Technology

60324 readers

4181 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

1142

Brands that don't buy enough Twitter ads will lose verification (www.theverge.com)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

220 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Starting August 7th, advertisers that haven’t reached certain spending thresholds will lose their official brand account verification. According to emails obtained by the WSJ, brands need to have spent at least $1,000 on ads within the prior 30 days or $6,000 in the previous 180 days to retain the gold checkmark identifying that the account belongs to a verified brand.

...

Threatening to remove verified checkmarks is a risky move given how many ‘Twitter alternative’ services like Threads and Bluesky are cropping up and how willing consumers appear to be to jump ship, with Threads rocketing to 100 million registrations in just five days. That said, it’s not like other efforts to drum up some additional cash, like increasing API pricing, have gone down especially well, either. It’s a bold strategy, Cotton — let’s see if it pays off for him.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 287 points 1 year ago (56 children)

Bro what is elon doing????

[–] jsveiga 59 points 1 year ago (24 children)

Since he started his act about buying Twitter I saw that as a personal vendetta to harm it - the ultimate tantrum for being mocked at there and not being under his control. He said he'd buy then backed off just to hurt Twitter's value, but then when he was forced to buy it for the first offer value, he got even more butthurt.

It's pretty clear that everything he's done since is to get revenge and destroy it. It's insane that some people keep praising his decisions towards Twitter as anything but ridiculous.

He's the rich brat who doesn't get brown nosed by the waiter in front of his date, then proceed to buy the restaurant just to fire the guy.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Eh, with Elon, I prefer to assume stupidity over malice, because he also had already done shit to hurt his own image before he owned Twitter. Who was he being malignant against then? Himself? To own, uh, his supported??? Everything falls in place by just doing the single logical step of "he dumdum".

[–] jsveiga 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

What about stupid malice, or maliciously stupid? :-)

Does a bully think being a bully hurts their image?

As an extreme narcissist, he can't fathom the idea that anything he does can hurt his image. Surrounded by devoted minions, everything he does boosts his ego. He's mauling Twitter, and thinks this projects a powerful image of himself.

I never liked this guy, I think he's an narcissistic spoiled brat, but even then I can't believe he could possibly be so stupid to think that things like throwing away the Twitter brand for "X" make sense.

load more comments (22 replies)

load more comments (53 replies)