesn’t automatically mean your stream will be watered down—it does, however, make it more likely than if you have only a small group of followers. The reason I choose Scoble as an example is because he has made the workings of the Twitter streams work for him so that he has retained a sense of intimacy between himself and his followers. Even his online name, “Scobleizer”, seems to acknowledge his Twitter stream existence as neither noun nor verb. He is a person but what he has created with his online presence is a way of being. The “Scobleizer Twitter stream is not identical to Scoblizer’s follow list. A stream is about a multiplicity of connections in many directions. It’s the difference between broadcasting at a loud volume and creating a positive feedback loop. For instance, there are plenty of celebrities on Twitter who have huge follower counts but who follow back very few people in return and almost never engage in conversation. Oprah has a large number of Twitter followers, but a completely weak Twitter stream, as there’s little or no interaction or recognition between these followers as her followers. Part of what makes Scoble’s Twitter stream so strong is that he interacts with his followers who in turn interact with one another. He often closes the circuit by retweeting these interactions: ensuring that their interaction is branded AS members of the Scobleizer Twitter stream and not just conversation between people who happen to be followers of Scoble as well as lots of other people. By putting your thoughts, ideas and blog posts out there in such a way that encourages discussion with EVERYONE who follows you is the easiest and best way to keep your stream strong. There are plenty of Twitterers out there who have loads of followers but will only deign to reply to a chosen few. Even if this discussion is rich and interesting, the fact that there is an unspoken follower hierarchy discourages other followers not only from replying to the Big Fish twitterer, but it also precludes them from finding and getting to know one another AS followers of the Big Fish.
Instead of aiming for a high number of followers, I would argue that a Twitterer’s IDEAS reach a greater number of people if they instead focus on cultivating a smaller, yet more engaged group of followers. You should cap off your followers at a number that still enables you to interact with them. Despite his huge following, Scoble is an example of someone who has made the fluiditiy of his stream work for him. He’s kept it “about him” precisely by not always making it about him.
