3 ms·

Twitter must already know engagement is higher with the check mark, and thus worth the money for many orgs. I'm surprised the NYTimes is not paying and it's no

• matthewdgreen 4y ago
  They control engagement and they can make it higher for the checkmark. Hell, they can push engagement to zero for anyone who doesn't pay, and it looks like that might be the plan. The problem is that the set of people with the checkmark is small and (in aggregate) fairly terrible, and is mostly disjoint from the valuable content creators on the platform. Twitter has lost a lot of good users and communities, but it's still relatively usable and stable. It's not going to survive another artificial engagement squelch targeted at non-paying posters. So either Musk will do that and there's no reason to pay for a dead platform, or he won't do it and it's better not to pay him. But the real argument is that enough people refuse to pay, perhaps it will speed up the process of forcing Musk to back off from his current approach and instead focus on making the platform better for all users (and hence bringing back high-paying advertisers) rather than doubling down on this failing subscription idea.