They Tweet every few minutes and the algorithm moves them down in people's feeds so they get less engagement.
Serious question: how can a mainstream political news site like @thehill have 3.4 million followers (allegedly), and always show up near the top of feeds, but get less engagement (likes, retweets, comments) than independent podcasters with 50k followers. Truly puzzled.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Because Twitter has rigged it's algorithm just like Google to favor certain political parties and ideologies on their platforms.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Twitter's 'Recommended Follows' algorithms (sometimes paid for) in the old days influenced the choices of a lot of newbies who subsequently quit using Twitter after a only few weeks or so but their accounts linger on. (Well, those are my suspicions.)
#TwitterZombiesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Less engaged followers
-
Likely because they are paid for. It’s probably only $10K or something to buy a couple million.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
They forgot to pay for botnets.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@thehill pays the way.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The Hill has a fairly open comment section.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
More DNC bots
-
But then why doesn't Twitter purge the bots so their social media more accurately reflects real human engagement? ....
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.