What is Twitter, a social network or a news media?

Twitter, a microblogging service less than three years old, commands more than 41 million users as of July 2009 and is growing fast. Twitter users tweet about any topic within the 140-character limit and follow others to receive their tweets. The goal of this paper is to study the topological characteristics of Twitter and its power as a new medium of information sharing. We have crawled the entire Twitter site and obtained 41.7 million user profiles, 1.47 billion social relations, 4,262 trending topics, and 106 million tweets. In its follower-following topology analysis we have found a non-power-law follower distribution, a short effective diameter, and low reciprocity, which all mark a deviation from known characteristics of human social networks [28]. In order to identify influentials on Twitter, we have ranked users by the number of followers and by PageRank and found two rankings to be similar. Ranking by retweets differs from the previous two rankings, indicating a gap in influence inferred from the number of followers and that from the popularity of one's tweets. We have analyzed the tweets of top trending topics and reported on their temporal behavior and user participation. We have classified the trending topics based on the active period and the tweets and show that the majority (over 85%) of topics are headline news or persistent news in nature. A closer look at retweets reveals that any retweeted tweet is to reach an average of 1,000 users no matter what the number of followers is of the original tweet. Once retweeted, a tweet gets retweeted almost instantly on next hops, signifying fast diffusion of information after the 1st retweet. To the best of our knowledge this work is the first quantitative study on the entire Twittersphere and information diffusion on it.

[1]  M. Kendall A NEW MEASURE OF RANK CORRELATION , 1938 .

[2]  Sharon L. Milgram,et al.  The Small World Problem , 1967 .

[3]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks , 1998, Nature.

[4]  Rajeev Motwani,et al.  The PageRank Citation Ranking : Bringing Order to the Web , 1999, WWW 1999.

[5]  M. McPherson,et al.  Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks , 2001 .

[6]  E. Rogers,et al.  Diffusion of innovations , 1964, Encyclopedia of Sport Management.

[7]  M. Newman,et al.  Why social networks are different from other types of networks. , 2003, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[8]  Ronald Fagin,et al.  Comparing top k lists , 2003, SODA '03.

[9]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Global organization of metabolic fluxes in the bacterium Escherichia coli , 2004, Nature.

[10]  Ramanathan V. Guha,et al.  Information diffusion through blogspace , 2004, WWW '04.

[11]  Christos Faloutsos,et al.  Graphs over time: densification laws, shrinking diameters and possible explanations , 2005, KDD '05.

[12]  Alessandro Vespignani,et al.  Epidemics and immunization in scale‐free networks , 2002, cond-mat/0205260.

[13]  Ravi Kumar,et al.  Structure and evolution of online social networks , 2006, KDD '06.

[14]  Michael L. Nelson,et al.  Agreeing to disagree: search engines and their public interfaces , 2007, JCDL '07.

[15]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  Worldwide Buzz: Planetary-Scale Views on an Instant-Messaging Network , 2007, WWW 2008.

[16]  Kathleen C. Schwartzman,et al.  DIFFUSION IN ORGANIZATIONS AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS: From Hybrid Corn to Poison Pills , 2007 .

[17]  Timothy W. Finin,et al.  Why we twitter: understanding microblogging usage and communities , 2007, WebKDD/SNA-KDD '07.

[18]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  The dynamics of viral marketing , 2005, EC '06.

[19]  Seungyeop Han,et al.  Analysis of topological characteristics of huge online social networking services , 2007, WWW '07.

[20]  Didier Sornette,et al.  Robust dynamic classes revealed by measuring the response function of a social system , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[21]  Hawoong Jeong,et al.  Comparison of online social relations in volume vs interaction: a case study of cyworld , 2008, IMC '08.

[22]  Jon M. Kleinberg,et al.  Tracing information flow on a global scale using Internet chain-letter data , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[23]  Balachander Krishnamurthy,et al.  A few chirps about twitter , 2008, WOSN '08.

[24]  A. Bernardo,et al.  Huberman, Romero, and Wu, Fang. . Social Networks that Matter: Twitter Under the Microscope. , 2008 .

[25]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  Planetary-scale views on a large instant-messaging network , 2008, WWW.

[26]  Ben Y. Zhao,et al.  User interactions in social networks and their implications , 2009, EuroSys '09.

[27]  Eric Sun,et al.  Gesundheit! Modeling Contagion through Facebook News Feed , 2009, ICWSM.

[28]  Krishna P. Gummadi,et al.  A measurement-driven analysis of information propagation in the flickr social network , 2009, WWW '09.

[29]  Fang Wu,et al.  Social Networks that Matter: Twitter Under the Microscope , 2008, First Monday.

[30]  Virgílio A. F. Almeida,et al.  Characterizing user behavior in online social networks , 2009, IMC '09.

[31]  Mary Beth Rosson,et al.  How and why people Twitter: the role that micro-blogging plays in informal communication at work , 2009, GROUP.

[32]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  Meme-tracking and the dynamics of the news cycle , 2009, KDD.

[33]  Bernard J. Jansen,et al.  Micro-blogging as online word of mouth branding , 2009, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[34]  Qi He,et al.  TwitterRank: finding topic-sensitive influential twitterers , 2010, WSDM '10.