Prev Next
Featured Quizzes
Politix Daily Headlines
Featured Debates
Issues

See all 19 issues

2012

Mitt Romney's 100,000+ New Twitter Followers in 2 Days? Definitely Not Real

Our new analysis confirms the rumors. But who did it?

Next>

by Mary Noble

Senior Editor t +

Spike in account creation dates of Romney followers, based on sample of half Romney's followers

Rumors have circulated since the weekend that Romney's 100,000-strong spike in Twitter followers consisted mostly of auto-generated Twitter accounts, not real users. We've done a new analysis that confirms it, using data from Twitter's API.

Irregularities of the spike day surge

First, almost all of the Twitter usernames on Romney's spike days followed a predictable pattern strongly suggesting that they were auto-generated. The usernames consisted of a first or last name plus a string of three to four random characters. 96% of Twitter usernames on the spike days had this property, compared to 50% on regular days.

Here's what the names and usernames look like:

Spike Days:
Kimber Martin @martineksf
Levi Butler @butlerqbjf
Mark Fowler @markiffxy
Shirleen Bullock @bullockqoww
Quinn Perez @quinncjhu
Sommer Mcclure @mccluredkh
Juanita Wallace @juanitajft
Eliana Knapp @knappzwxc

Regular Days:
Christopher Presley @PresleyTopher
Chris Cowan @Canadianmeat420
Andrew Walker @awwalker24
Nicolae IonuĊ£ @I_am_free2012
Rob Lutters @siempreNOkool
Caroline @Mrs_MadDog

On the spike days of July 19th and 20th, thirteen times the usual number of Romney's new followers were were users who had just signed up to Twitter, shown in the graph above. That trend is also a huge red flag that new accounts were created for the specific purpose of following Romney.

But who is the culprit?

The fact that a large number of Romney's new followers are most certainly bots doesn't mean that his campaign organized them. Far from it: some people are speculating that the whole operation is so ham-handed that it must be the work of an opponent out to discredit Romney. Romney's campaign has denied buying the followers and asked Twitter to investigate.

We should add that Romney is far from alone in attracting fake followers. Internet search company PeekYou estimates that only 20-30% of politicians' Twitter followers are real.

Like this article? B Vote Up
?

What do you think explains the surge in fake Romney auto-followers on Twitter?

28 Comments (view in Forum)

  • autiger
    !
    Mitt Romney... First it was his dog on the roof of his car.. THEN he bullied a fellow student some 40 years ago.. THEN it was about his wife being a homemaker.. THEN his wife's horse.. THEN it was about a company he wasn't even running at the time.. NOW twitter???
    The focus is on President Obama's no matter what the media tries..
  • ir0nw0lfe
    !
    I dont think some prank twittter accounts will make or break a candidate in this election. If they do, then there never was any hope for the country in this election.
  • ded
    !
    PersonAlly, RAther thaN cOmIng up with complicateD theoRIes, i'd Get to tHe boTtom of it WIth some commoN sense and straiGhtforward Explanations foR what we're Seeing.
  • stevie
    !
    i don't think you can draw any useful conclusions from the number of followers a candidate has. And, while its funny / sad that so many of romney's jump in followers are not real people, it doesn't really matter. the only thing that matters at this point is how many people that are currently undecided are going to commit to one candidate or the other. I don't think you're going to get that from the number of twitter followers. But hey, what the heck do i know?
  • ded
    !
    The general reaction in this thread seems to be "who cares"? But as far as I can see there has been a consensus in recent years that social media are important in elections.

    So are you saying "that's wrong", or "yeah, but twitter isn't important", or "yeah but who cares if a political party is completely misrepresenting itself in an important component of an election", or what?
  • Bobolinsky
    !
    Do you really think the Romney campaign would think aomething like this would pass the smell test? A spike in twitter accounts that sticks out like a sore thumb and invites investigation by the opposition? Me neither.That means some other amateurish bunch of with the appropriate software did it.

    And no one is saying that social media is important or not important. We are saying that we don;t care about a story that is nothing but another thing for Obamabots like renee to parrot as to why Romney is an evil hater. It's a non story that was made into an issue by people looking for something that they can twist into something that makes Romney look bad.

    I expect stuff like this from a campaign manager like Stephanie Cutter. We don't expect the news media to report it as a potential scandal if it all.
  • ded
    !
    So if you agree that social media are important, then

    - the electorate will be misled by the figures
    - therefore it's an important issue, because we care about democracy and an accurately informed electorate

    If the media don't cover the story, then people wont know the numbers are fake.
  • Bobolinsky
    !
    If media didn't cover the story, no one would've known the numbers nor would they have cared to know. I wonder who Obama's Twitter followers include... I'm one. What does that mean?
  • ded
    !
    Alright, but if no-one knows the numbers and no-one cares to know, then twitter is not important in the election. We can't have it both ways. Either it's important and the story matters, or it isn't and it doesn't.