Names in order of first out to last out with number of twitter followers to date:

@danielle_marr 8,443
@BigRonAtkinson 2,559
@sophielanderton 30,827
@dustindiamond 13,634
@realbrucejones 2,381
@CourtneyStodden 179,166
@louiespence 919,653
@VickyEntwistle 34,070
@Mario_Falcone 870,004
@McGiff 377,582
@laurenharries 34,686
@abzlove 53,079
@CharlotteGShore 1,539,514

Looking at this (not sure if a couple of the minor players are right as their accounts aren't verified but they seem legit) I wonder why Louie didn't do better and why Sophie did so badly! The Americans I can understand - UK programme and all that.

(Just been doing my accounts and suddenly had the urge to do this )

Does anywhere near 1.5m watch Geordie Shore? (Or anything on MTV, for that matter.) If so, that's worrying

Generally seems to be just under or just over a million. TOWIE gets more. Coronation street gets about 10 million.

Just over a million which is great for a cable network. Highest rated show on MTV.

GS is pretty big in Australia too, probably where some of her followers come from.

As the saying goes there are 'lies, damn lies and statistics'

In principle the number of followers on twitter should equate to the public support that the housemate has which in turn should equate to how well the HM does on BB. The stumbling block though is that following someone on twitter is free but voting for the HM on BB is not. Also, a more subtle point is that following someone on twitter does not mean you like that person, some people follow people on twitter just to ridicule or be outraged at what they tweet.

So as we have seen on BB the number of followers cannot be taken as an true indicator of how successful a HM will be on BB.

That said I think Charlotte had this sown up from day 1 due to the sheer volume of her twitter followers. Reasons for this a) the demographic of Charlottes followers is likely to be younger people who I think are more likely to vote and b) her followers were so much higher than the next HMs that even allowing for a percentage of followers who would not pick and the vote or her that still left a higher percentage who would. So basically she could have sworn, farted, burped, pissed the bed, thrown her toys out of the pram in BB and still won - errr think that's what he did .

Great post

(I'm sure there were more replies on this thread - and the forum - have we been culled?)

bless little Bruce and Ron's cottons

I know lol! I wasn't even sure if they were the real accounts but they were the ones with the most followers

Yes, and most celebs and their PR agents buy twitter followers to give the illusion of popularity.

Charlotte can have me for £10

Really? I didn't know that. Presumably they are false accounts then?

I'll be anyone's for £9.50

Yep. I wouldn't be surprised if the bigger number accounts are mainly because of being bought.

http://gizmodo.com/5994621/which-cel...tter-followers

It's a stupid pointless trend.

my god ... the mind boggles .... why? ..... just why? ....

Im not getting it either.
I do know that twitter and facebook generate fake votes that their clients pay for.
The votes are not a true reflection of genuine people who do phone in to tv shows.
The votes are rigged and pre paid for.
Therefore the winner is picked from the second they enter the house.
There was a programme on recently about fake generated votes via twitter and facebook.
Its like... a few nerdy guys in an Asian or another country...they are paid a big sum of money to generate fake votes and they do it.
They do it very well.

From those stats it would appear that generally speaking there is a pattern to suggest that your amount of Twitter followers certainly helps.

Fake FB and Twitter followers I understand, and also fake votes for those online polls that BB do, but paid-for votes? I'm a bit sceptical about that. It's similar to the idea that gambling syndicates back their bets with for Hms with votes. How are they to know that other HMs are not being backed even more heavily and may have genuine popularity on top of that? It just doesn't seem cost effective.

They are known on Twitter as 'eggs', as they have a name but no avi other than the blank oval that is the default pic.