iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

71 Percent Of Tweets Are Ignored, Study Finds

The Huffington Post   First Posted: 10/12/10 10:08 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 07:00 PM ET

Twitter

Ever feel like you're tweeting but no one's reading? Well, most of the time, you may be right.

That's according to a study conducted by Sysomos, a media monitoring and analytics firm, which examined 1.2 billion tweets sent in August and September 2009.

Wired reports on their findings, which suggest that a Twitter's lifespan may be little more than an hour in length:

They discovered that more than seven in every 10 tweets sink without any kind of reaction from the world. Of the remainder, just 6 percent get retweeted, and 92 percent of those retweets occur within the first hour. Multiplying those probabilities together means that fewer than one in 200 messages get retweeted after an hour's gone by. Essentially, once that hour's up, your message is ancient history.

As Wired notes, 23 percent of tweets get an @reply, with the vast majority (85 percent) getting only a single reply. Noting that "only 1.53% of Twitter conversations are three levels deep" (i.e. there are three @replies), Sysomos concludes, "only a small number of users actually have the ability to engage on Twitter in a significant way." The report also found that nearly 97 percent of @replies will occur with the first 60 minutes after the tweet was posted.

The study did not investigate why a relatively low number of tweets fail to generate a reply or retweet. Perhaps it's tied to Twitter's format, which quickly pushes down old posts--if so, it will be interesting to observe whether the redesigned "New Twitter" will encourage more users to engage with the tweets they see--but it could also be that we're saying doesn't always interest our followers.

A study of tweets conducted by Rutgers University in 2009 found that the majority of Twitterers (80 percent) are "meformers" who use Twitter to "post updates on their everyday activities, social lives, feelings, thoughts, and emotions." Twenty percent are "informers" who post information to their followers, from links to articles to breaking news.

Before you stop tweeting, keep in mind that the study determined how often tweets were "ignored" using the number retweets and @replies a post garnered--but seems to have overlooked tweets that are read by followers (i.e. they do not go unnoticed), but neither retweeted nor replied to. As HuffPost commenter Gregstevens writes (see below), "[J]ust because a tweet hasn't been replied to or retweeted doesn't mean it is being ignored. I maintain a twitter account that I use to promote a website. When the website posts new original content, I will tweet some kind of little advertising "blurb" about the article, with a link. I will do this approximately every hour. I will try to use a different "blurb" to get attention to the article each time, to be able to catch the interest of people scanning or searching for different keywords. Almost NONE of these tweets of mine are replied to or re-tweeted. But I can see that it's driving traffic to the website: hundreds of hundreds of hits arriving from the twitter links, with "spikes" of hits coinciding with the hourly tweets that I post."

See charts from Sysomos below. Do you feel like your tweets are ignored? Do you agree that "only a small number of users actually have the ability to engage on Twitter in a significant way?" Are @replies a fair measure of this?



FOLLOW HUFFPOST TECH

Ever feel like you're tweeting but no one's reading? Well, most of the time, you may be right. That's according to a study conducted by Sysomos, a media monitoring and analytics firm, which examine...
Ever feel like you're tweeting but no one's reading? Well, most of the time, you may be right. That's according to a study conducted by Sysomos, a media monitoring and analytics firm, which examine...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 52
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
05:07 PM on 10/18/2010
Good stats, but there's an better study done by some academics in Korea that you should definitely read if you're into Twitter.

One of the key findings: "67.6% of users are not followed by any of their followings in Twitter. We conjecture that for these users Twitter is rather a source of information than a social networking site."

This confirms what Twitter is now saying about itself, that it is *not* a social network. More details and implications for Twitter, Google, Facebook, Amazon and others here:
http://www.alchemyofchange.net/twitter-is-not-a-social-network/
12:29 PM on 10/13/2010
But on the other hand, 29% are not ignored. That's actually higher than I expected. Plus many Tweets are read but not forwarded. Also, I find my Tweets come up in Google searches; on newspaper websites etc -- and I only have 200 followers -- so I am small potatoes. It is effective when complaining about a company because it is public.
10:20 AM on 10/13/2010
you make the (mistaken) assumption that "not retweeted and not responded to" equals "ignored"
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cynth Bage
w'hever
08:54 PM on 10/12/2010
Most of my Tweets come from my Kindle, sharing what I've just read to others. Not that it matters. When it comes to retweets, I'm at about zero percent.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Demarcus Jackson
Southern Psychology Professor
08:39 PM on 10/12/2010
I will add that I think the only reason Twitter is still around is largely due to the popular media.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Demarcus Jackson
Southern Psychology Professor
08:38 PM on 10/12/2010
I just don't understand the need for Twitter. I joined last month out of curiosity, but after about two weeks I canceled my account--I just thought it was sort of mindless.
06:13 PM on 10/13/2010
It is mindless, which is why it's so popular.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Bill Swadley
Writer, finance exec, dad
08:01 PM on 10/12/2010
Is anyone surprised? My guess is that less than 5% of anyone's "friends" on Facebook or MySpace are paying attention as well. It's all technological self-stimulation.
06:43 PM on 10/12/2010
I have never understood the value or reason to using Twitter (or facebook/myspace, etc. for that matter)

Seems pointless, and a waste of time, like I really care what you are doing at any one moment
04:22 PM on 10/13/2010
To the average Joe it doesn't really matter. Who really does care what someone had for lunch or if their favorite sports team won? In the world stage it's significant though. This type of media is on the spot reporting pretty much. Witnessing something that the media has yet to catch on? Facebook/Twitter can be useful if used in the right context. The downside is 90% of the time it's used for trivial things.
04:27 PM on 10/12/2010
The Twitterverse is an ever changing system, as you are, as you will ever be. The network will feed on the intentions and motivations of the individuals in it, as they will feed off it. Ignore and be ignored. Engage purposefully, and purpose will emerge.
03:19 PM on 10/12/2010
I never got the concept of Twitter. It is like instant messaging to no one.
photo
yannb
Noblesse oblige
01:19 PM on 10/12/2010
Which is why I don't tweet. But then again, who cares.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
maxwelldog
even if i don't go anywhere, I'll still be late.
01:16 PM on 10/12/2010
But I write so well.

Fact is, I'm having a hard time deciphering newspeak into English.
I went two months wondering why so mant people were talking about men having sex with other men when it had nothing to do with the topic. Then I found out that there were OTHER meanings to MSM.
Colleges, universities, companies, transportation experts, main stream media...(that one, probably) sometimes people's name initials...Mary Tyler Moore's older sister, Mary Smith Moore.

Some of it was cute.
LOL was funny. But, I was so humored I would LALAL (laugh and laugh and laugh), but then I heard Greg Geraldo (RIP) that it would be crazy if everyone WAS laughing that much, LOL. I mean LOL, how could they do any real work, LOL.
photo
goodog
Honk if you believe in a public editor.
01:04 PM on 10/12/2010
"it could well be that we're saying doesn't always interest our followers."

You think?

"Twenty percent are 'informers' who post information to their followers, from links to articles to breaking news."

I've never seen a tweet about info I didn't already know.

The biggest FAIL for media's frenzy for tweeter is Live Tweeter Updates of breaking news like election night coverage, coverage which invariably runs unmonitored rolling displays of both meformers and informers reporting everything from what they had for dinner to info we already know.

Live Tweeter Updates are an egregiously cheap and lazy neglect of journalistic standards by an organization unwilling to invest the time, money and effort on someone to remove what's irrelevant and redundant.

And GAWD... please... categorize the feeds by subject matter and THEN by who's tweeting.

On election night, put up a national map that links to each state map with blog posts and tweets for state-wide races. On state maps, link to district maps with posts and tweets for a given district only.

The ideal is to drill down from presidential to school board races geographically.

If I'm following the race in NY-23, I don't wanna have to sit through a rolling stream of tweets about dinner decisions from all over the country.

That's the beauty of the web. You can do this. Having to skim through a thread on the off-chance someone might mention the race you're interested in is SUCH a big time waster.
photo
Max Headroom
Your micro-bio is empty
12:42 PM on 10/12/2010
Tweeting and posting blog comments are all the same, mental masturbation.

Many will post few will read or care.
01:04 PM on 10/12/2010
I just fanned you, but that doesn't mean I'm gay. ;)
photo
yannb
Noblesse oblige
01:20 PM on 10/12/2010
I'm gay, but that doesn't mean I just fanned you.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
maxwelldog
even if i don't go anywhere, I'll still be late.
01:20 PM on 10/12/2010
whoa there, Max...
I happen to write a blog. And I've had up to eight readers!
http://maxwelldog.wordpress.com/
('course, some folks are more interested in the dancing bug....)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BonzaSheila
What's disgusting? UNION BUSTING!!
05:28 PM on 10/12/2010
I've found the one use for Twitter, is that if you post the URL when you update your site, the tweet will give you a backlink, which will raise your rank with Google. Try it each time you make a post.
http://www.bonzasheila.com
photo
Max Headroom
Your micro-bio is empty
10:05 PM on 10/12/2010
Actually I said "posting blog comments", not blogging. I think the actual blogs stand a chance of being "heard". It's the posting of comments on blogs that is screaming into outer space; you know, like I'm doing right now....
12:36 PM on 10/12/2010
I agree with @gregstevens that the numbers here are incomplete - to truly measure the influence of a tweet you'd need to incorporate click-throughs on links.

The basic issue here is information overload. As you follow more people, your Twitter timeline gets noisier & it becomes more difficult to sift through the trash to find the content that matters.

This is exactly the reason we created TweetAgora (a Twitter client for iPhone that focuses on filtering & aggregation); if you're tired of sifting through garbage & want to get more value from Twitter, check it out: http://tweetagora.com