A surprising number of brands won't pay for Twitter verification

by WarriorForum.com Administrator
13 replies
A new article on Social Media Today reports that the team from Capterra sought to find out, surverying 300 US marketing and advertising professionals to get their thoughts on Elon's paid verification program.

This doesn't surprise me. What about you?

First off, according to Capterra's data, 53% of brands say that they're unlikely to pay $7.99 a month for verification on Twitter.

At present, brands that already have a blue checkmark will now get a gold one instead, to mitigate the risks of impersonation, and at some stage, they'll likely have to pay $8 per month to keep that gold tick.

So, right now, just over half of brands don't see the value in paying for a checkmark. Indeed, respondents indicated that they'd be more willing to pay for better promotion opportunities, better user targeting, and improved security in the app over verification. That said, just over half of brands also indicated that they believe verification does serve an important purpose.

In terms of overall risk on the platform, given Musk's stated passion for allowing more 'free speech' in the app, nearly 2 out of 3 current Twitter advertisers say that advertising on the platform is risky for their brand right now.

Among the main concerns are increased incidences of hate speech, as well as misinformation, and impersonation - with the latter being a key problem with the initial launch of Twitter's updated verification plan.

Hate speech and misinformation have also, reportedly, increased since Elon took over at the app - though Twitter itself says that hate speech, overall, is on the decline. Still, as Elon brings back thousands of previously banned users, and touts COVID theories from his own account, you can understand why some brands are hesitant about the app at this stage.

Less than a quarter of participants indicated that they're looking to reduce Twitter ad spend, while 31% of brands have opted to monitor the situation, rather than suspending current ad campaigns. As with most Twitter elements, it's a bit of a 'wait and see', with the impacts of Musk's changes set to happen over time, making it harder to judge the right approach just yet. And with Elon also proclaiming record high usage, you can see why some advertisers are facing a dilemma, which can only be answered by seeing what comes next at the app.

Approximately 3 in 4 respondents believe marketers will move to other top social media platforms such as Instagram (76%), Facebook (75%), and TikTok (60%) if Twitter shuts down.
#brands #number #pay #surprising #twitter #verification
Avatar of Unregistered
  • I wonder if it's more political or they can't afford $80 a year (which might be spent at a business lunch for a couple of employees.

    PS I think it's more the former.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11739015].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KillerVirus
    Someone is finally speaking truth without government censorship.

    Freaking awesome!

    You should do a survey of marketers who are no longer being shadow-banned due to FBI involment and see what they think.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11739405].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kay King
    53% of brands say that they're unlikely to pay $7.99

    They SAY that - and it will depend on what the majority of brands do....if they start paying $8....so will the others. Does anyone really CARE?
    Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
    One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
    what it is instead of what you think it should be.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11739408].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author DABK
    Surprising to whom? And why?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11740436].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Instagusqw
    Not at all surprising!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11741316].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Teo1999
      I would say definitely surprising.
      Companies really dont have $80 per year to spend?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11766384].message }}
  • Gravity is more immyooterbwaahl than anywan flyin' stoopid rockets.

    Gut feels oughta tellya this is trooer than it ain't.

    Beyond this, there is reeesoich, I guess.

    Let's see where we are in like 2030.

    Tellya, prolly we way past alla this frickin' schwango by then.

    Lightin' fuses is for blowin' stuff togethah.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11741387].message }}
  • We tried paying for Twitter ads and it wasn't worth it. So it doesn't make much sense for us to pay for verification, unless that gold checkmark comes with more value.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11741700].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Max Ortiz
    I think the question is as quoted above... "Does anyone really care" the blue check mark promoted exclusivity, but it can be bought now, so how exclusive is it?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11742104].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Ronn O
    Twitter is declining
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11743027].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author RMRC
    The problem is that things that used to have nothing to do with politics now do. So a lot of brands are making decisions based on politics. There's no way to tell if that is the case or not with each individual company.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11745619].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Burburuzan
    Thanks for the article!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11762609].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author spartan14
    well for sure this companies dont get desired results ,visibility from twitter and consider its not important for them and its not about the money

    Admin note: Affiliate links are not allowed in paid user sigs

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[11762645].message }}
Avatar of Unregistered

Trending Topics