Some context upfront:
Twitter looks at several factors to determine if an account is considered „significant.“ Some of these factors may include:
Popularity of the account: If an account has a large number of followers, this may indicate that it is considered relevant and important by many people.
Activity of the account: If an account regularly posts tweets and actively participates in Twitter discussions, this may indicate that it is an important voice in its community.
Expertise of the account: If an account is managed by an individual or organization that is recognized as an expert in a particular field, this may indicate that the account is an important source of information and insight in that field.
It is important to note that these are not the only factors and that Twitter’s decisions are final and not publicly disclosed.
So lets compare:
Markus(just as example for a man with similar stats in the same field (politics) has less of a following, both post frequently while Annalena has a bigger following but overall not tweeted as much.
Markushas the fully colored checkmark, while Annalena has not.
So Markus is more important than Annalena?
From an algorithmical point of view it is most likely that the overall amount of tweets are having a big influence on the significance of a person.
Here we have a system that rewards people that talk a lot instead of rewarding the people which bring things on the point.
Truth is not complicated.