After reading four articles on the topic, I’m still not 100% clear whether making “verification” a paid process also changes the process of tying an account to a real world identity, which is I thought the whole point of “verification”. This article seems to say that that will still happen. I understand the complaints in this scenario, but Twitter is a business trying to make money. It is not obligated to provide equitable access to verification on its platform, just like we are not obligated to be on the platform.
Other articles suggest that mere payment will give a check mark, without additional identity verification required. So impersonators and trolls could get them easily with $8/mo. That just seems free-for-all dystopian, and given the historical meaning of “verification”, it’s also a deceptive change.
I still think journalism-at-large needs something like Readup (when the marketplace was in place), just like the music industry’s broken way of operating was changed by Spotify. Maybe Substack or Medium will try to pull it off, integrating mainstream media into their monetization & community schemes. Let’s see how this unfolds indeed.
After reading four articles on the topic, I’m still not 100% clear whether making “verification” a paid process also changes the process of tying an account to a real world identity, which is I thought the whole point of “verification”.
I'm confused too. All these articles and memes make it sound like Twitter scrapped their entire verification process, but that seems stupid, even by Musk standards. Or are we just seeing accounts that already had the blue checkmark doing something they always had the possibility to do (change their name to impersonate a person or company) out of spite?
I still think journalism-at-large needs something like Readup (when the marketplace was in place), just like the music industry’s broken way of operating was changed by Spotify.
Actually, part of the functionality of Twitter Blue is exactly that, after they acquired Scroll more than a year back. Sadly they seem to have done very little with it after the acquisition.
Will be interesting how this all unfolds.
Believe it or not, I’ve never understood the attraction or the value of twitter. I’ve need engaged
After reading four articles on the topic, I’m still not 100% clear whether making “verification” a paid process also changes the process of tying an account to a real world identity, which is I thought the whole point of “verification”. This article seems to say that that will still happen. I understand the complaints in this scenario, but Twitter is a business trying to make money. It is not obligated to provide equitable access to verification on its platform, just like we are not obligated to be on the platform.
Other articles suggest that mere payment will give a check mark, without additional identity verification required. So impersonators and trolls could get them easily with $8/mo. That just seems free-for-all dystopian, and given the historical meaning of “verification”, it’s also a deceptive change.
I still think journalism-at-large needs something like Readup (when the marketplace was in place), just like the music industry’s broken way of operating was changed by Spotify. Maybe Substack or Medium will try to pull it off, integrating mainstream media into their monetization & community schemes. Let’s see how this unfolds indeed.
I'm confused too. All these articles and memes make it sound like Twitter scrapped their entire verification process, but that seems stupid, even by Musk standards. Or are we just seeing accounts that already had the blue checkmark doing something they always had the possibility to do (change their name to impersonate a person or company) out of spite?
Actually, part of the functionality of Twitter Blue is exactly that, after they acquired Scroll more than a year back. Sadly they seem to have done very little with it after the acquisition.