4 ms·
Yeah I was wondering about this, surely they didn't have 145 million "users" as in "created accounts", which is typically the definition. I imagine someone who
by jiganti 16y ago
Yeah I was wondering about this, surely they didn't have 145 million "users" as in "created accounts", which is typically the definition. I imagine someone who checked the website once is part of their "user" tally.
- ivankirigin 16y agoTwitter has been quoted claiming 176M unique visitors a few months ago. That stat makes sense for a site like nytimes.com, but not for a social network. The number of active users is close to a standard in the industry. When Facebook says it has 500M+ users, they mean people who have accounts and have visited the site in the last 30 days. Thing is that everyone knows the right stats to publish. They only use 145M because is sounds better than (the more likely) 70M active. This doesn't come as a coincidence as Twitter is trying to start selling ads. Attractiveness to advertisers is directly proportional to audience size.