Why I Don’t Need to Follow Other Farrah Fawcett or Charlie’s Angels Pages

---

One of the assumptions people make in fandom spaces is that pages should automatically support each other. If you run a page about the same celebrity, the same show, or the same cultural niche, the expectation is that you should follow one another, share one another’s content, and treat that network as a built-in community. I no longer believe that.

​Running a page does not create an obligation to support other pages simply because they exist in the same orbit. It certainly does not create an obligation to follow pages that repost other people’s work, promote questionable merchandise, operate with low standards, or contribute little beyond recycled material and shallow engagement. At some point, the issue is not whether a page belongs to the same fandom. The issue is whether it operates with any integrity.

In theory, a fan page should be an extension of admiration. It should reflect some degree of care toward the person, the work, or the cultural legacy being celebrated. In practice, many pages function very differently. They are not built on thought, curation, or stewardship. They are built on convenience. They post whatever is easiest, recycle whatever gets attention, and borrow whatever value they can from stronger pages without doing much to earn it.

That same lack of standards shows up in the way some pages handle merchandise. If a page is willing to promote products built around a celebrity’s image without asking basic questions about legitimacy, rights, or who is actually profiting, that tells you something. It suggests that availability has become more important than responsibility. If it exists, if it can be bought, if it gets attention, then that is apparently enough. I do not accept that standard. A public image, especially one tied so closely to a person’s identity and legacy, should not be treated like an open resource for anyone to monetize simply because demand exists. The willingness to look away from those questions is not harmless. It reflects a broader carelessness that runs through too much fandom culture: the assumption that admiration alone justifies circulation, promotion, and profit. It does not.

The same principle applies to images. I have no interest in pretending that other pages are doing me a favor by reposting work from my pages. That idea only makes sense if one assumes that all exposure is valuable and that any circulation is good circulation. I do not believe that. Exposure by itself is not automatically beneficial, especially when it comes from pages with low standards, weak judgment, or no respect for authorship. In those cases, the exchange is not equal. They benefit far more than I do. A page that reposts my images gains stronger material, better presentation, and the appearance of higher-quality content without having to produce any of it. It borrows value it did not create. Meanwhile, I gain very little from being associated with pages that do not reflect the standards I have worked to build. That is not arrogance. It is an honest assessment of the imbalance.

Once that becomes clear, the idea that I need to follow those pages starts to look absurd. I do not run a page in order to participate in a circle of mutual respect. I run a page to build something with a specific point of view, a specific standard, and a specific sense of purpose. That means I am free to decide that some pages are not worth my attention. In fact, I would argue that making those distinctions is part of maintaining quality. Every follow, every association, and every visible connection communicates something. At minimum, it suggests that a page is acceptable to you. I am no longer interested in extending that approval where it has not been earned.

There is also a larger lesson in all of this. Fandom is often described as though it were automatically communal, generous, and supportive. Sometimes it is. But fandom can also be lazy, extractive, and careless. It can reward repetition over originality, access over authorship, and visibility over standards. When that happens, the smartest thing you can do is stop treating every page in the space as equal. They are not equal. Some pages curate. Some pages preserve. Some pages actually think about quality, authorship, context, and legacy. Others recycle, imitate, promote whatever is in front of them, and lean on the work of others while contributing very little of their own. Lumping all of that together under the word fandom is far too generous.
​
So no, I do not feel any need to follow other Farrah or Charlie’s Angels pages simply because I run one myself. If a page does not reflect the standards I respect, I do not owe it my attention, my approval, or my association. If that leaves me connected to fewer pages, that is not a loss. It is a filter. At this point, I would rather have fewer associations and better standards than a larger circle built on imitation and indifference. That seems like the clearer choice.