Document: Twitter plans to exempt its top 500 advertisers and 10K most-followed, previously verified organizations from paying $1,000 per month for a checkmark

Mr. Musk requested a meeting with Lina Khan, the chair of the F.T.C., which has been investigating Twitter's privacy and data practices.

New York Times 2023-03-31

Context & Ripple Effects

Twitter launched Verified Organizations with a $1,000 monthly company checkmark fee and $50-per-affiliate pricing. The planned exemptions immediately carve out a preferential tier within that program.

The move follows a period in which many of Twitter's largest pre-takeover advertisers had stopped spending, according to tracking of the top 100 advertisers. It matters because the platform is treating verification not only as a subscription product but also as an advertiser-retention lever.

First-order effects

The top 500 advertisers and 10,000 most-followed previously verified organizations would avoid the $1,000 monthly charge, reducing their cost of retaining or obtaining the organizational badge.
Twitter forgoes potential verification revenue from its most commercially valuable or visible accounts while offering them a differentiated relationship with the platform.

Second-order effects

Other organizations may face a clearer two-tier proposition: pay the listed rate or qualify through advertising scale or pre-existing prominence.
The exemption strengthens Twitter's ability to use verification as part of advertiser negotiations, alongside its earlier stated plan to pay to verify brands that did not want to do so.

Third-order effects

If this approach persists, platform verification may evolve from a uniform trust product into a segmented commercial benefit, with access and pricing shaped by account value.
That segmentation can make badges less legible as a simple identity signal, increasing pressure on platforms to distinguish paid status, organizational affiliation, and account authenticity.

The trend: This is one data point in platforms bundling trust markers, subscription pricing, and advertiser incentives into increasingly tiered account economics.

Discussion

@rmac18 Ryan Mac on x
With Twitter under investigation by the FTC, Elon Musk has tried to get involved and asked for a meeting with Lina Khan, underscoring how serious the inquiry has become. (from @dmccabe and @kateconger) https://www.nytimes.com/...
@pkafka Peter Kafka on x
I would pay $96 to watch this meeting, or at least $8 to read Elon's mash notes to Lina. https://twitter.com/...
@jeffjarvis Jeff Jarvis on x
“Mr. Musk, Ms. Wilson and a spokesman for the F.T.C. did not respond to requests for comment. A press request sent to Twitter triggered an autoreply email with a poop emoji.” Elon Musk Tried to Meet With F.T.C. Chair About Twitter but Was Rebuffed https://www.nytimes.com/...
@kateconger Kate Conger on x
Scoop with @dmccabe: Elon Musk sought a meeting with Lina Khan to discuss the FTC's Twitter investigation. She declined. Musk ended up meeting with the outgoing commissioner Christine Wilson. https://www.nytimes.com/...
@melaynalokosky @melaynalokosky on x
Seeing a lot of business accounts in your feed that you don't follow? Or that your followers don't like or retweet? Elon Musk is clogging everyone's feed with PAID, non-disclosed, advertising & wanted the @FTC's blessing on his latest illegal activity. https://www.nytimes.com/...
@matthewstoller Matt Stoller on x
Well this is interesting. Elon Musk, Jim Jordan, and Christine Wilson seemed to be working together to protect Twitter from investigations into its privacy violations. https://www.nytimes.com/...
@rmac18 Ryan Mac on x
@dmccabe @kateconger Some other news in this story as the company gets ready to rid legacy verified checkmarks this weekend: Twitter's top 500 advertisers and 10,000 most-followed organizations will not be expected to pay for verification, according to an internal doc. https://ww…
@carnage4life Dare Obasanjo on x
The idea that Twitter would charge for blue checks and then exempt the organizations who would be the most likely to pay for it, if it was valuable, tells you everything you need to know about how dumb of an idea this is. What a fail whale of a strategy. https://searchengineland.…
@kurtwagner8 Kurt Wagner on x
found this particularly interesting. Twitter is letting advertisers make lists of accounts that they *don't* want their ads to run next to. One media buyer told us: Musk's account is at the top of their list https://twitter.com/...
@dmccabe David McCabe on x
Scoop w/ @kateconger: Elon Musk tried to meet with F.T.C. Chair Lina Khan in connection with the investigation of Twitter. Khan rebuffed him because she said Twitter was dragging its heels in the inquiry. But Musk did speak with GOP Commissioner Wilson. https://www.nytimes.com/..…
@cagoldberglaw Carrie Goldberg on x
Lol. Khan pwned Musk https://www.nytimes.com/...
@kantrowitz Alex Kantrowitz on x
Well, you're paying Twitter either way I guess. But so much for the democratizing force of Twitter Blue. https://twitter.com/...
@elonmusk Elon Musk on x
Important to establish whether someone actually belongs to an organization or not so as to avoid impersonation https://twitter.com/...
@oliverdarcy Oliver Darcy on x
New: The New York Times says it is not planning to pay for Twitter verification: “We aren't planning to pay the monthly fee for verification of our institutional Twitter accounts,” a spokesperson tells me.
Vox Shirin Ghaffary on x
Elon Musk wants to fill your Twitter feed with paid accounts
@oliverdarcy Oliver Darcy on x
The Los Angeles Times also says it will not pay for Twitter Blue, noting “verification no longer establishes authority or credibility.” Here's an internal note from managing editor Sara Yasin that went out to staff. https://twitter.com/...
@howardtayler Howard Tayler on x
Quote-tweeting to turn up the volmue. There is no internal-to-Twitter verification method. The ONLY way to verify that a given Twitter account is yours is to link to it from something that CAN be verified as yours. https://twitter.com/...
@scalzi John Scalzi on x
The Twitter blue check no longer verifies identity, it just confirms you're spending money, so from a journalistic point of view it makes no sense to pay. Have the outlet post a list on its site of its reporter's accounts and have the accounts link to it. https://www.buzzfeednews…
@astrokatie Katie Mack on x
“verification no longer establishes authority or credibility, instead it will only mean that someone has paid for a Twitter Blue subscription” -LA Times Managing Editor, on why they won't bother purchasing a blue check https://twitter.com/...
@babumoshaaye Abhijit Dey on x
Once publications lose verification and fake, verified accounts start popping replacing our timelines, the media outlets will be forced to leave Twitter as a platform. https://twitter.com/...
@nash076 @nash076 on x
The NYT, the LA Times, Vox, Politico, WaPo, Buzzfeed ... the list goes on and on, but it looks as if no reputable media outlet will be paying the $1000 a month for Twitter “verification.” https://twitter.com/...
@jessespector Jesse Spector on x
I was once told that my articles did exceptionally well on Twitter, and that meant maybe 10% of my traffic was from here. It's a useless cesspool and I will miss it dearly. https://twitter.com/...
@bdherzinger Blake Herzinger on x
I am told this is what business acumen looks like - trying to charge people to produce the content and data your model requires, then having everyone but neckbeards refuse to pay you. Incredible stuff. https://twitter.com/...
@dimensionmedia David Bisset on x
I'm not a “Mastodon can fix everything wrong with Twitter” person but one could in theory have a server just for journals and reporters (not public) and they can be verified via that source. But won't get them showing up on Twitter over the organizations / frauds that DO pay. htt…
@stevanzetti Steven Monacelli on x
Twitter may not generate a ton of traffic but it sure does allow me to bully politicians in public so who is to say what the trade off really is https://twitter.com/...
@graceonfootball Grace Robertson on x
Can't believe Elon Musk's plan of constantly shitting on potential customers has downsides. https://twitter.com/...
@mattnavarra Matt Navarra on x
The Newsrooms Who Say They'll Pay For Twitter Blue Checkmarks For Their Journalists The New York Times: ❌ Washington Post: Undecided CNN: Undecided The Los Angeles Times: ❌ Semafor: ✅ The Daily Caller: Undecided Insider: ❌ BuzzFeed: ❌ HuffPost: ❌ https://www.buzzfeednews.com/ ...
@oliverdarcy Oliver Darcy on x
BuzzFeed a no on paying for staff's blue checks: “As an organization, we will not cover fees for individuals to keep their blue checkmarks moving forward. There are several reasons for this, but one outweighs them all: a blue checkmark no longer means the handle is ‘verified.’”
@roslyntalusan Roslyn on x
for those of you who feel pressured into buying twitter blue for business purposes*, please bear in mind that corporations are resisting this site owner's extortion scheme. *paying ~$8 to the man screwing your business over is not a good business decision. https://twitter.com/...
@sonnybunch Sonny Bunch on x
Elon: “Well, the journos will keep their checks because their bosses will pay for it.” Bosses: “lol no” https://twitter.com/...
@notabigjerk Lauren on x
twitter drives an enormous amount of discourse that mostly just stays on twitter. there's absolutely no financial justification for paying the amount twitter wants for institutional verification so i suspect they won't be the only ones who play wait and see https://twitter.com/..…
@markmobility Mark Elliott on x
It's all going south for Elon. NYT not paying for a blue checkmark for itself or its reporters. Same for LA Times, Buzzfeed and Politico. “verification no longer establishes authority or credibility.” All it establishes is you're paying Elon $8/month. https://twitter.com/...
@therealhoarse @therealhoarse on x
People on Twitter don't click out of the platform. I learned that firsthand when promoting music over COVID. A video posted here would get 50,000. That same video posted as a link to YouTube would get 150 clicks. https://twitter.com/...
@crawf34 Adrian on x
I mean it's not like someone with a fake opinion page account could tweet anything more absurd than the current one does https://twitter.com/...
@allisonlcarter Allison Carter on x
What many people — including the owner of this website — don't understand. Twitter is good for branding for news sites but a drop in the bucket for traffic and revenue. https://twitter.com/...
@dellcam Dell Cameron on x
Twitter does not generate traffic. I've been in countless meetings at multiple outlets where this fact has been repeated to me over and over. https://twitter.com/...
@lollardfish David M. Perry on x
The thing is: if Twitter was a useful site gain paying subscribers, there might be an argument for everyone from the New York Times to me and my 475 person Patreon or to pay for verification. But it's not. It was pre Elon, but he broke it. https://twitter.com/...
@scottnover Scott Nover on x
Twitter needs the New York Times WAY more than the New York Times needs Twitter. And it's not particularly close. https://twitter.com/...
@benjysarlin Benjy Sarlin on x
Would be tens of thousands per month for “real” branded verification ($1k per brand, $50 per affiliated account). If brands don't pay, this whole model falls apart pretty quickly revenue-wise. https://twitter.com/...
@normcharlatan Norm Charlatan on x
Assuming this policy sticks (which I'm not sure it will), I'm willing to bet they'll pay within 60 days once it's clear that a) the algorithm favors verified accounts and b) there's so much misinformation using misleading NYT usernames. https://twitter.com/...
@mikiebarb Michael Barbaro on x
Sniff, sniff. It was nice knowing you, Blue Check. https://twitter.com/...
@clemenswergin Clemens Wergin on x
Who pays for Twitter verification and who believes it means that an account is actually verfied is a moron https://twitter.com/...
@andybcampbell Andy Campbell on x
Even if this was a good deal for companies, and even if newsrooms got high traffic from twitter (we don't), there's zero incentive to pay for any feature announced by a CEO who rips up his own rule book each week. https://twitter.com/...
@tomgara Tom Gara on x
This take is both true and starting to feel a bit outdated given how relatively unimportant raw traffic has become for news businesses vs higher value stuff like engaged readers who subscribe etc https://twitter.com/...
@lxeagle17 Lakshya Jain on x
Twitter really doesn't drive a lot of traffic. Not sure how many news organizations are going to pay the astronomical fees for verification ($1K/mo per brand, and then $50/mo for each affiliate). Imagine a bill of >$10K a month for the minimal traffic you get from Twitter. https:…
@itsborys Christian Borys on x
Twitter blue is so stupid it's genuinely hard to believe anyone inside Twitter thinks this is going to result in anything but a complete disaster https://twitter.com/...
@stevelackmeyer @stevelackmeyer on x
I wonder at what point do the NYT, Washington Post, CNN, ABC News, NBC News, CBS News, Gannett and other news organizations agree to pick a replacement social media platform... https://twitter.com/...
@senatorshoshana @senatorshoshana on x
Raises hand as someone who has worked at many orgs where we need traffic. Twitter can drive very high-quality traffic for sure! There's real ROI from it. But it doesn't generate high-volume traffic https://twitter.com/...
@dancow Dan Nguyen on x
The NYT gets a W here https://twitter.com/...
@maxwelltani Max Tani on x
LAT also won't reimburse: “Verification no longer establishes authority or credibility, instead it will only mean that someone has paid for a Twitter Blue subscription,” @sarayasin told staff. https://twitter.com/...
@sdkstl Staci D Kramer on x
LAT: >>"verification no longer establishes authority or credibility."<< https://twitter.com/...
@katienotopoulos Katie Notopoulos on x
I was curious about how news outlets were going to handle journalist losing their beloved blue checks. Would they pay? Allow people to expense it? Or just... no? Turns out it's a mixed bag! (BuzzFeed will not pay or allow us to expense) https://www.buzzfeednews.com/ ...
@mikeisaac @mikeisaac on x
this is a no-brainer imo forget any feelings one might have about mgmt or the company — the way they are handling bluechecks now is punitive rather than value-adding and there's no actual safeguard against impersonation whether you buy it or not, which is the major concern https:…
@onceupona Adrianna McIntyre on x
is this the business school case I was promised https://twitter.com/...
@_danilo @_danilo on x
one of the great oaks of media says: “we will not be extorted” https://twitter.com/...

Chronicles