Of Twitter and infographics
Posted on: July 10, 2011
I love this infographic because it condenses the original report into a bite-sized nugget that is easy to understand. Its creator probably had to take some creative and interpretive liberties, but he was entitled to.
And it looks like I fall in the blue 5%. I don’t tweet enough to be in that purple group!
15 Responses to "Of Twitter and infographics"
2 | Sergio Pereira
July 11, 2011 at 7:20 am
Just one correction. If twitter had only 100 people, obviously nobody would have more than 100 followers 
ashleytan
July 13, 2011 at 3:48 pm
Ha, good catch!
But if we suspend disbelief for a while and live in the spirit the infographic was intended, it still helps us visualize a possible state of Twitter.
3 | Andrew
July 11, 2011 at 8:20 am
This graphic is wrong. Groups are not mutually exclusive. You can have more than 100 followers and be a “loud mouth” for instance..
[...] Source [Ashley Tan] [...]
6 | 40deuce
July 11, 2011 at 11:32 pm
Thanks for linking back to our original study! Yes, this data is now 2 years old, but it’s still kind of interesting to see.
Cheers,
Sheldon, community manager for Sysomos
ashleytan
July 13, 2011 at 3:58 pm
Thanks for sharing the results in the first place! 
If that information was not available, someone would not have created that infographic.
Without the infographic, we might not have some of the critical discourse in this comment area!
[...] (Vía Another dot in the blogosphere?.) [...]
[...] (Vía Another dot in the blogosphere?.) [...]
July 13, 2011 at 12:51 am
[...] Another dot in the blogosphere?.) Publicado por Alvy # 12/Jul/2011 Categorías: Internet Compartir: correo Me gusta Tweet [...]
[...] [via: ashleytan] This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged infographic, twitter. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL. « Why don’t people believe in God? [...]
[...] no todos los navegantes de la web son igual de apasionados que yo. A propósito de ello, el sitio Another dot in the blogosphere? publicó un análisis sobre el comportamiento de los usuarios de Twitter, presentándolo en una [...]
July 10, 2011 at 9:26 pm
Twitter is a self-constructed content index/aggregator. Basing Twitter evaluations on what percentage of people tweet is a bogus assumption.
Its real function is to allow people to organize a customized, inbound, real-time information stream.
For most, its a personal mix of news, special interest + entertainment. The fact that many people don’t contribute is TOTALLY irrelevant! Further, 200+ million fully interactive members would be a digital train wreck.
Bottom line : The best content providers net the most followers. Its that simple.
July 13, 2011 at 3:54 pm
I guess that is one of the things that happens when someone tries to reduce everything to numbers. Sometimes you lose the story, sometimes you lose the point.
Depending on how you define “content”, I don’t think that the best content providers get the most followers. Some celebrities (or celebrity-types have lots of followers but generate rubbish from my point of view.
As an educator, I am interested in all things education, not the life and times of a chihuahua in a handbag.