Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

I_Like_Driving1 t1_j96dsqd wrote

lol, social media platforms are shooting themselves in the foot

371

0x6835 t1_j96n1jw wrote

People said Elon Musk was insane for doing this and now Meta is doing the exact same thing.

Remind me of Samsung making fun of apple then copying the same ideas.

186

I_Like_Driving1 t1_j96ngxw wrote

That doesn't mean they're achieving anything.

91

0x6835 t1_j96nqj0 wrote

They're extracting more money from clout chasers.

56

I_Like_Driving1 t1_j96p1w8 wrote

Clout is only happening if you have an audience. I doubt Facebook/Twitter will maximize their userbase with these options. We'll see what happens.

27

0x6835 t1_j96u0zl wrote

Not FB, but instagram. A lot of small businesses/ E-girls/ content creators who are not notable enough will buy it.

22

Spaceman-Spiff t1_j98cz85 wrote

If you get boosted in the algorithm everyone who monetizes social media will pay for it. I see people who rail against Elon but still have Twitter blue because they depend on it to make money.

13

totemlight t1_j9ae283 wrote

Yeah but they might stop making money if people stop using it….

2

Butterbuddha t1_j9azxmf wrote

Wait I thought that the only way for it to be worth it was if you ARE notable, so you can protect your brand? Grandma doesn’t need the blue check but Volvo might

1

0x6835 t1_j9b4ugd wrote

Volvo most likely already several verified accounts. But some mid-size youtube/podcaster may not be notable enough to get one so they'll buy one.

2

CaliforniaF0g t1_j97uafe wrote

They could've earned a lot more if it was for an ad-free experience. My guess is that will be Facebook's next paid DLC.

9

Daimakku1 t1_j97xba2 wrote

Didi he finally give up on that Metaverse thing or is he still at it?

Havent read any shill articles about it for a while now.

7

LeonBlacksruckus t1_j97lyz5 wrote

People are so ignorant. They are responding to increased privacy rules and regulations and trying to get off relying on ads as their only revenue driver.

It’s also a very simple way to essentially eliminate bot farms.

4

stsh t1_j9evlk9 wrote

I have a hard time believing that 2 of the largest companies in the world with some of the largest data resources on the planet would implement this if they weren’t achieving anything.

There’s clearly something to this that critics are missing.

Any sort of objective dialogue on what this could accomplish when Twitter implemented it was drowned out by Reddit’s vocal hate for Elon.

1

PopCultureWeekly t1_j97xxc4 wrote

And Musk is insane for doing it. Less than 100,000 people are paying for it on Twitter. Lol

13

whatweshouldcallyou t1_j9agjgc wrote

What an insane guy, creating a new revenue stream that ONLY around 100,000 people are paying.

−6

PopCultureWeekly t1_j9apor3 wrote

It’s actually 37,000. If you think 37,000 people paying $8 is going to make a dent in that $44 billion dollar purchase I’m not sure what to say

6

whatweshouldcallyou t1_j9ard92 wrote

37000 in the first few weeks. That number will likely grow to at least double by June. And, it's a non trivial revenue stream.

−6

PopCultureWeekly t1_j9as2k2 wrote

It’s been two and a half months. And it actually went down. My guess is once people started getting that 2nd charge

7

Heelricky16 t1_j99opg6 wrote

I’m not sure what I’m missing here. How is he insane for doing it? Sure, less than 100k May be paying for it, so let’s say 80k, @ $11/month (iOS prices) that’s making them $880k a month just for people who want a blue check mark

−7

OriginalCompetitive t1_j98dkfp wrote

Not at all. The ability to publish a tweet to the world is nearly worthless to most people, but incredibly valuable to some. How much would Nikki Haley have paid, for example, to publish her candidacy for President to the world? $100,000? More? How much would Trump pay per tweet? How much would McDonalds pay? Hundreds? Thousands?

Charging commercial users a hefty price while letting normal people tweet for free is an obvious move, and makes perfect sense.

−20

macweirdo42 t1_j9a7d2f wrote

Power users drive engagement and are the reason anyone comes to Twitter in the first place. He's trying to double dip.

3

epic_null t1_j995mek wrote

... They missed the hype train a while ago. Tumblr's over here making them all rainbow and letting people send them to each-other.

2

JaggedMetalOs t1_j99lb7w wrote

Once they see one company get away with it they all want in on it...

2

GoblinBrain420 t1_j9ac0z9 wrote

As a social media manager this is going to utterly fuck my role.

No doubt I’ll have to start thinking of two tier content ideas. One for the ones who pay and expect more high production posts and then ideas for the normies.

2

Psychobob2213 t1_j9c1zbz wrote

They all know the game at this point. The first one to monetize something that shouldn't be monetized is ridiculed, and maybe delays rolling it out.

A handful of folks remember and point out how ridiculous it is when the second one does it. Then the third does it and we're used to getting screwed.

Luckily we're still on step one with car manufactures coopting the on-disc DLC model with BMW pay-walling heated seats.

1

CaptainClownshow t1_j9eh1k3 wrote

Zucc isn't exactly the picture of smart decision-making. Look at how much money he's wasted on his metaverse .

1

0x6835 t1_j9ej6z1 wrote

He made billions and billions before that lol.

1

ddhboy t1_j98dzm8 wrote

Especially when this has effect on rankings in the algorithm. Twitter shot itself in the foot on that one by making the analytics public. If the people that I follow with tens of thousands of followers are only getting 300 or so impressions per tweet, then what hope do I have with a much smaller follower count? Now you want to me to pay for the prospect of screaming into the wind?

12

SleepingSicarii t1_j98uipp wrote

Definitely not. Facebook saw all the idiots buying Twitter Blue and decided to also get the money for their own platform. People use Facebook and Instagram (and Twitter) for $0, and now even if 1 person buys it every month, it’s worth it. $12 for Facebook to provide almost nothing extra.

7

gabzox t1_j9930p7 wrote

This is what people aren't realizing. Even if only 100k subscribe...that's going to be close to 1 mil profit with little extra work

4

[deleted] t1_j99eevw wrote

[deleted]

0

gabzox t1_j99erns wrote

And it still is. They don't stop verifying...there are requirements and they still must verify you.

0

Mr_Xolotls t1_j975a10 wrote

People laugh at this, but then these companies make money, and then the rest follow.

5

Kombucha_Hivemind t1_j98dsr5 wrote

Until their users bleed away or die off, and they made some money in the short-term, but destroyed a future revenue stream.

13

a_rainbow_serpent t1_j9921sj wrote

Bleed off to where? These twitter and Facebook accounts have replaced corporate PR departments and journalists in media channels. These corporate entities will not fund departments again to write email press releases and email out then follow up on engagement, when a few thousand dollars a year in licence fees allows them to remain in touch. Social media may feel like it’s “influencers” and giving voice to individuals it really is just corporate money all the way down.

Soon social media will be even more like Television or radio with a clear divide between licensed content creators and consumers. We are watching the death of social media as we have know it, which was born out of the death of open internet.

−1

Kombucha_Hivemind t1_j993c5q wrote

Where are younger people going now? Tik tok? Where did people go from My Space? There is nothing holding people to a social network, if enough people leave the social network it will die. The journalists and the corporations will follow the actual people, people don't follow the corporations.

6

cloudxo t1_j9elicd wrote

So if Tik tok does the same thing by charging for a blue badge then what?

0

stevemoveyafeet t1_j99hrem wrote

I'll be deleting FB and Insta if this ends up happening, probably won't be the only one to.

3

happyscrappy t1_j99e9bp wrote

Yeah. People groused about Xbox Live (online play on Xbox) costing monthly money. Next console generation Sony and Nintendo started charging too.

3

stsh t1_j9evw8r wrote

Exactly. Facebook and Twitter understand their businesses better than any average Joe on Reddit.

I don’t understand this decision myself but I’m sure they have their reasons. People commenting things like “bad move, Facebook” just sound dumb.

2

BenWallace04 t1_j98cnmw wrote

Twitter has never been profitable

−4

nockeenockee t1_j993a5n wrote

It made money in 2018 and 2019.

3

BenWallace04 t1_j993v66 wrote

So being slightly profitable for 2 years out of a 17 year existence is something to brag about?

Why would others follow suit? That doesn’t sound like a sustainable model.

−8

Reddit-SFW t1_j997n0w wrote

He was just correcting your incorrect statement, not bragging about it.

8

BenWallace04 t1_j9985u3 wrote

I was being hyperbolic.

I didn’t literally go through ever yearly Twitter financial statement.

The amount of net losses they have faced in 17 years renders those two years moot and then some.

−8

Reddit-SFW t1_j998tp0 wrote

It didn’t translate well over text. But carry on…

6

nockeenockee t1_j99bufb wrote

Accuracy is important. Twitter was never making huge profits, but it was a sustainable company.

3

[deleted] t1_j97n416 wrote

They shoot themselves right in the tick.

4

Kamui079 t1_j99lblc wrote

I don't know why people are pretending like online services offering a monthly paid premium option is some new crazy idea.

1

I_Like_Driving1 t1_j99lg8n wrote

'cuz we got used to having our data mined and using these platforms "for free".

5

nedstarkin t1_j96ekxn wrote

OK, please create a pay wall for login as well, so that we can finally say goodbye to this social media batshit going on for a decade.

216

mdkubit t1_j96htcl wrote

That might actually work better than you think.

Social Media's cesspool is a natural effect of allowing everyone full unfettered access to communicate with everyone else anonymously with almost no repercussions beyond a banned account, which is zero barrier to entry because you can just create a new account and keep going.

If a pay wall exists, the vast majority of these people won't be spending money just to troll others, and the noise will drop off significantly. Granted, the biggest paid actors that try to flood social media with propaganda might still exist, but then again, they might not if it costs them millions of dollars for accounts that they have to keep re-spending every time the farm gets banned.

TL;DR - Mass Trolling exists cuz it's free and anonymous. Remove both of those and it'll likely either vanish entirely, or get niche'd into oblivion.

41

Not_Like_The_Movie t1_j96j7hh wrote

>If a pay wall exists, the vast majority of these people won't be spending money just to troll others, and the noise will drop off significantly.

We saw that this wasn't the case with the massive number of people paying 8 bucks to make fake verified accounts when Elon took over Twitter.

38

BODYBUTCHER t1_j97evr8 wrote

That could also be the case of the novelty of it all and not what the actual trend would be

16

mdkubit t1_j96op3f wrote

Well social media isn't going away, if a paywall doesn't work, there really isn't a solution beyond everyone adapting.

5

GeneralZex t1_j97dpeg wrote

Because that $8 conferred “a benefit”. I dare say if someone had to pay money to use Facebook period they wouldn’t pay at all and social media would die pretty quickly.

2

FoamGuy t1_j9bmujc wrote

>the massive number of people

Massive is a stretch, they just got a lot of media coverage.

1

LeonBlacksruckus t1_j97m6xd wrote

This is just wrong. The number of bots on Twitter have dropped off significantly. Sure a few people changed their handle to exploit this but all in all it was a good choice.

−1

idontevenliftbrah t1_j97ubfw wrote

That's actually an interesting point that I hadn't considered. Thank you

4

mdkubit t1_j984vdm wrote

A lot of the pre-mass-public social media in the 80s and 90s was actually heavily moderated and fairly civil, because the bar to entry was pretty high.

  1. Afford a PC.
  2. Afford a way to connect PC to an online service.
  3. Depending on the service, pay additional fee for Internet specific access.

You could create anonymous names, but your ISP, your online service provider, would know your real info, so getting banned was a lot more of a threat at the time as a result.

You can raise that bar to entry monetarily, and you'd likely get a similar chilling effect. Not necessarily 'great' as a solution, but it is a solution.

7

BiscottiOdd7979 t1_j9b2are wrote

If it helps limit bay shit crazy Americans fall in to echo chambers and not vote for Donald trump or republican types I’m all for it.

2

BiscottiOdd7979 t1_j9b22n8 wrote

I’m hoping they do too. I only keep it as business, events etc are so entwined with fb it is limiting not to have it. If they start charging hopefully this will change though and I will dump it in a heartbeat.

1

DangerousAd1731 t1_j96h0hr wrote

Just saw Zuckerbergs fb post. Too funny, any way to make a buck I guess.

177

weaponizedtoddlers t1_j978yn3 wrote

Well Zuck has to recoup the freight train full of dollars he set on fire building the metaverse somehow

107

ryper42 t1_j9a4o7d wrote

It may be more like a way to keep shareholders from complaining that they're not trying to make a buck. If Meta didn't try to exploit this new revenue stream Musk revealed, there'd be questions.

3

Consistent_Jacket892 t1_j96tg3c wrote

This is the equivalent of dropping a quarter in the back of my recliner, I know it’s there but somehow I really don’t give a shit.

19

capybooya t1_j96ihxl wrote

We are certainly on fast forward mode, I wonder what they'll do when all their short term money grabs are used up?

17

ikoncipher t1_j985jqe wrote

Next up, The Blue Check blockchain, where you just need to be verified once and no need for 3rd party to know your data.

16

LemApp t1_j97eafs wrote

Why does this remind of the Dr. Seuss story of the critters with stars on their bellies. When everyone had stars, they wanted the stars removed. Then it became a vicious cycle of stars going on and off. Finally broke, the entrepreneur who was doing the stars on and off drives away a very rich man. So when can I sign up not to have a blue tick on my account?

13

jasonreid1976 t1_j986v0c wrote

The Sneeches!

A book meant to teach kids how to treat others equally.

7

SmokeyBare t1_j96dqx9 wrote

Trust this source more, because they have money. Sounds about America.

11

Tex-Rob t1_j96kppu wrote

Almost feels like this is a play to 1) see if the market will tolerate this 2) deter people from signing up for theirs or Twitter by making people say, "I thought about signing up for Twitter, but if they are all gonna charge now, f that!" I hate META but I can't say I hate either tactic.

11

sharkethic86 t1_j97xcos wrote

Why would these platforms do something to deter new users from joining? Quite literally against their business model.

7

Martholomeow t1_j98ibvn wrote

So they want people to pay extra and submit ID to help prevent scammers from impersonating them?

LOL I have a better solution to that problem. Delete your facebook account then no one can impersonate you there.

7

SleepingSicarii t1_j98v4b3 wrote

Wouldn’t it be easier to impersonate if that person doesn’t have an account? …

6

suzanne2961 t1_j98t1xh wrote

It definitely won’t help people who use stage names

3

redddcrow t1_j98segl wrote

I stopped using Instagram and Facebook a few months ago. My mental health has improved dramatically. Give it a try, it might work for you too!

7

WontArnett t1_j99d7oo wrote

These social media sites think people don’t want any excuse not to use them.

Just like newspapers charging a paywall to see an article— bitch there’s five other sites just like yours.

7

geophilo t1_j98rtra wrote

Who gives a fuck about Meta

6

RomanCavalry t1_j97mivf wrote

Yanno, I shouldn’t be surprised because Meta does just steal all of their ideas from other platforms after all.

5

Nearby_Cheesecake_42 t1_j98hol4 wrote

I hate that they conflate "notability" with "paid subscribers." Clout chasers of a certain kind will subscribe immediately and the company will have some positive cash flow, but it will drive the user perceived value of the platform down. Love it or hate it, having something exclusive you can't pay for is valued by the active user base. It's part of the platforms culture. The opaque internal validation structure only made it even more enticing to influencers.

It's akin to them ditching their social graph in an attempt to complete with TikTok. Sloppy moves like this show how desperate Meta/Mark is becoming.

5

dewayneestes t1_j96pc7m wrote

This is a nice way of them saying if you have a small business and someone copies your account and pretends to be you they won’t do shit about it unless you pay the ransom.

Honestly even then they probably won’t do shit about it.

4

EscaperX t1_j99ejur wrote

anyone who would pay money to fb so that they can harvest all of your data for every penny that they can squeeze, is an idiot.

4

happynightmare13 t1_j98uxzf wrote

Monthly fee? So you pay this month, your identity is verified. If you don't pay next month, your identity will be questionable. 😅

3

faust_noir_deco t1_j997755 wrote

Honestly, at this point, we're just one more step away from there being an outright pay wall on all social media platforms within the next few years.

We can argue the idiocy of this move in the comments until the sun burns out, but for rich people and the sycophants willing to afford it, it's a dream come true. There's no limit to how much these people will spend to keep the "trolls" and "riffraff" out.

3

Roastage t1_j99o18c wrote

Am I wrong in thinking that the only value the tick ever had was that you couldn't pay for it?

3

truthpooper t1_j98aonh wrote

Oh no! The Twitter is come from INSIDE THE FACEBOOK!

(stolen from Rob DenBleyker, probably butchered his name)

2

mumblewrapper t1_j98p1u5 wrote

What is the point of it? So that I can see which of my "friends" are stupid enough to pay for Facebook? I already know who the stupid ones are. But, I guess this will add to the list potentially.

2

Robjchapm t1_j9abl21 wrote

My grandma will know it’s officially me.

2

MonchichiSalt t1_j9b5h52 wrote

Golly! I'm old enough to remember a time before any social media! And I was fine. It won't be a problem to go back to those days.

2

angrybox1842 t1_j9c0tm4 wrote

There's just so little money in this model, I guess it's mostly free to give people a little checkmark, but it won't solve the revenue drop they've had after so many companies are getting out of social media advertising.

Just for reference Q4 revenue was down 4% over last year and net income was down a whopping 55%. Shit's bad at mother meta.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/meta-reports-fourth-quarter-and-full-year-2022-results-301736645.html

2

jimkurth81 t1_j9ccmnq wrote

so instead of just blocking bot accounts, which could be done easily and was a result of their inability to control account creation, they have decided to capitalize on the opportunity and charge people $12-$15 per month to verify their account profile so they won't get confused with a random bot... Not only do they already collect a ton of revenue from targeting ads for businesses to the users, they want to charge the users monthly subscription fees in addition.

Sounds like it's time for a new free social platform that isn't about charging subscription fees.

I think the reality is that only businesses, celebrities, and people who don't treat money as oxygen (like the rest of us do), will be the only people paying for this verified tick.

2

RobotRippee t1_j9d2yzv wrote

A user subscription to prevent them from allowing someone to impersonate the user.

2

Mountain-Diamond-282 t1_j9dz76o wrote

So now they want you to pay them to steal your privacy, of course there are enough fools to comply.

2

DontListenToMe33 t1_j97cuzf wrote

Tying user verification to a subscription service just makes zero sense to me. I guess it’s good that meta will actually attempt to verify people - Twitter doesn’t bother (it’s a “pay us and we’ll give you a verified check for almost whatever name you want” system). But, generally speaking, why do I care about being verified? Literally makes no difference to me. Just seems like $100+ a year down the toilet.

The original Twitter Blue made more sense… it was like $5 a month for some extra features and no ads. Now, it’s more money + you still apparently get ads + the extra features are still crap.

1

StarDatAssinum t1_j98d4sk wrote

My guess is that this will have a much bigger impact on Instagram than Facebook. Influencers live by the verification system on there (if they don't cross-promote elsewhere)

1

Dark-Myst t1_j97wpsd wrote

For what? I need a blue check on my Facebook feed to tell the ads I'm real?

How fucking stupid is this going to get? 1 more stupid fucking thing Zuckerfuck and I'm done with Facebook.

I should have deleted years ago.

1

itsyaboidarkseid t1_j9atvmy wrote

Gonna be honest, if you're still around now and you don't run a business that needs to be publicly visible, I don't even know how you made it this far lmao

2

AirbagOff t1_j981oes wrote

This worked out so well for Twitter. What could possibly go wrong? /s

1

kyflyboy t1_j98l3jd wrote

DO IT! I want to see Facebook die.

1

overdrive_dd t1_j98w0ld wrote

Taking a leaf out of Elon’s playbook and it’s not even a good book

1

ozzy_og_kush t1_j99ey2k wrote

Meta doing something idiotic in response to another social network doing something idiotic is the pinnacle of hilarity.

1

NibblersNosh t1_j99kuoa wrote

Free, and it always will be …

1

yanshio t1_j99qqix wrote

$ 11.99 $ at month

1

JustDalek_ t1_j99tp2e wrote

Everyone who bought twitter blue: this is because of you demonstrating we are willing to pay for this nonsense lmao

1

tacodepollo t1_j9a2cfw wrote

A quick little pump & dump before checking out?

1

BigMax t1_j9abta0 wrote

Capitalism sucks.

“You know that service that we make tons of money on by just charging for ads? I bet people will pay for it anyway! Then we can make even MORE profit!”

1

D-Spornak t1_j9afzvp wrote

I feel like this should be on r/ABoringDystopia for some reason.

1

Khalbrae t1_j9ai0zn wrote

Such a stupid idea.

1

Glittering-Ad-7846 t1_j9aishq wrote

It's a matter of time before this subscription model spreads like wildfire into everything. Think your Whatsapp is going to stay free? It'll start with a badge and verification for at $12/month, then guess what, it'll soon be a $2-5 a month for anyone to use the platform, possibly "less ad" version. And because the free version will be so unbearable and bloated, people will buy another subscription to their monthly bundle. Why? Because a couple bucks a month is less than a coffee! Right? Ironically this strategy will also mark the death of the subscription model. My guess is that groups of people will start their own little silo'd social media channels, a la Discord.

1

BiscottiOdd7979 t1_j9b3c4e wrote

Lol. Would dump WhatsApp in a heartbeat too and go back to old fashioned phone. Only use it because it’s free. I don’t think it is worth any money per month.

2

DantedeLelusa64 t1_j9aqyjk wrote

It's about time, now everyone can get a blue tick. People are saying that they're shooting themselves on the foot but I really don't think that's the case. It's still going to be free to use and this is just a way or getting more money.

For those that want to become influencers and small businesses it's great news because they're taken seriously with a tick and people will take them way more seriously if they are paying for it. Not to mention that if getting the tick becomes an actual trend it'll get to a point where it'll be very ease to spot a spam/troll/bot account

1

BiscottiOdd7979 t1_j9b3qsn wrote

That assumes the average Joe cares enough to continue to be engaged despite the cost. Many people don’t give a shit and only use it as it’s free. Hopefully the beginning of their demise. Honestly the world was better before social media shit. Hopefully we are heading back there. Or at least meta crash and burns.

2

Micahman311 t1_j9ara3x wrote

It's times like this I am happy I never gave a shit about Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, or whatever the hell else people use for socializing.

The only one I do use is reddit, and that's mostly to keep up with games, music, and movies, as well as the regular world news.

1

jimkurth81 t1_j9cd21k wrote

just you wait until Reddit has a subscription service set up to use. Or that certain forums will be subscription-based and only paid members can access them. I feel it's coming.

1

Micahman311 t1_j9cdr99 wrote

And then I will leave.

And I do not disagree that they will indeed try to do something to that effect.

2

RenzoMF t1_j9az7sm wrote

Or how to lose millions of users.

1

Polyolygon t1_j9bmajw wrote

Well I should of fully deleted Facebook a while ago. No time like the present

1

CJ5jeep2012 t1_j9bn1li wrote

IMO…In my world… Things on social media ( I.e… Facebook/ Twitter / Instagram / Tic-Toc / etc…) are simply a distraction for when I have some downtime. I’ve lived over 50 years prior without it, I can certainly live the rest of my life without it. They go to charging… I’ll be gone with the wind lol

1

DrChill21 t1_j9bq4oj wrote

For as long as the service has been free to use, why not finally add something that brings in dollars besides ad revenue. What’s the problem here?

1

jimkurth81 t1_j9cctxg wrote

that requires too much work on their end. Why not just find a way to battle the bot system they helped create and promote by charging customers to pay to show others they are not a bot. They manufactured the problem they are capitalizing on now.

2

firstanomaly t1_j9bzgmm wrote

Because they weren’t already an enormous profitable company? Now users can pay to have their data sold for them.

1

jadams2345 t1_j9d00g9 wrote

Anyone who's short on cash makes them blue verification ticks LOL I gotta start charging people for this too :)

1

opticd t1_j96f0r0 wrote

Hindustan Times? 🧐 Seems legit lmao.

0

voodoovan t1_j97p1tf wrote

Read a number of their reports and they have been on the money. Legit outlets, even the most respected, sprout lies as good as any other.

4

Typical_Cat_9987 t1_j971r4z wrote

To everyone who thinks this will backfire - it won’t. We’re all so addicted to these platforms enough people will pay for this. If you think otherwise you’re kidding yourselves.

The proof - why don’t you delete your Instagram account? Or your Reddit account? Exactly ….

0

sojithesoulja t1_j97lf42 wrote

You are the product and you will pay to be the product and like it... silly world we live in.

4

Daimakku1 t1_j9815yg wrote

>The proof - why don’t you delete your Instagram account? Or your Reddit account? Exactly ….

I would if they said a monthly/yearly sub was now necessary to have an account. I'd finally be free.

3

psychedoutcasts t1_j980a2s wrote

If you spend any money on any of these social media conglomerates for a blue checkmark just to prove you are somebody you're a class a idiot.

0

OriginalCompetitive t1_j98etgm wrote

No, you’re a person - or more likely a company - that cares about monetizing your name and reputation as a brand. For a lot of people, $8 a month is a rational financial investment.

8

psychedoutcasts t1_j98ftd2 wrote

Found the idiot.

−4

OriginalCompetitive t1_j98legl wrote

Take Donald Trump, for example. He basically won the presidency based on a blizzard of free tweets. In a rational world, Twitter should have charged him hundreds of millions of dollars for that media access. And it would have been worth it to him.

Now apply that to every politician in the country.

And to every corporation.

And every sports team.

And every wealthy celebrity.

And every “influencer.”

These people will pay big money for an unfiltered bullhorn to the world. It’s a no brainer for Twitter, etc. to charge them.

8

LeentjeNL t1_j9902pk wrote

Yes I get that, but they need the audience otherwise it doesn’t work at all. I don’t know if and how long the people are accepting this new format.

2

OriginalCompetitive t1_j9ag5xd wrote

Sure, but you don’t charge the audience. It’s a voluntary fee that you only pay if you want a verified ID.

1

tommyalanson t1_j9894bp wrote

This was dumb enough on twitter.

0

RichyCigars t1_j98b5sn wrote

So excited to not fucking care at all about this nonsense.

0

chance125 t1_j98n15e wrote

Nice job Elon you started another dumb trend you fucking idiot

0

docah t1_j99eabi wrote

The platforms are nothing without the people and the content. Every dollar they make is off someone else's content. Trying to get people to cough up protection money is just peak corruption. Hopefully this is one of the things that does them in.

0

nicejaw t1_j99uify wrote

The only problem I have with this is that you have to reverify just for changing a profile photo? I hope they aren’t assuming your profile photo is supposed to be some kind of personally identifiable photo because people and especially businesses often have them very stylized.

The price IMO should be nothing for people who actually have decent jobs or whatever… easily spend more on Starbucks each month.

0

JuggST4R t1_j96ig4y wrote

Technology has phases 1st step electricity was used 1st then wiring electricity has imaginary numbers when used for example a gear uses 1 electrical number it was previously thought electricity was wild, and that there was no way to make something but we used wires to change the currents for it so a gear could move. Just electrical scientist zapping everything all day the world is fake yall like a keyboard mouse.

−1

RevelacaoVerdao t1_j97uyha wrote

I have read and reread this a few times and every time I do I feel like I understand it less and less.

12