Buying followers & engagement in the music industry

[GAETANOS]

Hey everyone,

I want to openly talk about something you can see all over Instagram but people rarely discuss honestly: buying followers and engagement.

In the music industry it often feels like it’s basically standard practice you can spot it in jumps, unnatural like/comment ratios etc. And somehow it seems to “work” because of mass psychology: big numbers create social proof, and a lot of business people (promoters, bookers, brands, A&Rs) look at follower count first before they dig deeper. Also, real reach can come from other channels (TikTok, Spotify, PR, touring, collabs) Instagram then becomes more of a “shop window number” than the actual source of traction.

Also, bot/fake followers aren’t even limited to smaller artists. Even huge mainstream profiles (think celebrity-level accounts) have bots sitting in their follower base whether through spam, inactive accounts, or purchased growth. So the line between “organic” and “inflated” is blurry in general, and in music it seems especially normalized.

Do you see it as a legitimate lever if an artist already has real momentum? (e.g. going from 60k organically to 100k by “topping up”)
What are you guys thinking about this?

 

[Razentyler]

If you have organic traffic coming in from other platforms, you can redirect this on Instagram very easily, Then if you buy Bots or even Engagement on IG, That will not matter, This will just be social proof and do more good than harm.

The only problem with buying is that you lose organic growth, but if you get it from somewhere else, then the entire point changes, it helps more with social proof and gives better brand deals and promos.

 

[GAETANOS]

any other idea?

 

[ToyBox Marketing]

Just keep in mind, botting followers might hurt the accounts reach; however, as long as you add a safe number of additions; the account will be safer. That is something you should take note when botting.

 

[GAETANOS]

What do you think how much one can bot? Having 70K followers what should be save

 

[loganmaddox]

I don't really understand why you would want to inflate your subscriber numbers if it's all about audience engagement and not just the numbers. For example, when selling advertising, advertisers will still look at statistics on reach, clicks, and so on. You can inflate your numbers to 10 million, but what's the point if there's no engagement?

 

[GAETANOS]

Actually it's not about engagement only. It's about followers. Especially in the entertainment industry people look first followers, if there is engagement is valid and thats it. they dont look too much into the numbers

 

[GAETANOS]

If it's too much. But if its like 20% do you still think?

 

[Nikolaos]

Hey everyone,

I want to openly talk about something you can see all over Instagram but people rarely discuss honestly: buying followers and engagement.

In the music industry it often feels like it’s basically standard practice you can spot it in jumps, unnatural like/comment ratios etc. And somehow it seems to “work” because of mass psychology: big numbers create social proof, and a lot of business people (promoters, bookers, brands, A&Rs) look at follower count first before they dig deeper. Also, real reach can come from other channels (TikTok, Spotify, PR, touring, collabs) Instagram then becomes more of a “shop window number” than the actual source of traction.

Also, bot/fake followers aren’t even limited to smaller artists. Even huge mainstream profiles (think celebrity-level accounts) have bots sitting in their follower base whether through spam, inactive accounts, or purchased growth. So the line between “organic” and “inflated” is blurry in general, and in music it seems especially normalized.

Do you see it as a legitimate lever if an artist already has real momentum? (e.g. going from 60k organically to 100k by “topping up”)
What are you guys thinking about this?

Nah fake bots and followers only inflate your metrics. I wouldn't rely on them and sudden spikes would make me suspicious unles the guy/gal running the account produces good music.

 

[Eban Mare]

Big follower jumps can look impressive, but when you actually run conversion ads or send a media kit to brands, the numbers get tested fast. Low engagement, weak saves, poor audience quality, it shows. If there’s real traction from streams, shows or collabs, I want scale that with paid traffic

 

[GAETANOS]

Obviously, real traction and great music have to be the foundation. But based on that?

 

[Tyrarith]

Honestly? Short term it can create fake social proof, but long term it usually hurts.


Bought followers don’t stream music, buy tickets, or engage.
Low engagement rate = red flag for brands and promoters who actually check.


If you already have real momentum, better to boost it with PR, collabs, ads, content, not fake numbers.


Big numbers might impress at first glance, but real industry people look at engagement + traction, not just followers.

 

[conceptsofo]

Hey everyone,

I want to openly talk about something you can see all over Instagram but people rarely discuss honestly: buying followers and engagement.

In the music industry it often feels like it’s basically standard practice you can spot it in jumps, unnatural like/comment ratios etc. And somehow it seems to “work” because of mass psychology: big numbers create social proof, and a lot of business people (promoters, bookers, brands, A&Rs) look at follower count first before they dig deeper. Also, real reach can come from other channels (TikTok, Spotify, PR, touring, collabs) Instagram then becomes more of a “shop window number” than the actual source of traction.

Also, bot/fake followers aren’t even limited to smaller artists. Even huge mainstream profiles (think celebrity-level accounts) have bots sitting in their follower base whether through spam, inactive accounts, or purchased growth. So the line between “organic” and “inflated” is blurry in general, and in music it seems especially normalized.

Do you see it as a legitimate lever if an artist already has real momentum? (e.g. going from 60k organically to 100k by “topping up”)
What are you guys thinking about this?

I'd say it's subjective. Being more niche has its advantages as well. I'd rather be an authority in a niche than someone in a generic space.

 

[GAETANOS]

How do you mean that? I mean authority in a niche is always the goal no?

 

[burgess_witherspoon]

Can you provide active followers?

 

[GAETANOS]

Can you provide active followers?

How do you mean

 

[Link Empire CO.]

A niche can be powerful i prefer being an authority in a specific area instead of competing in a crowded general space

 

[CashPhantom]

Short term it boosts social proof. Long term it looks fake to labels who check stats. Better push real traffic from tiktok or spotify.