Highlights
- New York Times denied to pay for Twitter's verification
- It will also not reimburse its staff for doing so
On April 1, 2023, Twitter implemented a major change in its verification policy. The blue check mark that used to signify that an account was authentic and of public interest would now be available only through a paid subscription service called Twitter Blue. Organizations would have to pay $1,000 per month to get a gold check mark, while it is $7 per month for individuals for a blue check mark.
The move sparked a backlash from many users and media outlets, who saw it as a way for Twitter to monetize its influence and credibility, and to create a hierarchy of users based on their ability to pay. Among the most vocal critics was the New York Times, which lost its verified badge along with several of its reporters and editors.
The newspaper said it would not pay for Twitter's verification, nor would it reimburse any of its staff for doing so. A spokesperson for the Times told Reuters that the paper did not see any value in paying for a symbol that had been diluted and devalued by Twitter's inconsistent and opaque verification process. The spokesperson also said that the paper would not compromise its journalistic independence and integrity by paying for a service that could be seen as endorsing or promoting Twitter.
The New York Times is not the only newspaper who is against Twitter verification, Politico, Axios, and the White House also said they would not pay for Twitter's verification, according to various reports. Many users also expressed their dissatisfaction with Twitter's decision, and some even threatened to leave the platform or switch to alternative social media sites.
Twitter, on the other hand has defended its new policy, saying that it was part of its efforts to improve the quality and safety of its service, and to provide more features and benefits to its loyal users. The company said that verified users would get access to exclusive content, analytics, tools, and customer support, as well as a badge that would help them stand out and build trust with their followers.
Twitter also mentioned that it would continue to verify accounts for free on a case-by-case basis, especially for those who are at risk of impersonation or harassment, or who have a significant impact on public discourse. However, the company did not provide clear criteria or guidelines for how it would determine who qualifies for free verification.
The controversy over Twitter's verification policy raises important questions about the role and responsibility of social media platforms in shaping public opinion and information. How much power should Twitter have over who gets verified and who doesn't? How does verification affect the credibility and visibility of users and their messages? How does paying for verification affect the diversity and inclusivity of voices on Twitter? And how does verification relate to other issues such as misinformation, censorship, and accountability?
The New York Times' choice not to pay for Twitter verification underscores the intricate and ever-changing landscape of social media platforms and their influence on society. As a result of this decision, the New York Times has lost its verification badge on Twitter, leaving the outcome of this situation uncertain and worth following closely.
Posts
No comments: