In April, Twitter removed many legacy blue checks from those who were not Twitter Blue subscribers, leaving journalists, creatives, actors and others opting not to pay for the blue check.
“After working for years to build up my portfolio as a creator and reputation in the process as a thought leader, I was initially frustrated with the fact that anyone could just buy a blue checkmark,” said Gigi Robinson, creator and chronic-illness advocate.
“When you get to a certain level as a creator, journalist or are notable in public spaces, it’s important to be verified so you don’t have to deal with any misleading impersonations,” she added.
For small businesses or brands looking for credibility online, paying for Twitter’s verification service to access Twitter Blue’s feature of prioritized rankings in conversations and search makes some sense.
“It is beneficial to brands, especially smaller and mid-sized brands that maybe don’t have that established presence as much just to get some of that verification,” said Cameron Clow, senior director of creative strategy at Day One Agency.
With the majority of Twitter users preferring not to subscribe to the service, marketers and social media managers are left wondering how this will affect their companies’ organic reach and if this type of model for social media is here to stay.
Meta follows
When one platform makes a change, others often follow. In February, Meta announced its subscription program Meta Verified.
For between $11.99 and $14.99 a month, Instagram and Facebook users get a blue verified mark as well as access to better security features, more visibility in search, access to Meta support and more. For now, it’s only available to creators and individuals in the U.S., Australia and New Zealand.
For creators looking for credibility, this was good news. But marketers and communications professionals raise the same concerns spurred by Twitter Blue since, to apply for Meta Verified, people need to prove their identity with a form of a government-issued ID.
