24% of Tweets Created by Bots
mashable.com
mashable.com
Maybe it should read 'already 24% of tweets created by bots'.
A bit of a trend would be useful information.
Would be interesting to have a breakdown on 'useful' bot tweets and 'spam' bot tweets as well, the article suggests that there is a bit discrepancy but does nothing to document how big.
I seem to remember danah boyd talking about something to that effect at one point; that a lot of the Twitter activity she'd observed among young people was about talking amongst a small circle of friends. The only people really broadcasting on Twitter are people who were already famous for something besides their 140 character brilliance.
One of the problems I've had to address in developing a social media analysis product is figuring out whose tweets get read by humans, and which ones are just followed by other bots. It's hard to approximate without access to lots of data which isn't available over the API. On the other hand, it will be easy for twitter to figure this out.
A few days ago, some users stopped showing up in search results. Are they starting to tighten the noose around spammers? The beauty of twitter is that I've already whitelisted those who I want to hear from. It can completely eliminate the spam problem with email.
But Twitter should make applications mark themselves as such to let tools filter out auto tweets (imo twitterfeed should count as a bot)
A better metric would be something like tweets*followers, or some other way to measure consumption of tweets instead of just production. Spam-bots will do poorly on that metric, but useful bots should do fine.
What Twitter needs is a way to filter the drivel that comes from humans.