Elon Musk's Twitter Purge: A Single Account Lost Blue Check, But Confusion Remains
In a surprise move, Elon Musk's plan to purge blue check marks from verified Twitter accounts took an unexpected turn. Instead of targeting all legacy users, the billionaire CEO singled out one high-profile account - The New York Times - for removal. This decision has left many wondering why the Times' main account lost its coveted blue verification mark, while other high-profile accounts remained unaffected.
Musk's initial plan was to remove "legacy" blue checks from verified Twitter accounts, which had been granted under Twitter's old system emphasizing protecting high-profile users at risk of impersonation. To stay verified, users were required to pay $8 per month for Twitter Blue subscription service. However, most legacy blue check holders found that their verification marks remained intact, but were now labeled as "verified because it's subscribed to Twitter Blue or is a legacy verified account."
The Times' main account lost its blue check after Musk responded to an account that often engages with him on social media by tweeting, “Oh ok, we'll take it off then.” This move was followed by a series of tweets lashing out at the Times for what Musk claimed was boring and "propaganda" coverage. The New York Times has reiterated its decision not to pay for verification, with other accounts remaining verified.
This move highlights Twitter's tendency to create confusion and whiplash among users. By targeting a single account, Musk appears to be guiding decisions based on whims rather than policy. The label change could make it easier for scammers to impersonate high-profile users and has raised concerns about the effectiveness of reserving verification for paid users.
Musk has defended changes to Twitter's verification system as a way of "treating everyone equally." He has also stated that paying for verification would drive revenue, which could help him pay off significant debt after buying Twitter for $44 billion. The move has also sparked debate about the impact on users and the potential benefits of charging for verified accounts.
As the dust settles, it remains to be seen how this move will affect Twitter's user base and verification system. One thing is certain - Musk's decisions continue to raise eyebrows, leaving many wondering what's next for the platform he now owns.
In a surprise move, Elon Musk's plan to purge blue check marks from verified Twitter accounts took an unexpected turn. Instead of targeting all legacy users, the billionaire CEO singled out one high-profile account - The New York Times - for removal. This decision has left many wondering why the Times' main account lost its coveted blue verification mark, while other high-profile accounts remained unaffected.
Musk's initial plan was to remove "legacy" blue checks from verified Twitter accounts, which had been granted under Twitter's old system emphasizing protecting high-profile users at risk of impersonation. To stay verified, users were required to pay $8 per month for Twitter Blue subscription service. However, most legacy blue check holders found that their verification marks remained intact, but were now labeled as "verified because it's subscribed to Twitter Blue or is a legacy verified account."
The Times' main account lost its blue check after Musk responded to an account that often engages with him on social media by tweeting, “Oh ok, we'll take it off then.” This move was followed by a series of tweets lashing out at the Times for what Musk claimed was boring and "propaganda" coverage. The New York Times has reiterated its decision not to pay for verification, with other accounts remaining verified.
This move highlights Twitter's tendency to create confusion and whiplash among users. By targeting a single account, Musk appears to be guiding decisions based on whims rather than policy. The label change could make it easier for scammers to impersonate high-profile users and has raised concerns about the effectiveness of reserving verification for paid users.
Musk has defended changes to Twitter's verification system as a way of "treating everyone equally." He has also stated that paying for verification would drive revenue, which could help him pay off significant debt after buying Twitter for $44 billion. The move has also sparked debate about the impact on users and the potential benefits of charging for verified accounts.
As the dust settles, it remains to be seen how this move will affect Twitter's user base and verification system. One thing is certain - Musk's decisions continue to raise eyebrows, leaving many wondering what's next for the platform he now owns.
Musk's latest move on Twitter has me scratching my head 
. Losing The New York Times' blue check seems petty 
. Why not just stick with a label change like they did for most legacy users? 
It's all about creating confusion and chaos 
, which isn't good for user experience 
. Musk says he's trying to treat everyone equally 
, but it feels like just another one of his ego-driven decisions 
. Can't wait to see what's next 
... Like, one account loses its verification and everyone else stays on? It just doesn't make sense to me. And yeah, The Times' account getting taken off is pretty wild. I'm not surprised that Musk is all over their case, but still, shouldn't they have some kinda protection or something? I mean, it's not like they're doing anything wrong... 
...
. it just looks like drama 4 the sake of drama, if u ask me 
. and what's w/ the label change? isnt that just gonna confuse people even more 
? or is musk really just trying 2 make sure ppl r paying 4 their blue check marks? either way, its just gonna be a headache 4 twitter users 
just 'cause they're gonna pay $8 a month? 
and why single out one big account like NYT 
? they don't even have blue check anymore 
it's all so weird 
but at the same time i get what Musk is trying to do 
he wants to make money 
? And what's with the whole "treat everyone equally" thing? 
#TwitterPurge #VerificationShenanigans #MuskTheMan
. So, one account gets blue check taken away while others stay? 
Was it just for the sake of drama? 
That's not equal treatment at all, bro 
. And let's not forget, this whole thing is just another way for Elon Musk to make more cash 
| 