3 ms·
It's pretty good that this kind of open secret gets coverage in the mainstream media, but it's disappointing that this article contents itself with a bit of cel
by Hasknewbie 9y ago
It's pretty good that this kind of open secret gets coverage in the mainstream media, but it's disappointing that this article contents itself with a bit of celebrity shaming and only hammering on Twitter, probably because they're a bit more transparent (technically speaking) and easier to take down.
Other networks (i.e. Facebook/Instagram) are probably just as bad, and if so they are generating untold amount of ad revenue based on fake traffic and accounts.
- Spearchucker 9y agoNot sure the coverage will do any good anyway. First thing I did after reading the Times piece was to see just how easy it is. Not only is it easy, it's CHEAP! I paid GB £8 for 500 Instagram followers. Within 10 mintes I had just shy of 1,000 new followers. So they under promise and over deliver, all the while playing to people's ego. That buying followers is a thing does not surpise me. I wonder how many others bought followers in response to this article.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]