Posted on 01/31/2018 3:48:52 AM PST by SMGFan
Roeper's name came up in the New York Times investigation into prominent people padding their social media accounts with fake followers.
Film critic Richard Roeper's reviews and columns will not be published by the Chicago Sun-Times as an investigation is conducted into his Twitter following, the paper announced Monday.
Roeper was one several prominent journalists, sports stars, politicians and celebrities who had paid to increase their Twitter followers with fake accounts, according to a New York Times report published over the weekend. Roeper's Twitter following currently numbers over 225,000, but it was not specified by the Times report how many of those followers were fake.
(Excerpt) Read more at hollywoodreporter.com ...
55 Celebrities and More Who Have Fake Followers, According to The New York Times
https://www.yahoo.com/news/55-celebrities-more-fake-followers-173034706.html
I just heard about the ability to “buy” twitter followers but I don’t understand the concept of how it works or why anyone would do it.
Someone would need to be one seriously self-absorbed a$$hole to BUY twitter followers.
These people need affirmation to attain self worth.
If they don’t receive it in their personal lives, they go out and buy it. It means they are not comfortable in their own skin.
Fake reviews
wonder if he’ll even phone in a review for a movie he didn’t watch like Roger Ebert was caught doing
Twitter still hasn’t shown a profit.
The whole thing is a bunch of fake.
Rush Limbaugh has exposed how the “thousands of angry consumers” who send boycott tweets to corporations are really just a dozen people with a lot of bots retweeting their blacklist-Rush campaign to sponsors.
Just read a story the other day that one can buy a batch of 100,000 fake Twitter accounts for something ridiculously cheap like $10. There are small businesses which open up the accounts on Twitter in bulk and then will sell them as "followers". The person buying the "followers" does it to make it look like a lot of people are actually interested in what that person has to say on Twitter. It looks more impressive if they have 225,000 followers instead of say 2,000.
The number of fake accounts on Twitter makes one wonder just what percentage of the accounts in the system are real. The value of Twitter itself, already very ethereally priced, could become more suspect if it has a fraction of the apparent number of accounts because a large percentage are fake.
What’s funny is that if you read the comments to this article in The Hollywood Reporter, many Hollywood types defend Roeper and fake followers.
The media is truly a cesspool.
“I just heard about the ability to “buy” twitter followers but I don’t understand the concept of how it works or why anyone would do it.”
Being a “celebrity” is, by definition, a popularity contest. The way some people become popular it to already seem popular. Popularity builds on itself because “followers” are, by definition, not leaders. They follow. The more followers, the more poplar, and popularity translates into television interviews and ad sales. Money, in other words.
Thanks for the explanation.
My bet is that 95%+ are fake.
The burden of proof is on Twitter to show otherwise.
They can buy Facebook “friends,” too.
The goal is to make them appear more popular than they are.
I know some hacks who are trying to writers and they’ve heard that you need a “platform” (which means, they need to go out and build an ‘audience’ that will guarantee several thousands and thousands of book sales before a publisher or agent will accept them...thus doing all the marketing work for the publishers who then only need to publish and profit) and so they create Facebook pages and slowly start to purchase friends to create that platform.
It’s all BS. There’s a video on youtube that discusses it in detail.
These are sad times we live in. Not because of the technology and all the blessings the good Lord has allowed humanity to develop and enjoy...but how humanity chooses to use those blessings.
Gertrude Stein was an idiot thinking the 1920’s was the “lost generation.”
Roeper was always criticizing Trump.
Please clap.
In some cases it has become an employment performance metric. “You do your job well, sure, but you only have 3,000 twitter followers. Sorry, no raise for you. We may need someone younger to replace you.”
You can be a billionaire and not show a profit for your company if you arrange your expenses to avoid taxes. Most Hollywood movies make a very small or no profit. I hope that the new tax law will help correct this.
I recall that Roger Ebert panned a certain film and caused it to tank. The producers sued him, so great was his influence on the,public.
Sued him for his opinion ?
The movies make “no profit” (ask the screenwriters who’s cut is based on a share of the profits) yet Hollywood throws hundreds of millions of dollars at the sequels.
Seems that somebody is lying.
“Don’t you know who I am?” <— attitude infests the media, politicians, and entertainers. “Must have status. To hell with humility.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.