The followocracy fallacy
I read recently that a hotel in Australia will give you a free night’s stay if you have more than 10,000 followers on Instagram. The idea (we suppose) is that you will take some photos, post them on Instagram and give the hotel some PR.
But it’s another example of how having large numbers of Instagram followers gets you free stuff. We might call it a “followocracy”. The more followers you have, the more doors open for you. As a power user, you have power. Over the last few years, we’ve seen how enough followers will get you all-expenses-paid trips if you agree to post pictures of their hotels, handbags or mineral water. Or free tickets to some cool events. Or even just good old-fashioned money. This followocracy is sustained by the belief that power users have some advertising influence through their follower numbers. But don’t advertisers wonder whether power-user value is a bit like a junk-mail delivery service? Yes, they can push things through a lot of people’s front doors, but most will go straight in the rubbish without being read, or there’ll be no-one home or they could start to annoy the recipients.
Some people still labour under the delusion that the quality of a power user’s photos is the reason they have so many followers. Of course, the power users themselves like to believe this too (who wouldn’t?) - this is how Instagram ensures they stay loyal to their platform. Some do happen to be quite good, but that’s not why they have lots of followers. Look closer and you’ll see most owe their follower numbers to Instagram’s suggested user list. Sometimes Instagram uses its suggested user list to give out large followings to its pals (ie good old-fashioned nepotism), most other times they want people who they think will do good PR on their behalf. And if they weren’t already really a key influencer, in a sort of self-fulfilling prophesy, because Instagram annoints them as such, the world believes they are, even if they’re not.
No-one home?