
It’s interesting how we all see the terms of public dialog. Of course, when I hear follower, I think Jim Jones and Kool-Aid.
I get the audience concern. We once lived in a world of listener and broadcaster. The broadcaster broadcasted, the listener listened. For some the term implies paternalism, a concept anathema to the libertarian bias of networked publics.

Dan Gillmor has referred to all of us as the former audience. Those people who react to, participate in and even change a story as it evolves.
I’m okay with audience. But it depends on the context of what I’m doing.

My Twitter feed is a good example. Some dialog, some narrowcasting. Some connection with friends and colleagues, some publishing for a select group.
Perhaps we see audience as somehow detached and anti-social. Some believe that social tools are all about the chit chat. Twitter as cocktail party. But new media are as much about publication as they are about repartee. Public media have evolved such that each of us, in the absence of any dialog, can be the broadcasters of our own ideas. We are, in effect, on stage when we publish.
So I suspect audiences are inevitable, whether we like it or not.
Do you have an audience, followers or both?