4 ms·
When someone's an verified user, they're a public figure and have an outsize impact on the Twitter discourse (they tend to have a lot of followers). The things
by roywiggins 10y ago
When someone's an verified user, they're a public figure and have an outsize impact on the Twitter discourse (they tend to have a lot of followers). The things they say are inherently newsworthy. If the archiving is done for the purpose of scholarship or commentary it sounds like a compelling argument for it being fair use.
- thwarted 10y agoI think that one of the things that an account should have to trade in for being a Verified Account is the ability to delete tweets. Being a public figure and having the notoriety that is implicit in having a Verified Account, the account should have to stand by what it tweets, or at least not be able to modify the public record and break references to its content.
- exolymph 10y agoI like this idea, but I think a big function of the checkmark is reassuring people that an account belong to who it says it belongs to. For example, @realDenaldTrump is not verified (even though people still fall for it). That said, Twitter administers the checkmark in puzzling and thoroughly non-transparent ways.
- thwarted 10y agoI think a big function of the checkmark is reassuring people that an account belong to who it says it belongs to That is in fact the only reason Verified Accounts exist, and is the reason that non-celebrities or people otherwise lacking notoriety can not get Verified Accounts. It's not worth Twitter's effort to make my account, or any random user, Verified, it seems. But as Twitter's role continues to expand in the public sphere, it is really the public who gives out Verified Accounts (through making someone famous), and the public should have requirements, such as a certain level of consistency, from the accounts it gives the power/influence of the Verified Account to.