Brands that don’t buy enough Twitter ads will lose verification
www.theverge.com
Hard to not see this as a threat, right?

Starting August 7th, advertisers that haven’t reached certain spending thresholds will lose their official brand account verification. According to emails obtained by the WSJ, brands need to have spent at least $1,000 on ads within the prior 30 days or $6,000 in the previous 180 days to retain the gold checkmark identifying that the account belongs to a verified brand.

…

Threatening to remove verified checkmarks is a risky move given how many ‘Twitter alternative’ services like Threads and Bluesky are cropping up and how willing consumers appear to be to jump ship, with Threads rocketing to 100 million registrations in just five days. That said, it’s not like other efforts to drum up some additional cash, like increasing API pricing, have gone down especially well, either. It’s a bold strategy, Cotton — let’s see if it pays off for him.

  • MilitantAtheist@lemmy.worldEnglish
    3·
    11 months ago

    Imagine what this must look like on the inside.

    You’re a software engineer at Twitter. You keep getting these weird tasks that you know are stupid, but you keep doing them just to see where the hell this bullshit will end up.

    • Zetaphor@zemmy.ccEnglish
      2·
      11 months ago

      And you haven’t already quit because you’re on an H1B/GC visa, and so your residence in the US is tied to your employment, effectively making you a corporate owned slave.

      • SCB@lemmy.worldEnglish
        01·
        11 months ago

        TIL people deported their slaves when they were unruly.

    • enu@lemm.eeMEnglish
      4·
      11 months ago

      At this point, I’d say: Providing entertainment to the internet while also helping grow the fediverse

      • theTrainMan932@infosec.pubEnglish
        0·
        11 months ago

        Having never been on twitter myself I’m especially entertained, watching and laughing from a far corner of the internet

        • glimse@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          11 months ago

          Twitter has a bad reputation from the “buzzworthy” people. It was nowhere near as bad as the terminally online would have you believe. I’d even say it was a GREAT site before 2016.

          It’s a social media platform. You (used to) choose whose tweets you saw. As such, it was easy to curate your account to stick to one kind of content. I never saw politics or sports, I only followed funny people. And I had every major brand straight up blocked

          The 140 character days were like text Vine where you made a joke through constraints and I loved it

    • jsveiga@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      0·
      11 months ago

      Since he started his act about buying Twitter I saw that as a personal vendetta to harm it - the ultimate tantrum for being mocked at there and not being under his control. He said he’d buy then backed off just to hurt Twitter’s value, but then when he was forced to buy it for the first offer value, he got even more butthurt.

      It’s pretty clear that everything he’s done since is to get revenge and destroy it. It’s insane that some people keep praising his decisions towards Twitter as anything but ridiculous.

      He’s the rich brat who doesn’t get brown nosed by the waiter in front of his date, then proceed to buy the restaurant just to fire the guy.

      • penguin@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        01·
        11 months ago

        Didn’t he offer to buy it so he could sell a bunch of tesla shares without sinking the value? And then he tried to back out, but was forced to buy it.

  • Lightor@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2·
    11 months ago

    Wait, wait, wait, lemme get this right.

    Problem: They were low or revenue.

    Response: Increase API costs

    Problem: API costs are too high

    Response: People started scrapping Twitter

    Problem: People are scrapping the site

    Response: Make users sign in to view tweets

    Problem: People have to sign in to see any ads too

    Response: Tell companies that if they don’t spend enough on ads they will lose verification.

    I mean, what’s next?

  • sirnak@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1·
    11 months ago

    This look more and more like a speedrun on how to bring down a well established platform in under a year.

    • demonsword@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      11 months ago

      I’m not American but I confess I’m relieved that he can’t do that. Just try to imagine someone like him being able to fire nukes.

      • xkforce@lemmy.worldEnglish
        025·
        11 months ago

        We dont have to imagine given that Trump was president for 4 horrible years.

      • Whiskey Pickle@lemmy.mlEnglish
        0·
        11 months ago

        for some reason, i don’t think that would stop him from trying anyway and then throwing a tantrum for being ineligible.

        • orclev@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          11 months ago

          I’m not convinced the GOP wouldn’t nominate him, and that the current SCOTUS wouldn’t rule he was eligible to run.