This is so much better

OK. You asked and i explained.

Because i like to hear a plurality of views and opinions and not always rely on other's reporting. Also many are hugely powerful and what they say is importnat to world events. I don't want to be in a bubble and it's good to have my views tested.

i was focussed on the principle of selective reporting of followers infering beliefs rather than anything else.

You perhaps have more faith in the Times than I do

They detail 3 of 25 in the above - we don't know who the other 22 are or thier type. I'm not implying an agenda, it just struck me as bad journalism.

Indeed, although i feel a seperate point. I'm just sceptical of reading too much into who a person follows to infer beliefs - i follow diverse hundreds but the press could selectivly type cast me by selecting a particular type. It's a dangerous road.

Does following always mean approval? I follow many people i can't stand but they are influencial for good or ill and i want to see what they say first hand to judge for myself.