13 ms·
I think the thing to watch will be ads and other revenue streams. Most companies aren't going to want their ads next to 'free for all' content, so we'll see wha
by davidw 4y ago
I think the thing to watch will be ads and other revenue streams. Most companies aren't going to want their ads next to 'free for all' content, so we'll see what happens.
- bobiny 4y agoI hope ads will die some day. To me they are just annoying and very rarely informative.
- davidw 4y agoWhere's the funding come from, then? That was not a cheap purchase.
- bobiny 4y agoI wasn't talking about Twitter specifically. Ads are a dominating revenue model: Youtube, Instagram, Facebook etc. I had an idea of people using crypto payments instead of likes. A platform would take a cut.
- WJW 4y agoI'd expect like counts to fall precipitously if you had to pay for every single one.
- LegitShady 4y agoyou can see with youtube premium that the value of individual ad views is basically nothing, and getting users to pay a reasonable monthly fee ends up being much more profitable. nobody will do the 'pay per video' thing because its not as profitable as just getting a monthly sub.
- bobiny 4y agoI wouldn't pay for each video I watch now, but I could probably watch less. It's like eating junk food now: you can eat nonstop but it doesn't nourish.
- usefulcat 4y agoOTOH a like would mean a lot more because it would mean someone literally put their money where their mouth is.
- bobiny 4y agoYes. I feel that "liking" is a consumerist approach to conversation. Buy/no buy, swipe left/right. It's more nuanced in real world. We don't always agree or disagree with people, sometimes we just listen and exchange words. So yeah, there would be less "likes", but they would be more substantial.
- freejazz 4y agoOr maybe they wouldn't because it's just twitter and why would anyone pay to "like" something? seems more like the crypto fantasy for a world where everything is a financial transaction. I don't think its a realistic assessment of how people actually value money and speech.
- bobiny 4y agosure
- treeman79 4y agoSo PBS? Or government funded/controlled socials.
- bobiny 4y agoMaybe something funded by public, yes. I think there is a need for smaller existing community-based social networks. They can be paid for by certain people or crowdfunded once in a while like Wikipedia.
- TheOtherHobbes 4y agoIn unrelated news: https://twitter.com/ProfessorShaw/status/1586064942972575746 https://twitter.com/ProfessorShaw/status/1586064942972575746 Also, I assume the point is a presidential run within the next cycle or three.
- zimpenfish 4y agoThe tweet has been deleted - do you have the content?
- lupire 4y agoDeleted tweet. Elon Musk is not eligible to be President.
- bena 4y agoWhich is probably why they deleted the tweet. They were probably getting ratio'ed to hell. So they decided to delete their shame rather than take their lumps.
- marssaxman 4y agoWhat does "getting ratio'ed to hell" mean?
- remarkEon 4y agoReplies >>> likes + retweets Implying that people are dunking on you for being wrong instead of amplifying what you said.
- ldh0011 4y agoThat tweet doesn't seem to exist when I click the link. Unless I'm missing some context if you're saying Elon will run for president I don't think that can happen because he was born in South Africa.
- 4y ago
- wombatpm 4y agoHow about charging anyone with more than X followers? Or pay to be verified? or pay for support? Supported bot accounts or corporate accounts? There are many options they could pursue. Twitter was not helped having Jack as a part-time CEO for all of those years.
- jcranmer 4y ago> How about charging anyone with more than X followers? Excellent idea, let's deplatform people by creating lots of bot accounts to follow them so that they have to pay for it!
- bobiny 4y agoVerified accounts means it’s somebody well known outside of Twitter. So it’s beneficial to Twitter to have them. I see today’s Twitter as a chat app where popular people promote their content to less popular. Maybe it would make sense to help populars sell stuff directly and get a cut.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- SamBam 4y agoClearly they generate revenue, though. What's your proposal for how Twitter makes money? Just double-down on the harvesting of personal information instead?
- bobiny 4y agoPersonal info harvesting is at the core of most ad based businesses. Like Google of FB. I’d help people sell things. Like be a platform to sell books, nudes, news etc.
- lake_vincent 4y agoWell, speaking in those terms, I think the thing to watch will in fact be censorship. Elon is extremely idealistic, so it will be fascinating to watch him melt down when confronted with the reality of how complex free speech and censorship issues really are. I predict that he will succeed in turning Twitter into the rightwing safehaven that "Truth" Social, Parlor, etc have all been trying to become. He's making a deal with the devil to fund Twitter, and if that means selling out to guys like Peter Thiel and other conservative power brokers, then he will do it. Just in time for the 2024 presidential election media cycle too...What could possibly go wrong?
- BashiBazouk 4y agoAnd what if China requests a tweet removed or user banned and puts a Tesla factory or those sweet tax cuts on the line?
- lake_vincent 4y agoOh that's what I mean - he will enforce his own definition of free speech and censorship. It will be usual "Rules for thee but not for me" kinda thing. It will be a constantly shitfing goalpost, and he will always have some bullshit justification for why whatever he decides is correct. It won't be free speech, it will be Elon speech. He is a petulant child with too much money, and not enough humility. His sink stunt tells you everything you need to know - this is all about Elon. God help us all.
- umeshunni 4y ago"Rules for thee but not for me" I mean, that's no different from Twitter and other platforms currently operate in terms of how they define hate speech or who they cancel.
- davidw 4y agoIt's not easy is it? I think the point is that while right now, 'unfair' things might happen, perhaps they will become even more uneven in the future, as he exerts more personal sway into what's ok and what's not, rather than attempting to stick to some guidelines.
- mooreds 4y agoI agree. I think he understands that, as indicated by https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1585619322239561728 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1585619322239561728 That doesn't sound like someone burning Twitter to the ground. Also, many are acting like Musk has free rein in running the company. Yes and no. Beyond needing employees to actually run the thing, he also has loans to pay back ($13B!) and investors to maintain good relationships with. More on that here: https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/who-is-financing-elon-musks-44-billion-deal-buy-twitter-2022-10-07/ https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/who-is-financing-elon-mus...
- sosodev 4y agoI'm very skeptical of the idea that Twitter can become a place where people discuss things with civility. It seems like the mechanics of the conversation encourage outrage.
- kitsunesoba 4y agoOn top of that, historically internet forums have required fairly strict moderation to remain civil for any significant amount of time. Without that, one quickly ends up with an incredibly unpleasant space that repels more people than it attracts.
- strangattractor 4y agoThat kind of info will be difficult to get - he is taking the company private - no need to make all those bothersome public disclosures.
- amazing_rae_123 4y ago> Most companies aren't going to want their ads next to 'free for all' content, so we'll see what happens. This is a misconception. Outsiders don't know anything about ads. Twitter needs to be more useful, especially to iOS users. It users outside of major US metros. It needs older users. It will need better targeting and science. Then it will increase ad revenue.
- tenebrisalietum 4y agoOlder users have Facebook, and Facebook is withering.
- yeahunlessnow 4y agoCompanies will want their content next to specific content which they will pick when placing bids based on a reputation value which will be computed by a secret algorithm. Whoever has a better reputation will attract more ads and get more cuts from the money twitter collects. Like, I want to show my gun ads next to Trump's posts and want to show abortion clinics next to Biden's. Nothing wrong with this. Want to show public works ads next to Bernie's ads. Then when you want to post wild things, anonymous mode will kick in and those posts will not be posted in an identifying fashion. They will be posted in an area that cannot lead to the post owner being "accurately" identified. That way nobody knows who posted it. That should reduce some legal issues. If the poster decides to post it as the owner and successfully gets past the Nazi filter, their reputation will be affected depending on the public reception of their post. Just like in real life. You stay away from people who you don't like.
- neves 4y agoBut we can see Twitter being supported by extreme right foundations. I'm from Brazil and the extreme right is abusing all the communication platforms. it's a complete madness in what people believe right now. Our society is on the verge of crumbling.
- konfusinomicon 4y agothe same could said about the far left in America. well i guess it could be said about the far right too. its up to the folks in the middle, the progreservatives (or consegressives depending on how you look at it), to end the madness but most of us are too busy living our own lives to care about how crazy the fringes of society are beyond the entertainment value of it all.
- shaoonb 4y agoI'd be interested to see some examples of the far left trying to influence communication platforms.
- konfusinomicon 4y agoisn't it the far left that's all up in arms about musk buying Twitter in the first place? to me the average left leaning person could give two shits about who owns Twitter, yet a ton of Twitter employees vowed to quit if the deal went through. subjective as it is, those of which I'd consider far left.
- freejazz 4y agoSo the far left wants to control twitter because there are people that want to leave twitter if musk runs it, and these people must be from the far left because...
- konfusinomicon 4y ago...of the intolerant views that they subscribe to that have been covered time and time again during this saga over the last few months.. oh but wait, there is intolerant views on the right too? id wager a fair bit that any right leaning employees of Twitter, intolerant as they may be, are snug as a bug in a rug right now, as are the centrists
- paganel 4y agoThey'll go where the eyeballs are, this is capitalism, in the end. If Twitter manages to attract more eyeballs, the advertisers will come.
- yamazakiwi 4y agoAt least to advertisers, eyeballs are not all divided equally.
- paganel 4y agoI guess we'll have to wait and see. The signals coming from the "liberal" side are certainly tipping the balance on the "non-liberals" being the more level-headed ones, at least that's what the recent nonsense written by The Verge editor [1] makes me believe. [1] https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/28/23428132/elon-musk-twitter-acquisition-problems-speech-moderation https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/28/23428132/elon-musk-twitt...
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- topynate 4y agoThe 'brand safety' super omnia argument isn't nearly as straightforward as it's made out to be. Twitter already has an enormous amount of content that is perfectly within the terms of service, yet that you wouldn't think most companies would want their ads next to. Hardcore pornography, for example. It more or less works out, because Twitter ads aren't associated with particular tweets in the same way that YouTube ads are associated with particular videos. The argument only goes through when you look at the platform reputation as a whole. That's why platforms like Parler have trouble attracting ads. There are a lot – a lot – of people trying to hit Twitter's platform reputation right now, but their problem is that the best place to degrade companies' (and people's) reputations is Twitter.
- RetpolineDrama 4y ago> yet that you wouldn't think most companies would want their ads next to That's fine, I won't see any of their ads anyways and neither should any of you. Now, can we please get over this era of _advertising companies_ deciding what is acceptable in the digital town square?
- chasd00 4y agohe should make the platform $5/month to post and free to read. That would likely increase the quality of content and provide another source of revenue.
- augustuspolius 4y agoI don’t think $5/month would stop the biggest offenders: content farms. I have reported dozens of accounts that have posted tens of thousands of tweets in the last few years. Accounts that spam US politicians with things like “I am a democrat and I will not vote for Biden because he is neo-Nazi…” and so on and so forth. Accounts that ruin the discussion, waste attention. Accounts that are obviously not authentic users but are a part of a foreign propaganda campaign. These accounts can afford to pay $5/month.
- manquer 4y agoContent farms use a lot of accounts , they have to - impersonate realistic users easy to shadow ban block otherwise that $5/user/month quickly adds up. The reason this idea does not go far is because the people who pay usually do not necessarily post good quality content , that degrades the quality of UGC and view time therefore ad revenue loss
- augustuspolius 4y agoPaying for a million fake users would be peanuts to a state actor. Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, etc... These users post on average 2 tweets per hour (my personal observation, not a reliable data point). A million users tweeting twice every hour that's 1.5B tweets. Per month. I agree that introducing paid accounts would make it harder for content farms to exist - primarily due to the fact that they would need a very large number of bank accounts and/or payment cards. However I don't think it's a real solution to this problem. Maybe as a part of some holistic anti-bot system? Yes, that could work.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- sfgd1 4y agoIt's not like they were doing any decent job at moderation so far. Take a look at this: https://nypost.com/2021/01/21/twitter-sued-for-allegedly-refusing-to-remove-child-porn/ https://nypost.com/2021/01/21/twitter-sued-for-allegedly-ref...