It’s been less than a month since Elon Musk began his chaotic takeover of Twitter but, to many, the platform already feels like it’s entered an inevitable death spiral. Advertisers are fleeing. The few remaining top executives are also leaving. Musk’s Twitter Blue rollout was a complete disaster. The FTC says it has “deep concern” about the company. Musk told employees bankruptcy is a real possibility. Former engineers say the site could break at any moment.

Unsurprisingly, the uncertainty has inspired many users to explore Twitter alternatives. Among them, Mastodon, a decentralized platform founded in 2016, has emerged as one of the top destinations for Twitter quitters. The service saw an earlier uptick in April, when Musk’s buyout was announced, but it’s seen an even bigger flood of new users since Musk’s takeover was completed.

Between October 27th and November 6th, Mastodon gained nearly half a million new users, almost doubling its user base, according to founder Eugen Rochko. Data from Similarweb, shows that the two most popular “entry points” to Mastodon, the mastodon.social server and joinmastodon.org, are getting more than four times the amount of daily traffic compared with the end of October prior to Musk taking over the company.

SimilarWeb

It’s not the first time upheaval at Twitter has driven new users to the “fediverse,” but it’s the largest exodus. And even many of those who haven’t quit Twitter entirely have begun promoting their Mastodon accounts.

But not everyone is ready — or able— to give up on Twitter. And many don’t see Mastodon as a viable substitute for what Twitter has provided.

For Beth Hyman, executive director of the SquirrelWood animal sanctuary in New York, Twitter has for years been a vital source of donations thanks to the rescue’s popular “Crouton & Friends” account. She began to grow SquirrelWood’s Twitter presence in 2018 by posting nightly videos of Crouton, a baby cow living at the sanctuary.

Now, Twitter, where Crouton has more than 65,000 followers, is one of the sanctuary’s biggest, and most reliable, sources of donations. For example, she was able to raise $30,000 for a used horse trailer in just three days in 2021, and frequently shares other fundraisers for the sanctuary. She worries about how Twitter’s current instability could affect them. “I don't want to see the income that helps keep this sanctuary going, and all these animals fed, dry up,” Hyman tells Engadget.

She says she signed up for Mastodon as well as CounterSocial after noticing a dip in her followers in the days after Musk’s takeover, but she’s skeptical she will be able to recreate her Twitter account’s success on a new platform. “Our main home base has always been Twitter. A lot of work goes into this, and it's not like you just flip the switch and walk away and reignite it somewhere else,” she says.

She’s also found that it’s just not as easy to share photos and videos of SquirrelWood’s animals — the main draw for her social media followers — on Mastodon due to its file size constraints. “We’re taking care of 70 animals, I need something that I can do on the fly very easily,” she said.

For others, the decentralized nature of Mastodon has other drawbacks. Eric Feigl-Ding is an epidemiologist who grew his Twitter following at the start of the pandemic when he was among the first to go viral tweeting about the potential threat posed by the novel coronavirus. He now uses his Twitter account, where he has more than 700,000 followers, to share updates about the pandemic and to promote public health policy.

He says he tried to sign up for the mastodon.social server only to find that it was full, and that he and some colleagues are now debating starting their own server, But he worries he won’t be able to reach the same people as he can on Twitter.

“I knew I wanted to reach policymakers, members of Congress, and journalists, basically people who care that can move the needle on this pandemic and prepare for it,” he says. “And Twitter is that platform. Twitter is the platform to get your message out. They're not sitting on Mastodon.”

Feigl-Ding, who has spent a lot of time debunking COVID-19 misinformation, also worries about the consequences of leaving. “You do not want to cede the town square to misinformation, to disinfo, to slanted views on things,” he said. “You want to be there to engage, you want to show up at the debate.”

Others worry about losing the friendships and community they’ve formed on Twitter. Steven Aquino, a tech journalist who covers accessibility, says that Mastodon isn’t a realistic alternative for many people with disabilities because it lacks many of Twitter’s accessibility features. It also just wouldn’t be the same, he says. “The whole point of social media is to be social, and for a lot of disabled people … social [media] is how they interact with other humans,” he tells Engadget.

At the same time, the fact that Musk cut Twitter’s accessibility team makes him worried Twitter itself could become less usable. “The fact that they laid off the entirety of the accessibility team says a lot about what they think about people like me, and where they want the service to be,” he says.

“There’s so much being written about what Elon is doing, and hiring and firing, and those are all important things. But there is no respect for what is the real impact on the people who use the service.”

Elon Musk’s plan to democratize Twitter verification lasted less than two days. Twitter has temporarily pulled new signups for Twitter Blue after the platform was overrun by verified trolls. The company told staffers subscriptions were on hold to “help address impersonation issues,” according to Platformer’s Zoe Schiffer. It turns out paid verification was as much of a mess as nearly everyone predicted.

At first, it seemed as if Twitter had a plan to address the impersonation issue. Just ahead of the rollout of the new Twitter Blue, It introduced a separate “official” badge that would be appended to “government accounts, commercial companies, business partners, major media outlets, publishers and some public figures.” But Musk quickly changed his mind, and killed the idea just a few hours after it was announced. Paid verification launched Wednesday, without the label.

Unsurprisingly, it started to go wrong almost immediately. A fake Nintendo account posted an image of Mario flipping everyone off. A fake Tony Blair retweeted a fake George Bush. A verified Pope John Paul tweeted conspiracy theories at a verified Martin Luther account, which was replying to a verified Pope Francis impersonator. An account masquerading as Twitter’s official @verified tweeted crypto scams. An imposter LeBron said he was requesting a trade.

Screenshot via Twitter

Twitter responded by halting Blue subscriptions for new accounts, but the move had little effect on the deluge of verified trolling. Fake accounts sprung up to interact with other impersonators.

One of the most viral examples was a verified Eli Lilly account that tweeted “insulin is free now,” which forced the real ELi Lilly to apologize for the “misleading” tweet because its insulin is, in fact, not free. Another fake Eli Lilly then apologized for the actual Eli Lilly’s apology. An account that appeared to belong to a Twitter ad sales rep desperately tweeted at Musk to remove the fake Eli Lilly accounts. Both of the fake Eli Lilly accounts were suspended, but the tweets still sent the pharma company’s stock into a nosedive.

Musk responded that parody accounts needed to be clearly labeled. “Tricking people is not okay,” he tweeted. Some made half-hearted attempts to comply. A fake Tesla account going by @Teslareal scrawled “parody” onto the header image in its profile, but continued to troll Musk (the account is now suspended).

Meanwhile, a number of extremists and conspiracy theorists also purchased verification, including — ironically — Jason Kessler, whose 2017 Twitter verification prompted a nearly four-year “pause” of verification. Media Matters reported that many of these newly verified right-wing accounts were already using them to amplify misinformation. A verified account impersonator Arizona candidate for governor Kari Lake tweeted that she had won her race even though it had not yet been called, according to The Washington Post.

By Friday morning Twitter Blue subscriptions were no longer available in Twitter’s app or website. And it’s unclear when it could re-launch. And, two days after Musk said the blue check would be "the great leveler," Twitter confirmed it would bring back the gray "official" label after all in order to "combat impersonation."

But despite the constant policy reversals and the flood of impersonators, Musk was still upbeat. "Some epically funny tweets," he said. "Hit all-time high of active users today." he added. 

Two weeks after taking over Twitter, Elon Musk has finally addressed the company’s remaining staff and the message was bleak. Speaking at an all-hands meeting, Musk said that Twitter is losing so much money that “bankruptcy is not out of the question,” The Information and Platformer reported.

Twitter hasn’t turned a profit since 2019, and ad revenue has declined significantly since Musk’s takeover as advertisers pull back from the platform. At the all-hands, Musk suggested that Twitter’s future depends upon the success of the revamped Twitter Blue subscription service.

“The reason we’re going hardcore on subscribers is to keep Twitter alive,” he said, according to The Information.

Musk also told employees, again, that they are expected to work from Twitter’s office, a reversal of the company’s previous “work from anywhere” policy. “If you can physically make it to an office and you don’t show up, resignation accepted," he said, Platformer’s Zoe Schiffer, reported.

Twitter is also rapidly losing the top executives that survived Musk’s layoffs. The company’s chief information security officer, chief privacy officer and chief compliance officer all recently resigned, exposing the company to potential new FTC fines. And two other high-profile executives, head of trust and Safety Yoel Roth and head of ad sales Robin Wheeler, also resigned on Thursday, Bloombergreported. The two had joined Musk in a town hall aimed at reassuring Twitter’s advertisers just one day before.

Developing…

President Joe Biden says that Elon Musk’s dealings with countries outside of the United States are “worthy of being looked at.” Speaking to reporters, Biden didn’t elaborate on if some kind of of investigation was underway, but suggested the Tesla and Twitter CEO deserved further scrutiny.

“I think that Elon musk’s cooperation and/or technical relationships with other countries is worthy of being looked at,” Biden said. “Whether or not he is doing anything inappropriate – I’m not suggesting that. I’m suggesting it’s worth being looked at, and that’s all I’ll say.”

It’s unclear exactly which of Musk’s relationships Biden was referring to, but he’s not the first official to raise Musk’s ties to other countries as a potential concern. Senator Chris Murphy has said the Committee on Foreign Investment in the US (CFIUS) should investigate the “national security implications” of Musk’s deal to buy the company. Murphy and others have pointed to major investments from Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

Other critics have noted that Tesla’s business dealings in China could make it difficult for Musk to make content decisions that affect the country, or that government officials could pressure him to turn over data. The Washington Postreported in June that “some U.S. intelligence analysts and White House officials are among those concerned about the potential for arm-twisting by China if Musk gets hold of Twitter.”

Musk was also widely criticized for tweets suggesting that “the will of the people” should decide whether parts of Ukraine taken over by Russia should become part of Russia. He later threatened to stop paying for Starlink internet for the Ukrainian government, but later walked back the comments.

Elon Musk is trying, once again, to sell his vision of Twitter’s future to the company’s advertisers. Musk, who by all accounts has yet to address Twitter’s remaining staff as a group, joined an hour-long “town hall” to take questions from advertisers and share more about his plans for the platform.

The company’s advertising business has taken a significant hit in recent days as a number of major brands have pulled back from the platform and activists have called for a boycott. Musk said last week that these actions had caused a “massive drop in revenue” for Twitter.

In his talk on Twitter Spaces, Musk tried again to reassure advertisers that their brands would be safe on the platform. He said that ads appearing next to hate speech “isn’t great” and pitched the newly launched Twitter Blue as a way to decrease hate speech on the platform. Under the new Twitter Blue, brands will need to pay for the blue check like all other accounts, Musk said. He added that anyone impersonating a brand would be permanently banned from the service.

He also said that he hopes to make Twitter ads a lot more relevant, and wants to integrate ads into recommended tweets. The goal, he said, was to “drive sales in the short term and protect the demand in the long term.”

Notably, he struck a much different tone than in recent tweets when he threatened “a thermonuclear name and shame” for advertisers boycotting the platform. “I understand if people kind of want to give it a minute and see how things are evolving,” he said. “We've been more rigorous about clamping down on bad content and bots and trolls, not less. So my observation of Twitter over the past few weeks is that the content is actually improving, not getting worse.” He added that brands and advertisers should be more active on the platform and that if they see something they don’t like they should “reply to one of my tweets and I’ll do my best to respond.”

Musk also talked more about his philosophy on content moderation, though he didn’t share any concrete changes to Twitter’s policies or how its moderation council might function. "We have to be, I think, tolerant of views we don't agree with, but those views don't need to be amplified," he said.

He also stated that he has plans to make Community Notes, the crowd-sourced fact checking feature that used to be known as Birdwatch, a more central part of the platform. “This is really gonna help in improving the accuracy of what's said in the system.” He also suggested that Community Notes would have an impact on the visibility of content on Twitter. “It's analogous to the way sort of Page Rank works in Google, where the the prominence of a webpage is proportionate to how much weight other prominent web pages give that web page. I think it’s a game changer.”

Meta is reducing the size of its workforce by about 13 percent and letting more than 11,000 its employees go in the first mass layoffs in the company’s history. Mark Zuckerberg has announced the mass layoffs in a message to employees, which Meta shared on its Newsroom. 

News of the impending layoffs was first reported by The Wall Street Journal, which also reported that Meta’s recruiting and business teams would be hit especially hard.

Mark Zuckerberg has been hinting at cuts for some time. During the company’s most recent earnings call, the CEO said Meta could become “a slightly smaller organization” by the end of 2023.He also has reportedly instructed managers to identify people for layoffs, and has told employees that “realistically, there are probably a bunch of people at the company who shouldn't be here." The company has already halted new hiring and cut some projects within Reality Labs.

Meta has been losing billions of dollars on its investments in the metaverse, with Reality Labs losing more than $10 billion in 2021. The company has said it expects to lose “significantly” more in 2023. Facebook’s ad revenue has also taken a significant hit due to Apple’s changes to apps’ ad tracking abilities.

Though Meta is cutting a significant number of jobs, it’s not the only major tech company to lay off workers in recent months. Snap laid off about 20 percent of its workforce over the summer, and Twitter recently cut about half of its staff following Elon Musk’s takeover.

Developing...

It turns out Twitter’s new plan for verification will be a two-tiered system after all. Esther Crawford, the twitter VP leading the revamped Twitter Blue subscription confirmed that in addition to the blue checkmarks, the company will also use a separate “official” label for “select” accounts.

The label had previously been spotted on internal builds of Twitter, but it’s the first time anyone at the company has confirmed its existence. Twitter, which recently laid most of its communications staff, didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

According to Crawford, the “official” label will be reserved for “government accounts, commercial companies, business partners, major media outlets, publishers and some public figures.” It’s unclear how Twitter will designate which accounts qualify or if they will have to go through an additional vetting process. “Not all previously verified accounts will get the ‘Official’ label and the label is not available for purchase,” Crawford tweeted.

The plan seems like it’s meant to address some of the criticism that’s been leveled at Musk’s plan for Twitter Blue and verification. Namely that paying for verification could open the door for scammers and impersonators to hijack conversations and spread misinformation. Crawford isn’t the first Twitter executive to address the issues. Yoel Roth, the company’s head of integrity, has also said twitter plans to “ramp up proactive review of Blue Verified accounts that show signs of impersonating another user.” Elon Musk also said that Twitter would ban all impersonators without warning after a number of accounts changed their names to Elon Musk to make a point about his plans.

Of course, the new “official” labels also sound a bit like… Twitter’s existing verification system which Musk and others have criticized as unfair. And, the fact that it will only be given out to “select” accounts determined by Twitter, sounds like the company will once again be making a judgment about which accounts are “notable,” something Twitter execs — including Roth — have criticized.

The “official” label and the expanded verification are both expected to roll out in the coming days.

Twitter’s top safety executive says election integrity is a “top priority” for the company even as the company has shed half of its staff in the last 24 hours. Yoel Roth, Twitter’s head of safety and one of the company leaders to survive mass layoffs, took to Twitter to downplay moderation concerns raised by activists and advertisers in recent days.

“Yesterday’s reduction in force affected approximately 15% of our Trust & Safety organization (as opposed to approximately 50% cuts company-wide), with our front-line moderation staff experiencing the least impact,” Roth tweeted. “With early voting underway in the US, our efforts on election integrity — including harmful misinformation that can suppress the vote and combatting state-backed information operations — remain a top priority.”

Roth’s comments come hours after the NAACP joined a coalition of activists and civil rights organizations to call for advertisers to suspend spending with Twitter. While Musk met with civil rights leaders earlier this week, those calling for a boycott said the company’s deep staff cuts undermined his promise to maintain Twitter’s election protection policies and its hate speech rules.

Roth, who is so far the only Twitter executive besides Musk to publicly weigh in on the company’s policies following Musk’s takeover, also tried to address reports about the impact staff cuts would have on safety.

“Last week, for security reasons, we restricted access to our internal tools for some users, including some members of my team,” he said. “Most of the 2,000+ content moderators working on front-line review were not impacted, and access will be fully restored in the coming days.” But while much of Roth’s Trust and Safety team may have been spared, numerous other teams whose work touches on safety issues were not.

As NBC News reported, Twitter’s curation team, which worked to counter misinformation on the platform, was axed entirely. Many engineering roles that deal with safety issues were also cut, as were numerous workers in policy and communications.

On Friday, Musk said that the layoffs were necessary. “Regarding Twitter’s reduction in force, unfortunately there is no choice when the company is losing over $4M/day,” he tweeted, adding that employees were offered three months of severance. “Again, to be crystal clear, Twitter’s strong commitment to content moderation remains absolutely unchanged.”

As Elon Musk looks for new ways to make money from Twitter’s he’s facing a much more urgent problem: advertisers are fleeing the platform. Musk said Friday that “Twitter has had a massive drop in revenue” due to advertisers’ concerns about content moderation and other issues raised by activists.

A number of major companies have paused ads in recent days, including GM, Audi, Pfizer, General Mills, Volkswagen and other big names who are wary of potential changes to Twitter’s policies as well as the departure of top executives. Industry groups have also expressed concern about brand safety under Musk, and The New York Times reported this week that “IPG, one of the world’s largest advertising companies, issued a recommendation … for clients to temporarily pause their spending on Twitter.”

On Friday, the NAACP joined other civil rights groups in calling for an advertiser boycott of the platform. “It is immoral, dangerous, and highly destructive to our democracy for any advertiser to fund a platform that fuels hate speech, election denialism and conspiracy theories,” NAACP President Derrick Johnson said in a statement.

Advertisers' pullback amid calls for an ad boycott show just how quickly Twitter’s ad business has deteriorated under Musk. It also comes barely a week after Musk tried to reassure the industry he didn’t want to turn the platform into a “free-for-all hellscape.” Twitter saw a significant spike in hate speech and racial slurs immediately following the news of Musk’s take over of the company. Twitter’s head of safety later blamed the activity on a coordinated trolling campaign. But the activity further fueled the concerns of civil rights groups, prompting Musk to meet with civil rights leaders this week.

On Friday he seemed to blame the drop in ad revenue on many of the same activists. “Twitter has had a massive drop in revenue, due to activist groups pressuring advertisers, even though nothing has changed with content moderation and we did everything we could to appease the activists,” he tweeted.

But a coalition of civil rights groups and activists rejected Musk’s characterization. During a call with reporters on Friday, they said that Musk’s mass layoffs of Twitter staff, including people who work in moderation and safety, undermine the commitments he made following their meeting.

“When you lay off almost 50% of your staff, including teams that are in charge of actually tracking, monitoring and enforcing content moderation rules, that necessarily means that content moderation has changed,” said Jessica González, co-CEO of Free Press.

The group also raised concerns about Musk's amplification of far-right conspiracies regarding the attack on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's husband; it also cited reports the now-CEO could chip away at current Twitter rules protecting trans users. "If Twitter does not take immediate concrete actions that illustrate a true commitment to maintaining best practices that protect users that companies then companies will not support with ad dollars and we're seeing it happen in real time,” said GLAAD CEO Sarah Ellis.

It’s only been a matter of days since Elon Musk took over Twitter, but he’s already shaking up the platform in major ways. Few of his ideas have attracted as much attention, or controversy, as his plan to start charging for verification as part of a bigger overhaul to Twitter’s subscription service, Blue.

Calling the current system “bullshit,” he said that his plan is to add verification as a perk to Twitter Blue, which will increase in price from $5 a month to $8 a month. All users who pay will get the checkmark, while those who don’t — even if they were verified under Twitter's previous system — will lose it. Subscriptions will also reduce ads and make accounts more visible in replies and search, a sort of anti-shadowban.

But while Musk’s plans may win him some fans among those who despise the idea of “blue check Twitter,” it also shows that he fundamentally misunderstands verification. And while he is correct that the current system is broken, charging for verification would make it worse, not better.

Verification is about authenticity

Musk’s plan ignores the reason verification was created to begin with: to convey authenticity. Because Twitter doesn’t have a real-names policy, a verified badge helps distinguish whether an account belongs to the person or entity whose name is at the top. From Twitter’s help center: “The blue Verified badge on Twitter lets people know that an account of public interest is authentic.”

It may seem like a status symbol to some, but the reason it’s handed out to journalists, celebrities, public officials and other notable figures is because there is inherent risk in not verifying those people.

“Verification was never meant to convey status,” says Nu Wexler, a policy consultant and former policy communications rep at Twitter. “It was simply a way for Twitter to address impersonation attempts.”

Screenshot via Twitter

But Musk seems unmoved by concerns about impersonation. In response to a question about whether newly verified users would be able to impersonate Musk himself, he said “that already happens very frequently.”

Musk isn’t wrong on this point. Hacking verified accounts and then changing their profiles to look like Musk is a known scam. But getting rid of these types of scammers was supposedly one his main motivations for buying Twitter for $44 billion in the first place. (Ironically, scammers are already using the prospect of paid verification as a phishing ploy, according to Twitter’s head of safety.)

Impersonation scams can have real consequences, as actor Robert Kazinsky pointed out in a viral Twitter thread. “I don’t tweet much, I am scared of the internet, I struggle with a lot of things in life. But this account exists so that fake accounts can’t,” he wrote, adding that in the past people impersonating him online have used his identity to start conversations with children.

Making verification solely dependent on who is willing to pay for it could have even bigger implications for the spread of misinformation. Around the world, public officials, government agencies, journalists, activists and others use Twitter to communicate important information to the public. Making their verification contingent on paying, or making it easier for someone else to impersonate them, would undermine the idea of Twitter as the “town square” Musk wants it to be.

Verification has always been confusing and unfair

Musk is correct that Twitter’s existing verification system could be a whole lot better. Verification on Twitter has always been a mess, but not because it’s sometimes perceived as a status symbol.

The reality is that Twitter has never been able to properly explain how verification works or why some people get it and others don’t. The company introduced it in 2009, but didn’t have a public-facing request tool until 2016. Instead, for nearly a decade, the company would quietly verify celebrities, journalists and other public figures mostly through backchannel connections via agents and public relations staffers. This meant that even some public figures who clearly qualified for it didn’t know how to be verified.

The decision to open up verification requests to the public in 2016 was supposed to resolve this. But a little more than a year after opening public requests, the company paused the effort amid a backlash after verifying a white nationalist.

Verification remained “paused” for the next four years. Except it wasn’t entirely on hold. The company continued to quietly grant verification to thousands of accounts via the same behind-the-scenes process it had used for years.In other words: it remains just as opaque and confusing as it ever was.

Even when Twitter said it would expand verification to more doctors and health experts at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was still widespread confusion about how these verifications would occur. Some researchers who were verified as part of the expansion were unsure how it happened.

Finally, in 2021, Twitter re-opened verification only to pause it — again — after just eight days because the company mistakenly verified a fake Cormac McCarthy account. (Verification requests resumed a month later.)

Twitter Blue and verification serve different purposes

So, yes, verification has always had significant issues. And Musk isn’t even the first to propose verification for everyone as a way to fix it. Former CEO Jack Dorsey said he wanted to open it to everyone back in 2018. ““The intention is to open verification for everyone … And people can verify more facts about themselves and we don’t have to be the judge or imply any bias on our part,” he said in a livestream.

But making verification part of Twitter Blue, which is designed to provide extra perks for those who pay, doesn’t address the underlying issue. While it may theoretically give everyone the opportunity to be verified, it also creates new incentives for people trying to take advantage of the platform, says Wexler.

“There's a market for Twitter to charge power uses for certain features like an edit button or priority customer service,” he says. “But selling authenticity is just inviting bad actors to impersonate elected officials and news outlets.”

One solution would be to separate verification and identity authentication. And even Musk seems to recognize the need for additional context for some accounts. He said there “will be a secondary tag below the name for someone who is a public figure, which is already the case for politicians.”

An early version of this appears to have already surfaced, on Dorsey’s Twitter account, which according to a screenshot of an internal build of the service, had an “official account” label underneath his blue check.

But extra labels don’t address the real danger that would be posed by the impersonators verification was created to fight.