Elon Musk's Plan for Twitter Verification Took an Unexpected Turn
A significant shake-up was expected when Elon Musk announced that he would be purging blue check marks from Twitter. However, instead of targeting the accounts with these coveted badges, Musk singled out one specific account - that of The New York Times.
As of April 1, Twitter had said it would begin winding down the old verification system, which protected high-profile users from impersonation. To stay verified, users were required to pay $8 per month for Twitter's Blue subscription service. But when most legacy blue check holders woke up on Saturday expecting their badges to disappear, they found that their accounts were still intact - albeit with a new label indicating that they are verified because of their subscription.
It appears that The New York Times main account was one of the few high-profile accounts to lose its blue check after posting a meme about not paying for verification. Musk subsequently lashed out at the outlet, calling their coverage "boring" and "propaganda."
This unexpected move highlights how Twitter is often guided by whims rather than policy. By appending a new label to legacy verified accounts, Musk has created confusion among users, including those who are not verified.
The decision to target The New York Times specifically has sparked concerns that it may be more about silencing criticism of Musk's leadership style than addressing the original purpose of Twitter's verification system.
The situation underscores the challenges faced by social media platforms in balancing user safety with the need for transparency and clarity. With millions of users relying on these platforms, feature changes like this can have far-reaching consequences.
Musk's long-standing campaign against "legacy" blue checks has been met with resistance from prominent users who argue that paying for verification should not be a requirement for high-profile accounts. Experts have also raised concerns about the potential impact of reserving verification for paid users on the number of bots on the site.
As Twitter continues to navigate these changes, one thing is clear - the platform's future will likely be shaped by Musk's unpredictable approach to decision-making.
A significant shake-up was expected when Elon Musk announced that he would be purging blue check marks from Twitter. However, instead of targeting the accounts with these coveted badges, Musk singled out one specific account - that of The New York Times.
As of April 1, Twitter had said it would begin winding down the old verification system, which protected high-profile users from impersonation. To stay verified, users were required to pay $8 per month for Twitter's Blue subscription service. But when most legacy blue check holders woke up on Saturday expecting their badges to disappear, they found that their accounts were still intact - albeit with a new label indicating that they are verified because of their subscription.
It appears that The New York Times main account was one of the few high-profile accounts to lose its blue check after posting a meme about not paying for verification. Musk subsequently lashed out at the outlet, calling their coverage "boring" and "propaganda."
This unexpected move highlights how Twitter is often guided by whims rather than policy. By appending a new label to legacy verified accounts, Musk has created confusion among users, including those who are not verified.
The decision to target The New York Times specifically has sparked concerns that it may be more about silencing criticism of Musk's leadership style than addressing the original purpose of Twitter's verification system.
The situation underscores the challenges faced by social media platforms in balancing user safety with the need for transparency and clarity. With millions of users relying on these platforms, feature changes like this can have far-reaching consequences.
Musk's long-standing campaign against "legacy" blue checks has been met with resistance from prominent users who argue that paying for verification should not be a requirement for high-profile accounts. Experts have also raised concerns about the potential impact of reserving verification for paid users on the number of bots on the site.
As Twitter continues to navigate these changes, one thing is clear - the platform's future will likely be shaped by Musk's unpredictable approach to decision-making.
This whole thing just reeks of political favoritism 
. You've got Elon Musk essentially handing out verification badges like they're going out of style, but only to people who agree with him or are willing to pay up 
. It's like he's trying to silence dissenting voices and limit the reach of opposing viewpoints 
. And let's be real, The New York Times being singled out for criticism just because they had a cheeky meme about not paying is some pretty selective targeting 
. It's time for Musk to explain what exactly his vision for Twitter's verification system is and why he's so hell-bent on silencing critics 
. And while we're at it, how are users supposed to know the difference between real accounts and bots when everything looks like a verified badge to them? 
It's like Musk just threw a digital wildcard into the mix without thinking about the long-term consequences 
.
. anyway this whole thing is kinda a big deal because now people are all confused and its affecting the user safety aspect of twitter 
. musk needs to calm down and think about what hes doing before he makes a decision that affects everyone else 
.
i mean like elon musk does it again and this time he's got everyone confused 
and now people are all wondering if they're still legit verified or not 
what's up with that?! 
meanwhile, top creators & influencers are making bank off ads & sponsored tweets 
I mean, come on, Musk needs to chill. This whole thing is just confusing for users - some are still rockin' their blue checks, while others are stuck with a "sponsored by Twitter Blue" label... like what even is that? 
And can we talk about how this is just another example of Elon's mercurial personality causing chaos on the platform? 
I'm low-key shocked that @nytimes lost their blue check due to a meme about not paying for verification 
. But seriously, this whole situation is super confusing. I checked my Twitter account and saw that all my legacy verified accounts are still there, but they're labeled as "verified because of my subscription" 
. I'm not saying @nytimes doesn't deserve criticism, but come on, Elon, can't you just leave them alone? 
Apparently, it's in the hundreds of thousands 
. I'm no expert, but I know that if we're not careful, our online discourse could get way more toxic 
.
elon musk wants to change the way blue check marks work but it looks like he got his wires crossed 
. it's like elon just threw a bunch of spaghetti at the wall and hoped some would stick 
.
that's just a recipe for disaster 
like what's next?! 
anyway this whole thing is just another example of how twitter can be super unpredictable and prone to freaking out on us 
. And calling out the outlet like that? Not cool, Elon. Twitter needs to get its act together and figure out how to verify users without making it all about paying up 
. I'm all for transparency and clarity online, but this just feels like a power play 
.
. It's like Twitter is becoming this crazy echo chamber where the people with the most money and influence just get to make rules 
. Not okay, Elon 
.
& now the times are gettin roasted by musk just cuz they didn't play along with his verification scheme? 
, especially considering how many bots are still on the platform anyway 
also, if you wanna stay verified, just pay up? kinda weird... 
anywayz, I got my mind blown by how quickly things can change on twitter... 
i was trying to make them gluten free but it was a bit of a disaster lol maybe i'll post pics on my Instagram later btw have you seen the latest season of your favorite show? i'm totally hooked 
. I get that he wants to promote his $8 Blue subscription, but come on, does it have to be at the expense of actual journalists who are trying to do their job?