Last week, Twitter announced that it would start removing "legacy verified checkmarks" from the profiles of celebrities, journalists, civil servants, and other public figures. Those users will have to pay for a premium Twitter subscription if they want to keep the check mark.
Already some high-profile account holders have fired back.
Last week, Los Angeles Lakers star LeBron James bluntly said he "ain't paying," while TV actor Jason Alexander has gone even further and pledged to leave Twitter if he loses his blue check mark.
It isn't just individuals either that could lose the status symbol.
On Sunday, Twitter removed the blue check marks from The New York Times, after the paper of record made it clear last week it would not pay the social media platform for verification of its institutional accounts.
"We aren't planning to pay the monthly fee for checkmark status for our institutional Twitter accounts," the Times said in a statement Sunday. "We also will not reimburse reporters for Twitter Blue for personal accounts, except in rare instances where this status would be essential for reporting purposes."
The New York Times is hardly alone in refusing to pay up for the check mark.
The Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, BuzzFeed, Politico, and Vox have also publicly announced they won't pay for Twitter Blue, the fee-based service that includes the blue check marks.
Elon Musk called The New York Times "hypocritical" for selling subscriptions while refusing to pay for its verified account.
"NY Times is being incredible hypocritical here, as they are super aggressive about forcing everyone to pay *their* subscription," Musk tweeted on Sunday.
Revenue Stream
To keep the blue check mark will range from $8 per month for an individual user to a starting price of $1,000 monthly for an organization, along with $50 monthly for each affiliate or employee account. However, Twitter Blue doesn't actually verify the individual accounts, as had been done with public figures and others prior to Musk's acquisition of the company last fall.
Blue check marks were originally created as a way to verify politicians, activists, and journalists/reports, and were used as a tool to help stop the spread of misinformation. By having a blue check mark, an individual was meant to be seen as credible.
In fact, most legacy blue checks aren't those of the status level of LeBron James or other celebrities.
"Verified blue check marks were meant to let other users know those people were who they said they were," said Professor Jason Mollica, professorial lecturer in the School of Communication at American University.
"As a long-time Twitter user, I see blue check marks as proof that someone is who they claim to be, and that can include experts in their field. I know it isn't a fake account," added Mollica. "Now with the paid element, it has been reduced to window dressing."
A Real Life Star Bellied Sneetches
Musk really should have seen this coming.
Allowing people to pay for the blue check marks almost seemed to be reminiscent of the Dr. Seuss story "The Sneetches," where those without green stars were able pay for the privilege – only for the stars to then lose their special status.
In the case of the fictional tale, it was intended as a satire of discrimination.
However, in real life, there seems to be little good reason to pay for the privilege of "being verified." Trust needs to be earned by news organizations, and those who achieve a level of celebrity are probably already famous for more than simply tweeting!
"Part of this has to do with Elon Musk and his own public profile," explained Dr. Chris Haynes, associate professor of national security and political science at the University of New Haven. "Musk should have seen that monetizing Twitter by having people and organizations pay for verification wasn't ever going to work. Like all social media companies, people are used to it being free."
Moreover, many of these news organizations have established accounts with tens of thousands to millions of followers. There now seems to be almost no value-add from a blue check mark other than its status.
The same likely holds true for most celebrities.
Perhaps such verification could benefit an up-and-comer, but only so far. If James and Alexander aren't paying, a question could be asked why the next star would need to do so? In fact, as noted, Twitter isn't exactly doing any serious due diligence when it comes to actually verifying those seeking a blue check.
"On one level, it could be used to flaunt something, like a vanity license plate," said Mollica. "It could let some people seem like they're more important, or at least feel that way."
It could also lead to something far more nefarious, where those with the blue check marks could use it to spread misinformation or even disinformation.
"There will likely be those who want to use it that way, and it will come down to the masses understanding that those individuals with the blue checks paid for them," Mollica continued. "We need to remember that just because someone paid to be verified that the information they are sharing is not legitimate and factual."
There could also be fake accounts, possibly those with blue check marks show up on Twitter – and like the fictional Sneetches, it may be hard to tell who is who at some point.
"There is a real drawback that we could see fake accounts increasingly popping up," warned Haynes. "That account could then post things that could put the actual person in a bad light."
Bad Time For Twitter To Change The Game
Musk could also be rightfully accused of picking a very bad time to ruffle feathers on the service. Already, he's faced an exodus of users from Twitter who don't subscribe to his personal views as a free-speech absolutist. By charging for a service that was meant to serve as a form of confirmation for celebrities, news organizations, and public figures on Twitter, the platform now risks driving away even more users.
"Elon Musk may be a genius, but he isn't the best businessman," suggested Haynes. "Just as Musk upset many with his political views, he's now rocking the boat by charging for what was free. Musk paid a lot to buy Twitter, and at this point, he may not know why he bought it, but it is clear he doesn't want to lose money in the process."
The subscription fees for Twitter Blue could seem like little more than a blatant money grab at this point. Yet, social media companies have long struggled to actually monetize their businesses, and Haynes suggested that Musk may not have a lot of options on the table to create revenue streams.
This may not be the best course of action, as Twitter is already facing an exodus of users, and this effort to charge for status could result in another.
"I'm sure there has been discussion of a paywall," he added. "But people will just move to another service."
"celebrities" - Google News
April 04, 2023 at 04:24AM
https://ift.tt/MRfGvyi
Celebrities And The New York Times Losing The Blue Check On Twitter – Does Being Verified Really Matter Anymore? - Forbes
"celebrities" - Google News
https://ift.tt/O7G2jks
https://ift.tt/o9m7fB4
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "Celebrities And The New York Times Losing The Blue Check On Twitter – Does Being Verified Really Matter Anymore? - Forbes"
Post a Comment