Search Box

Sunday, January 28, 2018

Do fake Twitter followers correlate with fake muscles?

Just saw an article in the NY Post, Britt McHenry, Ray Lewis exposed for Twitter-follower desperation buysThe relevant excerpt:

It is unknown whether McHenry, Lewis and several other figures themselves paid to improve their Twitter popularity or if someone else purchased the following for them. Either way, their followings have been enhanced by a shadowy company in Devumi, which creates fake accounts that give the appearance that a person’s following is grander than it seems. Having many Twitter followers can lend credibility and marketability to a person, especially those in media who want to show employers that a significant audience will follow them. McHenry worked for ESPN until being a victim of April’s layoffs, for which she attributed to herself being a conservative. Lewis is currently a Fox Sports analyst.

Also named in the sham buys were former Cowboys wide receiver and current ESPN analyst Joey Galloway, Olympic swimmer Adam Peaty, MLB free agent Brandon Phillips, Ohio State quarterback Tate Martell, Colorado Avalanche defenseman Erik Johnson and former rowing champion James Cracknell.

How many followers were purchased, and at what cost, are unknown. The site advertises that “5,000-plus” fake accounts can be had for $49.

Here's Ray Lewis during his playing days: 

You can decide for yourself whether or not he was on the juice. This past May I made the case that breaststroker Adam Peaty --

It's hard not to wonder if there's a correlation here. You'd think that the kind of person willing to buy fake Twitter followers in order to look better would also be the type willing to pretend that his store-bought muscles were merely the result of hard training. 

Well, maybe I shouldn't feel that bad that this blog averages only around a thousand readers per day. 

Or that my muscles are so puny.


Anonymous said...

I read an article yesterday about this. Apparently, Kathy Ireland has fake followers. Since she's a successful business person, I couldn't figure out why she'd want to have fake followers.

- Susan

Anonymous said...

Do you think Trump's Twitter followers are all legit, the real deal? I can't imagine Trump having fake followers.

- Susan

John Craig said...

Susan --
Yes, I saw that Ireland was listed in the original NY Times article. I guess they all want to appear more popular than they are. And, I guess it gives you more leverage if you're dealing with a marketing company which doesn't know your followers aren't real.

No idea about Trump.

Anonymous said...


Am I alone, or is this society full of the most annoying "types" that ever was? I suppose they were complaining about this in ancient Rome, but I live here.

The right-blogosphere is always bitching about the Ray Lewis black macho types, and I hate them too, but those blonde bimbo Britt McHenry types. Perhaps she's a nice woman, and I know she's human too, but I want to smack her face.

I never meet people like this IRL. Most of the black men I meet are fairly normal. I know dyed blondes but they don't look or act like Britt McHenry.

Do I hate us, or the media us?

John Craig said...

Anon --
To be honest, I'm not really familiar with either of them. About the only thing I know about Lewis is that he was supposed to be a great football player and at one point was a suspect in a murder trial. And I've never even seen McHenry in action, since I don't watch football and don't watch ESPN. Just judging from her picture, she looks like the type usually described as "bubbly" and "perky." I don't mind macho, as long as it's not in-your-face macho. And I have nothing against perky blondes, even if they're not my type.

If your larger point is that certain people feel they have to conform to a certain "type," then yes, I'm with you, that shows a distinct lack of originality, and is tiresome.

You bring up another interesting point too. I like most blacks I meet; it's the ones I read about I can't stand, whether that's Obama or Holder or Sharpton or the ones playing the knockout game or participating in a riot somewhere. Then again, I don't get out that much these days.

Anonymous said...

hey, I found a guy whose fact pattern you might enjoy:

and as for "only 1000 daily viewers" well you have me, and I tend to be statistically unlikely in many categories...thus I quietly raise your stats in many categories, so it is like you have another hundred daily viewers without going through with the actual foot-traffic formalities...


John Craig said...

Yep, he's a sociopath, no question. One of the things I've been thinking recently, when men cadge money from women, they're usually obvious sociopaths, but female gold diggers or women looking for sugar daddies aren't all that different, and I suspect a lot of them are sociopaths as well. They don't act out quite as dramatically, but their psyche is similar.

Okay, thank you, 1100 a day then. There are some days when it's more, sometimes more than 2000, but those are usually days when there's a TV show on featuring someone I've written about, and people will Google "Frederick Baer sociopath?" or something like that and end up here.

Steven said...


beppo said...

Watching a Jordan Peterson lecture on Youtube the other day I noted that he opined that there are fewer psychopaths among women than men.
Since he is a clinical psychiatrist his opinion must carry some weight.

It has occurred to me frequently through the decades of observing how they treat partners, that the opposite seems to be true if anything ... manipulative charm hiding cold calculation, lack of empathy or conscience etc.
Sexual involvement seems to trigger hidden psychopathy in so many.

Insurance statistics and lower rates charged for women drivers would seem to suggest that they are better drivers than men, but really reflect the phenomenon that their accidents are smaller more often: parking and low-speed incidents.

John Craig said...

Steven --
Somehow that doesn't surprise me.

John Craig said...

Beppo --
Traditionally the number given for female sociopaths is 1% of the population (as opposed to 3% for me), but I've never bought that. I think female sociopath is simply less visible for a reason similar to the statistic you cite about auto accidents: they're less likely to become violent, so their sociopathy is expressed in more subtle ways that don't necessarily put them on the radar screen.

And even apart from violence, females are less likely to become CEO's, or politicians, or daredevils or various sorts, or military heroes, or other positions which can vault someone into the public eye. So they're just less likely to make headlines.

Not Dave said...

Being an introvert I'm not on Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat or whatever because I don't have the need to be liked by anyone. YouTube stars have to sell themselves also. I just go about my day doing what I want without thinking about whether or not my followers will approve. My wife loves me, so does my family and I have a few close friends. That's all I need.

Granted it's celebrities that the story apparently was about. They live in an alternate universe than I.

I'd agree it's similar to stetoid muscles, dyed hair, facelifts, etc. Vanity.

And I visit your blog once or twice a week.


John Craig said...

Dave --
I don't have any of those things either, but I do have this blog, so I can't claim to be without vanity. (Although I didn't start this blog to talk about myself, I started it to give myself an outlet to vent.)

I wouldn't mind Snapchat etc. if they were employed in the service of honesty, but mostly they're in the service of burnishing one's own image. I'm always amazed when I read that some otherwise unknown girl in a bikini has something like 400,000 followers. (And, I'm a little suspicious, I doubt those numbers are real.) Do people really want to see her pictures that badly?