Before the internet was infiltrated with social media networks, celebrities were “untouchable”. They were put on pedestals above us common folk and our ideas about them were conceived purely by what they portrayed on television. Today, thanks to sites like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, we’ve been exposed to a whole other side to celebrities and quite frankly, I don’t like it.
Here’s why. Following some of my favorite celebrities, namely my favorite musician, has tainted my overall impression of him. Not only do his Tweets have zero substance to them, but he’s among the many that often times just RT urging fans who demand shout outs and birthday wishes. As a diehard fan of this individual (who shall remain nameless simply out of respect), and a PR professional, it makes me feel icky.
So it begs the questions, should celebrities run their own Twitter accounts? On one side, how great is it to know that what is being posted really is coming straight from the source; a glimpse into their “real” world if you will. On the other hand, if what they are posting doesn’t represent them in the best possible light, entrusting in a dedicated social media team to post on their behalf could be the smarter choice.
Don’t get me wrong, not all celebrities need a lesson in social media. A large majority takes to Twitter to interact with their fans in ways that are both creative and commendable (see Ellen DeGeneres and Lady Gaga). But the same cannot be said for many others. And it’s to those individuals that I make this plea: think before you Tweet. Spare yourself preventable embarrassment, or worse, a loss of a fan that once held you in such high regard.
Have a tale to tell about the good, the bad and the ugly of your favorite celebrity on Twitter? Comment on who you love (or hate) to follow.