5 ms·
Blue checks are an arbitrary decree from above that someone inside Twitter likes you. The whole thing is a sham.
by riffic 5y ago
Blue checks are an arbitrary decree from above that someone inside Twitter likes you. The whole thing is a sham.
- solarkraft 5y agoIt's even a badge of shame in some circles.
- paulcole 5y agoWhich circles is it a badge of shame in?
- jdavis703 5y agoThe folks who rage against the media and political establishment (blue checkmarks are basically granted automatically to journalists at traditional media outlets and to anyone running for office.)
- spacelamb 5y agoYes; among these political groups, "blue check" is a pejorative as belonging to the member of the "liberal elite" [0]. [0] https://theoutline.com/post/1323/verified-blue-checkmark-derogatory-insult-twitter https://theoutline.com/post/1323/verified-blue-checkmark-der...
- dymk 5y agoThis one
- ctdonath 5y agoBlue check used to mean "identity objectively verified", useful to confirm the twiterati using the name is the actual person/group others think they are. Then came the Great Bluecheck Purge, where anyone exhibiting opinions not preferred by Twitter management had their blue check revoked/denied - which in practice was applied generally to Republicans, who constitute about half the USA. (We're talking mainstream views, not just weirdos.) Ergo, anyone with a blue check is, by Twitter decree, not a Republican. For Republicans, blue check now amounts to a "badge of shame" indicating Twitter-approved opposition. Blue checks were changed from "identity confirmed" to "one of us, not them".
- riffic 5y agothis happens to leftists, journalists, and other critics, not just repubs: https://www.wired.co.uk/article/twitter-political-account-ban-us-mid-term-elections https://www.wired.co.uk/article/twitter-political-account-ba... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_suspensions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_suspensions
- jlawson 5y agoNo, you're confused. Those are suspensions. We're talking about removing the blue check mark or denying it. This happens to people who aren't morally-approved by Twitter for moral reasons. For example, the blue check was removed from Milo Yiannopolous (the gay conservative provocateur who was canceled a few years ago), after he was previously verified. Every "rule" on Twitter is no more than a tool used to create the appearance of left-wing consensus by suppressing alternative views through selective enforcement. Nothing is even-handed, and it's incredibly obvious when you're the target.
- riffic 5y agodirtbag leftists can't get blue checks and right wingers say "no one's being persecuted but us". please move beyond this a bit and come to the understanding that every single thing Twitter does is arbitrary from rules enforcement, labeling, suspensions, etc. It's the nature of the service, and frankly boring at this point. We could talk more about why the business model sees this to continue (twitter can't disrupt its income stream and the rules that get enforced are those that allow Twitter to stay in business).
- imwillofficial 5y agoDo you have any examples of dirtbag leftists losing their blue check marks due to political ideology or some such?
- ctdonath 5y agoInteresting comparison: for the Left, you choose the qualifier “dirtbag” which presumably is a very small fraction of that faction ... while comparing that unpleasant small minority with the entire other half of the political spectrum. I can (sort of, but would rather not) see denying authentication to problematic nutcases of any kind, and can see that edge case not pedantically covered/excluded by “nobody but us”. Sure, we can chalk up fringe cases to inconsistent boundaries of enforcement. But lumping in a plurality of users with edge cases is willful blindness to the blue check exclusion being official from-the-top policy, not mere erratic enforcement of vague rules by underpaid contractors. Sure it’s boring if you’re not in the targeted plurality. It’s significant when Twitter is your only viable podium in the public town square, and anything you want to say that’s meaningfully & reasonably dissenting may get you kicked out because Twitter management is decidedly biased.
- nathias 5y agothe well-educated circles
- ghaff 5y agoBlue checks are mostly reserved for some specific categories of users: celebrities, mainstream media journalists, and politicians. It's not absolute but my experience is that being only reasonably well known (thousands of followers) in, say, tech circles isn't enough to get a blue check. So it's not so much being liked but being in a category which Twitter has determined is important to avoid people faking identity. I had someone spoof my profile a while back. (Chose hard to tell apart user name and used my profile pic etc. to do some crypto spamming.) Twitter promptly nuked their account but wouldn't verify me afterwards.
- jlawson 5y agoWhile there are many factors, an essential one is that someone in Twitter finds you morally acceptable. If Twitter thinks you're not morally good, they will actually remove a blue check which they previously granted (e.g. they did this to Milo Yiannopolous). If blue checks were just about identity veritifaction, this would make no sense since Milo's account's identity was never in question. Ergo, it isn't just about identity verification.
- honkdaddy 5y agoThis has been my experience as well. A perfect example is podcasters - Anna [1] hosts a relatively popular and occasionally politically inconvenient podcast called Red Scare. No check. Alexandra [2], the host of Call Me Daddy, also a popular comedy podcast, naturally has a check. This is pretty openly discussed by e-celebs of middling fame. Until one reaches a critical mass of popularity, you won't get a check if you don't correctly toe the culture line. [1] https://twitter.com/annakhachiyan https://twitter.com/annakhachiyan [2] https://twitter.com/alexandracooper https://twitter.com/alexandracooper
- retpirato 5y agoThe expectation to "toe the line" is twitter's problem.
- notreallyserio 5y ago