Twitter Demands Advertisers Pay for a Blue Check or Spend $1,000 a Month
Twitter’s new verification process does littleAdvertisementfirst opened blue checks up to anyone willing to cough up $8, trolls seized the opportunity and started impersonating major brands and prominent figures. One tweet coming fromerasing billions of dollars in market cap. Yesterday, when Twitter removed legacy verification from any account that wasn’t coughing up Musk’s $8 protection money, the trolls stuck again, impersonating prominent accounts that lost their check marks.
when you email its communications department, reflecting the billionaire’s utter disdain for members of the press unwilling to lick his billionaire boots. In related news,However, Twitter’s email to advertisers explained the “strategy” behind its decision to coerce advertisers to pay for Twitter Blue.. Typically his response is to get defensive, though sometimes he reverses course.
Australia Latest News, Australia Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Microsoft removes Twitter from its social media tool for advertisers | EngadgetStarting on April 25th, advertisers using Microsoft's social media management tool will no longer be able to access Twitter on their dashboard..
Read more »
Public Media Body Demands Twitter Drops “Government-Funded Media” Label From All AccountsIt may have ceded to the BBC, but Elon Musk’s Twitter is back under pressure from the world’s public service broadcasters. The Global Task Force for Public Media has called on the socia…
Read more »
Twitter removing legacy blue check marks in push for paid verificationTwitter is starting to delete legacy blue verification check marks Thursday.
Read more »
Elon Musk's Twitter begins to remove unpaid blue check marksThe initial rollout of the change appeared to be fairly glitchy, as blue checks disappeared and reappeared on some accounts. A number of high-profile verified accounts also didn't seem to lose their checks, at least at first.
Read more »