Acclaimed Journalist engagement report
@Jonathan_Witt - 60K followers on X
Measured over 13 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on September 30, 2026.
Engagement
A typical post picks up 1.5K interactions against 60K followers, an engagement rate of 2.55%. Measured over 13 original posts, its engagement rate beats 94% of 20,445 tracked accounts of a similar size. Comparing inside a size band matters here: engagement rate falls as accounts grow, so a raw rate would mostly just re-measure the follower count. Posts are seen about 50K times each, and 3.08% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 83.0% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 1.8 posts a day over the last 30 days, though only 10% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 16:00 UTC, and Wednesday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 13 posts sampled, 69% carry an image or video and 8% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 6.3K interactions, about 4.1x its own typical post.
Measured over 13 original posts from a 30-day window, last computed on September 30, 2026. Recurring tag: #fz1073.
Compared with accounts its own size
Acclaimed Journalist's engagement rate beats 94% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (20,445 accounts, accounts of similar size (decile 5 of 10)). A percentile is spread evenly by construction, so 50 really is the middle of that group and 90 really is its top tenth.
On engagement per impression rather than per follower it beats 72% of the same group. When those two numbers disagree, the gap is about how far its posts travel rather than how people react to them.
Where this sits in the catalog
At 2.55%, Acclaimed Journalist sits above the 90th percentile of the 204,694 accounts in this comparison. That places it in the top 10% band, which runs 2.55% to 82.4%.
Show the percentile table
| Percentile | Engagement rate |
|---|---|
| 10th percentile | 0.004% |
| 25th percentile | 0.024% |
| 50th percentile | 0.143% |
| 75th percentile | 0.677% |
| 90th percentile | 2.55% |
| 99th percentile | 82.4% |
This ruler is the whole measured catalog, not a size-matched group: it shows where the raw rate falls across every account we can measure, all of which are large. For a like-for-like comparison, read the size-band percentile above instead. See how the bands are built
Posting timing
This account posts most often around 16:00 UTC, and Wednesday is its busiest day of the week. The bars below are the catalog-wide pattern, with this account's own busiest slot marked. They do not show how this account performs at each hour: we keep one aggregate per account, not one per hour, so that measurement does not exist in our data.
Show engagement by hour posted, utc as a table
| Hour (UTC) | Vs author median | Posts |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00 UTC | -1% | 89K |
| 01:00 UTC | -2% | 90K |
| 02:00 UTC | -3% | 88K |
| 03:00 UTC | -4% | 94K |
| 04:00 UTC | -5% | 76K |
| 05:00 UTC | -4% | 75K |
| 06:00 UTC | -5% | 86K |
| 07:00 UTC | -5% | 93K |
| 08:00 UTC | -4% | 108K |
| 09:00 UTC | -4% | 124K |
| 10:00 UTC | -3% | 129K |
| 11:00 UTC | -3% | 141K |
| 12:00 UTC | -3% | 154K |
| 13:00 UTC | -3% | 167K |
| 14:00 UTC | -4% | 173K |
| 15:00 UTC | -2% | 176K |
| 16:00 UTC | -3% | 171K |
| 17:00 UTC | -3% | 159K |
| 18:00 UTC | -2% | 149K |
| 19:00 UTC | -2% | 141K |
| 20:00 UTC | -1% | 131K |
| 21:00 UTC | 0% | 116K |
| 22:00 UTC | -2% | 100K |
| 23:00 UTC | -1% | 90K |
Show engagement by day of week as a table
| Day | Vs author median | Posts |
|---|---|---|
| Sunday | +5% | 393K |
| Monday | +1% | 483K |
| Tuesday | -2% | 520K |
| Wednesday | -3% | 472K |
| Thursday | -2% | 430K |
| Friday | -3% | 447K |
| Saturday | +2% | 393K |
Formats this account uses
Its own posting mix on the left, and what each of those formats does across every account we track on the right. Only formats where the effect clears our publish test appear here, so an empty row is a format we could not measure rather than one that does nothing.
| Format | This account | Catalog effect | 95% interval | Accounts behind it |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Image or video | 69% of posts | +111% | +108% to +115% | 34K |
| Outbound link | 8% of posts | -41% | -42% to -40% | 32K |
| Typical length | - | +15% | +14% to +16% | 32K |
- 69% of this account's sampled posts carry an image or video. Across the catalog, posts with an image or video run 111% above the same accounts' other posts.
- 8% of its posts carry a link off X. Across the catalog, posts with an outbound link run 41% below the same accounts' other posts.
- Its average post runs 444 characters, which falls in the over 280 characters band. Across the catalog, posts over 280 characters run 15% above the same accounts' other posts.
These are catalog-wide differences applied to this account's own posting mix, not a measurement of how each format performs for this account specifically. We keep one median per account, not one per format per account, so the second thing is not something this data can tell you.
Best tweets
- Sep 29, 20264.1x their median
Heute gehen die Videos ganz schön rum, in denen die Zerstörung des Gazastreifens gezeigt wird. Selektiv. Denn gezeigt wird immer Rafah, der Hafenbereich von Gaza-Stadt und der Nordosten. Ich habe einfach mal genau das Gleiche gemacht. Ich habe nur einfach woanders gezoomt. 😊 https://t.co/U4bEH0mRLu
- Sep 29, 20263.6x their median
Thanks to fracking, America is now by far the world's largest oil producer. https://t.co/fGPNqT8kMh
- Sep 30, 20263.4x their median
🔴 Incident vol Flydubai entre Dubaï et Tel Aviv. Le Boeing 737 MAX 8 a été gravement endommagé lors de sa descente rapide au moment de l’attaque. Selon une analyse des données de vol, les passagers du vol flydubai FZ1073 auraient subi une phase de quasi-apesanteur (environ 0 à 0,2 g) pendant 15 à 25 secondes, après une chute d’environ 4 360 mètres en 37 secondes.
- Sep 30, 20262.8x their median
Flydubai flight #FZ1073, a Boeing 737 MAX 8, registration number A6-FKF, flying from Dubai to Tel Aviv, diverted to Tabuk, Saudi Arabia, following an onboard security incident. Timeline (UTC): 03:05 — Take off from Dubai 05:21 — Altitude fluctuations begin 05:22 — Aircraft drops more than 14,000 ft in under 30 seconds 05:31 — Squawk changes to 7700 (general emergency) 05:38 — Squawk changes to 7500 (unlawful interference) ~06:45 — Lands at Tabuk Regional Airport Playback: https://t.co/auSvqOodca Blog post: https://t.co/XIHNBMVruJ
- Sep 30, 20262.0x their median
Something went very wrong aboard a commercial aircraft today. Flydubai Flight FZ1073, flying from Dubai to Tel Aviv, diverted to Tabuk, Saudi Arabia, after a violent incident in the cockpit reportedly involving one pilot stabbing the other. The Boeing 737 MAX 8 was carrying roughly 170 people. During the incident, the aircraft reportedly squawked 7700 and then briefly 7500, the code associated with unlawful interference. Flight data shows a rapid loss of roughly 14,000 feet in about 30 seconds. Israeli and Saudi fighter aircraft were scrambled before the aircraft landed safely in Tabuk. Passengers reported screams from the cockpit, blood and a pilot being attacked with a knife. Passengers and off-duty aviation personnel onboard reportedly helped restrain the attacker and regain control of the aircraft. Was this a violent altercation between pilots, was someone attempting to take control of a commercial aircraft? Officials are reportedly examining the possibility of an attempted hijacking or deliberate crash, and some reporting has described it as a suspected terror incident. We need to know what happened, why it happened, and whether it was planned.
- Feb 29, 20161.6x their median
You can be politically correct. I'm going to stick to just being correct.
- Sep 30, 2026
Severe damage to the aircraft involved in the FlyDubai incident, a Boeing 737 MAX 8, following the ‘forced’ descent (from 30,000ft to around 15,000ft in just approx 30 secs) during the time of an incident in the flight deck (involving pilots, and reportedly some passengers) https://t.co/YXcnQ4Igtz
- Sep 29, 2026
The robot that displaced a factory worker in 2019 made you richer. Not the factory owner. You. This confuses people who treat jobs as the end goal of economic life rather than the means. Henry Hazlitt demolished this error in 1946 in "Economics in One Lesson." When a machine replaces ten workers on an assembly line, those ten workers represent released labor, which redirects toward production the economy couldn't afford before. The machine, meanwhile, drops the price of the manufactured good. You buy the same shirt for less. That gap between what you pay now and what you paid before is real purchasing power, a raise you received without your employer signing anything. Let's look at televisions. A 60-inch 4K television cost around $1,500 in 2015. Today you buy comparable picture quality for under $350. Automated manufacturing drove that collapse. The factories didn't become charitable organizations; they competed for your dollars by deploying capital more efficiently, and the savings landed in your pocket. This process terrifies politicians because the benefits disperse invisibly across millions of consumers while the displaced workers are visible, concentrated, and angry. So politicians respond by subsidizing inefficiency, taxing automation (as the EU seriously proposed in 2017), or erecting tariffs that punish you for wanting cheaper goods. Every such intervention forces you to pay more than the market price, transferring your purchasing power to a protected producer and their employees. Free market thinkers have stressed one fact since Mises and Böhm-Bawerk formalized capital theory: rising capital intensity, meaning more and better machines per worker, is the entire mechanism behind rising real wages historically. Britain improved living standards between 1760 and 1850 by replacing hand-operated looms with machines, freeing labor to produce medicine, railways, and eventually the electricity grid. Automation is capital accumulation made visible. You benefit from every iteration of it, provided the state leaves the price system alone to do its work.
- Sep 30, 2026
The population of Johannesburg, South Africa reaches 3 million (3,000,000). https://t.co/nOfGrpWlrC
- Sep 30, 2026
A terrorist attack on a flight targeted at Israelis and this is how News24 reports it. What is actually wrong with you @AdriaanBasson? https://t.co/VSat3ECDtt
Ranked by total interactions across everything we have tracked for this account, which is a longer history than the 30-day window the rates above use. The multiple compares each post to this account's own median.
Recurring topics
The most frequent hashtags in the sampled posts. They describe what this account writes about; they are not a performance signal, and the catalog-wide breakdown on the hub shows how little hashtag count moves.
Buy or sell Twitter (X) accounts - escrow-protected
PlayerSells is an escrow marketplace for Twitter (X) accounts. Every deal is protected, with no middleman risk.
Reading these numbers
A typical post picks up 1.5K interactions against 60K followers, an engagement rate of 2.55%. Measured over 13 original posts, its engagement rate beats 94% of 20,445 tracked accounts of a similar size. Comparing inside a size band matters here: engagement rate falls as accounts grow, so a raw rate would mostly just re-measure the follower count. Posts are seen about 50K times each, and 3.08% of those impressions turn into an interaction. That is about 83.0% of the follower count, which is the gap between an audience on paper and an audience in a timeline. Posting runs at about 1.8 posts a day over the last 30 days, though only 10% of days saw any activity at all. Most posts go out around 16:00 UTC, and Wednesday is the busiest day of the week. Of the 13 posts sampled, 69% carry an image or video and 8% link out. The account's strongest tracked post pulled 6.3K interactions, about 4.1x its own typical post.
- What is Acclaimed Journalist's engagement rate on X?
- Acclaimed Journalist (@Jonathan_Witt) has an engagement rate of 2.55%, based on the median interactions across 13 original posts from the last 30 days against 60,151 followers. Replies, reposts and quote-posts of other people are excluded from that sample.
- Is that a good engagement rate?
- At 2.55%, Acclaimed Journalist sits above the 90th percentile of the 204,694 accounts in this comparison. Those comparison accounts are all large ones, because our scanning cadence is weighted towards big accounts, so this is a ranking among peers of similar scale rather than a ranking across X.
- Does @Jonathan_Witt have real engagement?
- Its engagement rate beats 94% of the tracked X accounts closest to it in follower count (20,445 accounts), which puts it in the top 10% for its size group. Ranking inside a size band matters because engagement rate falls as accounts grow, so a raw rate would mostly re-measure the follower count. It is a starting point for a look at follower quality, not a verdict on it.
- When does @Jonathan_Witt post?
- Most posts go out around 16:00 UTC, and Wednesday is its busiest day, at roughly 1.77 posts per day across the measured window.