Twitter demographics shift

Tweet

I'm on the wrong side of 40, but up until March, my age made me part of Twitter's 'in' crowd: 35-54 year olds.



Boomers and gen X'ers were the most likely demographic to be on Twitter. But something happened in April that caused a massive influx of millennials. Comscore released data showing this trend. Look at the top two tiers in the chart below and how they're getting squeezed from April through July.
What happened to cause this shift? Some are suggesting it's the Ashton Kutcher effect. In April, the young celebrity began a Twitter battle with CNN: the first to reach one million followers would be declared the winner (and malaria nets would be donated to Africa so there was a feel good element to this silly competition).


No word on whether malaria rates have fallen at the same pace as Twitter use has risen. But as Twitter grew from 9.3 million users in March to over 50 million users in July, the type of user has shifted and more brands and spam accounts are now joining the ranks of the Twitterati, for better or for worse.

Think you're following 1,000 Tweeps? Actually it's closer to 40.

Tweet

Twitter's supercharged adoption rates have taken it from nine million unique visitors in March to 17 million in April.

But recent scrutiny of Twitter adoption rates have turned up two interesting results:

• 60% of users who start an account abandon it within a month. (Source: Nielsen)
• 10% of its active users are responsible for 90% of the Tweets. (Source: Harvard Business School)

Based on these metrics, while my account might indicate that I'm following 2,000 people on Twitter, I'm actually following more like 800 (40% of 2,000). And, 10% of them--80 people--are responsible for 90% of what I see. The other 720 folks are responsible for a smattering of Tweets.

To see if these numbers bore out, I reviewed an hour of incoming Tweets and counted closer to 150 individuals and news feeds of which no more than 10 people or outlets were responsible for multiple Tweets. This is not scientific by any means, but it tells me I'm following users who are twice as active as the average. This is what I'd expect to see since I tend to follow other communicators and journalists; however, it still illustrates the point that only a small percentage of followers are consistently contributing to Twitter.

What do these trends mean for communicators and their clients? Well, for one, it means Ashton Kutcher does not have 2.1 million followers -- he has 840,000, max of which 84,000 would fall into that most active 10% and who are, therefore, likely to be on Twitter at the moment he sends a Tweet. And now the question is whether that's the 84,000 who really care what Kutcher has to say? (And could it be that high? ;-)

But enough about Kutcher. What this post is intended to illustrate is that amassing large audiences is not as important as targeting and attracting followers that care about and share your interests.

And, in that respect, social media is no different than all forms of communication that preceded it. The first commandment remains 'know thy audience.'

If you're being followed by 1,000 people, keep in mind that 600 of them are no longer using Twitter because they didn't get it. Of the 400 remaining, only 40 of them can be expected to really engage.

So take stock and identify who those 40 people are, find more like them, serve that audience as best you can, and consider cutting loose those who may be cluttering your communications rather than adding to them. Approach your social networks with the same discipline you use to build a direct mail or media list--you want the highest response rate possible so pay close attention to your followers' profile.

And if you're someone who is an above average user on Twitter, help newcomers and encourage them to stay by engaging with them, recommending TweetDeck and other tools that improve the experience, and so on. Think of it as your community service.