Twitter Tumbleweed Watch

from the this-town-is-coming-like-a-ghost-town dept

I just want to share some back-of-the-envelope math. I’m increasingly convinced that Twitter (or at least the network neighborhoods that comprise my Twitter experience) is becoming a ghost town. Here’s why:

A couple months ago, I spoke with Nancy Scola for her story about why DC-types can’t seem to quit Twitter. One of my comments became the headline: “I caught lightning in a bottle. I will be one of the last people to leave Twitter.”

The “lightning” in this case, was the whole “Bretbug” dustup back in August 2019. Before Bret Stephens got mad and wrote to my provost, I had about 9,000 followers on the platform. After his weeklong tantrum was over, I had around 40,000 Twitter followers. That number has held pretty steady ever since — today I have around 42,000. That’s… a lot. On paper at least, it makes Twitter a much larger and more valuable megaphone than I am likely to have anywhere else.

I have 3,500 followers on Mastodon. Mastodon is fun! It kind of has the vibe of Twitter circa 2011. I like it. But if I want to promote a new essay that I’ve written, Twitter is my bread and butter. That’s where people will see it and share it.

(This is a classic “network effects” story. The value of Twitter is derived from the number of people who are also using it. Twitter is the solution to a coordination game. Mass-scale coordination games are not easy to solve.)

But that number — 42,000 Twitter followers — has begun to seem hollow. When I tweet something, it isn’t actually viewed by 42,000 individuals. It’s seen by the subset of those 42,000 people that happen to be staring at Twitter’s chronological timeline at the time I send the tweet, plus anyone who is shown the tweet through Twitter’s algorithmic timeline. And that reduced-megaphone turns out to be a lot less irreplaceable.


I first noticed it last month. I wrote a piece for the Atlantic about ChatGPT. (It’s a good piece! I think it holds up well!) The piece had everything that my normal Substack posts lack —a real editor, professional art, a catchy headline. I shared it to Twitter and Mastodon. I posted about it on Substack too.

Here’s a screenshot of the Twitter post. Notice the view count, which Elon had just recently pushed as a new feature.

I didn’t reach 42,000 people by tweeting my article. I reached less than 3,000 people. And that has been pretty consistent. Unless I write something spicy that gets a lot of retweets, the view-counter tells me I’m reaching 2,000-3,000 people.

Here’s my post from earlier this week. 2,203 views.

I figure there are two potential explanations. (Well, there are three, but I’m going to dismiss the third.)

(1) Maybe I’m a little bit shadowbanned?

I don’t think this is especially likely. But I can’t say I don’t deserve it. I have spent a lot of time heckling Elon on Twitter. I have said a great many things, I have meant every one of them, and none of them very nice. Elon fans might have flagged my tweets for review. (If somebody was repeatedly saying the stuff I say about Elon to someone I like, I would flag their tweets for review too.) One of the few surviving Twitter employees may have looked at my tweets and said “nope! Too mean to the bossman. Totally uncalled for. You will receive less algorithmic amplification from now on.”

That seems like a reasonable thing for the company to have done.

(2) Many of the people who follow me on Twitter have either quit the site or check it a lot less.

This is what I mean by Twitter becoming a ghost town.

You wouldn’t notice it from the activity in the algorithmic feed. There’s still Twitter-drama. People still post article links and TikToks. But the crowd is thinning out. People are locking-but-not-deleting their accounts. (If you delete your account, someone can grab the freed up username and impersonate you.) People are deleting the app from their phone. People are spending their attention-minutes somewhere else — Instagram or TikTok or Mastodon or Slack or Discord or, I dunno, going for a nice walk outdoors or something.

(3) The view-counter might be garbage.

I’m dismissing this explanation for now, since I have no way to evaluate it. And it would be pretty surprising if views were being undercounted, rather than overcounted. Usually social media platforms end up getting in trouble for inflating their metrics, not deflating them. But it’s a possibility because there are only like sixteen engineers left at Twitter and this new feature was pushed just before the holiday. …Who knows, y’know?

Here’s where we get to the back-of-the-envelope math:

I have a bit more than 2,300 Substack subscribers. My posts appear in the inboxes of all those subscribers. Everyone presumably at least views the headline, whether they open and read the article or not.

If I’m getting 2,000-3,000 views through Twitter, and ~2,300 views through Substack’s email distribution, then my Substack has already reached the same effective size as my Twitter following.

What’s more, Substack is growing, while Twitter is shrinking. Mastodon is growing too (though they don’t provide comparable analytics, and the user experience probably benefits from having fewer gamified metrics.).

Twitter isn’t irreplaceable. Not even for minor-Twitter-celebrities like me who have much larger followings on the site than they would have anywhere else.

And that’s because Twitter is becoming a ghost town. (Certainly not for everyone. If you’re a crypto-spammer, the place is probably hopping again. If you’re a white nationalist, it must be exciting to see so many of your old buddies have their bans rescinded.)

Twitter’s locked-in value comes from all the people who spend too much time there. It benefits from having over a decade of habit formation, and from all the sedimentary network development that happened along the way.

Thanks to Elon adding the view count to the native Twitter app, we’re now constantly reminded how many people are actually seeing our tweets.

For me, at least, what Elon revealed is that Twitter is a megaphone equipped with dying batteries.

I’ll keep using it, just like I use all the other tools. But it’s already much less special than I thought.

Republished with permission from Dave’s Substack.

Filed Under: ,
Companies: twitter

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Twitter Tumbleweed Watch”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
77 Comments

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Koby (profile) says:

Dead Channel

(4) You got a bunch of followers because of a snarky comment that you made, and those people agreed with you. But no additional snarky comments were forthcoming, so your followers don’t care.

We’ve seen this consistently with social media celebrities and corporate channels. There are supposedly millions of followers, but only dozens of interactions. These platforms are designed to make you think like you’re important, as if you’re a star and being watched by throngs of adoring fans. In reality, noone cares.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re:

They’ll probably whine that whichever platforms decent people go to avoid them are being unfair for having enforced standards and continue whining the same way they do now. They won’t be happy until they have a legally enforced audience for their idiocy. Which will never happen, as it’s as counter to common sense and decency as it is to the actual concept of free speech.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

They won’t be happy until they have a legally enforced audience for their idiocy.

They don’t want an audience. They can get that on any social media site that would have them. What they want is confrontation: They want to shove their shit in other people’s faces and get into arguments to prove the superiority of their ideas. The behavior of our troll brigade tends to prove my point.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3

To bully, yes, but not to shut down. If they wanted a platform free of dissenting voices, they would all go to the echo chambers like Truth Social and Gab. That they go to those places, but ultimately don’t stay there, proves that they crave engagement with “the enemy”.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4

Yes, they crave engagement, as a means to control the narrative.

The other half of that is to bully sites like Techdirt until they bow to these jerks so the idiots responding cannot easily check if they’re full of bullshit.

Just because the white supremacists are doing a terrible job at it doesn’t mean this isn’t their intended purpose.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Matthew M Bennett says:

Re: Re: Re:2

They don’t want an audience. They can get that on any social media site that would have them. What they want is confrontation: They want to shove their shit in other people’s faces and get into arguments to prove the superiority of their ideas. The behavior of our troll brigade tends to prove my point.

Funnily enough, this is actually accurate. Were you actually listening all those times I told you I don’t like Musk so much as I think your ideas are dumb and that needs to be pointed out?

Now, if you guys didn’t say hilariously dumb things (Masnick, mostly) I wouldn’t come here to point it out.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3

if you guys didn’t say hilariously dumb things (Masnick, mostly) I wouldn’t come here to point it out

The real question is why you even bother doing that. That you come to a site you hate and try to start shit with people who think you’re little better than the average Twitter troll is a mental defect of your own making. Well-adjusted people don’t do that shit, fam.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Scary Devil Monastery (profile) says:

Re: Re:

We’ve seen it before. Twitter is rapidly heading for the “All the worst people” scenario we saw playing out in 4chan, 8kun, and all the other attempts to make unmoderated communities which ended up fetid morasses only visited by edgelords, trolls and people who literally don’t get way of entry in civilized places.

People like Baghdad Bob – or Bennett, or whatever else he calls himself this time around – are only on places like TD because there are views to be upset about. He’ll hate Twitter’s new iteration as the “interesting people” he refers to will be klansmen, nazis, russian trolls, Qanon cultists and saudi nationalists.

Which I guess is “interesting” if what you’re after is positive feedback on fascist and/or racist ideals and want an audience where your complaints that “the lefties” are all being mean to you is appreciated by other deplorable assholes.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2

“I love this comment because it is Exhibit A of the fact liberals think it’s OK to call anyone who disagrees with them a racist (we’ve graduated to “fascist” now, interested to see where you twits go from there) and that that is somehow an argument.”

What do conservatives call those with whom they disagree?

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Matthew M Bennett says:

Re: Re: Re:3

In my case, usually economically illiterate, sometimes I call them totalitarian jackboots, sometimes I point out they are treating “science” as a religion without any understanding of actual science. It depends upon the particular liberal’s kink, really, but most of the time they’re real intent on telling others what to do without any knowledge of why that’s a bad plan.

If it makes you feel better I get mad at conservatives about police unions and qualified immunity.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2

we’ve graduated to “fascist” now, interested to see where you twits go from there

Whoa, slow down a bit there shit-for-brains.

You’re misunderstanding the problem.

You’re an asshole. That’s the problem.

It’s not that anyone disagrees with you. No one wants to discuss anything with you in the first fucking place. Why not? Because you’re an asshole, incapable of getting the fucking hint of everyone else around you.

Stop injecting your opinion where it isn’t wanted, especially once it’s obvious that’s the case. Understand that, and you’ll understand your problem. It won’t change anything, but you’ll understand.

Disagreements can be resolved. But assholes like you will never change.

You’ve got a problem with liberals. We get it. Now do the part where you don’t come here to tell us about it. Because we really don’t give a shit. Anything short of that is proving my point.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

JMT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2

I love this comment because it is Exhibit A of the fact liberals think it’s OK to call anyone who disagrees with them a racist (we’ve graduated to “fascist” now, interested to see where you twits go from there) and that that is somehow an argument.

I’m not surprised you can only come up with this simplistic thought process.

If I disagree with you, I’ll explain why (i.e. an argument) and probably won’t call you anything. But…

If you say racist things, I’ll call you a racist.

If you espouse fascist views I’ll call you a fascist.

These three things are quite seperate and may or may not overlap.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:4

He did’t call you a racist, he used racist as an alternative example of how he’s calling people for what they are.

It’s interesting both that you took that so personally, and you didn’t complain about being labelled a fascist (which he didn’t, but the words surrounding fascist imply the same meaning as the one you object to).

Your mistakes are very revealing.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

4chan generally tries to use peer pressure to “moderate”, mostly because there’s only two official mods, and everyone hates them because they tend to either be powertripping assholes, incompetent or both.

And it sort of worked, for a very loose definition of working, until the Stormfront fucks decided to make /pol/ their home. Note that similar behavior had been done before, ie, /mlp/ and their “raids”, but there was little action done aside from memeing the shit out of the shunned bronies.

4chan doesn’t even want Stormfront there.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Violet Aubergine says:

Re:

Capitalism will course correct this so called correction. In December Twitter was down 71% in advertising and that’s the month everybody spends big on everything including advertising because it’s Christmas. Twitter without competent moderation isn’t anything anybody but trolls and MAGA mouth breathers want. Couple that with Musk refusing to pay rent in SF and London is a pretty decent sign that chaos and unpredictability is the new normal for Twitter so don’t expect any contracts you sign going forward with them to have any meaning. Screwing over people you’re in business with is totally how you build brand loyalty and a positive reputation that makes everybody want to be involved with your business.

And since Twitter is being flooded with so many great interesting ideas care to share one of those interesting ideas with us? I mean you must have at least one example unless you’re making stuff up. You wouldn’t lie to support your own point and ego? No, people never do that. I’m more than willing to give any new ideas consideration. And I mean universally interesting, not interesting to people like yourself or myself. Personally, I find it difficult to believe somebody on Twitter came up with an original idea that deserves investigation but I’d be happy to be proven wrong.

I’d love it if I could go back to the notion that Musk was a competent business person and a scientific genius instead of seeing him as a bull in a china shop when it comes to business and mediocre as an average American when it comes to science. I think the vast majority of the people here would love it if Musk began acting like the image of the old Musk we have even if he kept all his regressive political beliefs. Incompetence and chaos might provide some schadenfreude but we’d all be much happier if Musk was running things competently and not mercurially. Instead, he’s all chaos, indignation and persecution complex that makes him go out of his way to prove how superior he is so people don’t realize how inferior he really is.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
That One Guy (profile) says:

Re: Re: As an alternative might I suggest 'A politician with a must-pass bill'?

I’d love it if I could go back to the notion that Musk was a competent business person and a scientific genius instead of seeing him as a bull in a china shop when it comes to business and mediocre as an average American when it comes to science.

Minor correction just because I find it entertaining: Mythbusters actually tested that saying and it turns out that bulls are remarkably careful to not run into things, completely avoiding the rickety shelves loaded with cheap dishes they had in a small pen even when there were several bulls in the pen at once.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

“Twitter was failing financially” It was breaking even, which is not what Wall St wants to see but certainly better than most tech companies running a red margin and constantly seeking runway.

“change is almost by definition an improvement” Is this true when the change is from break-even self-sustaining to selling the furniture and leaving the bills unpaid to scrounge up runway for the company?

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

Lady, Twitter was failing financially before Musk bought it. It was also a dystopian hellscape. Any change is almost by definition an improvement.

Nah, it was mostly breaking even to slightly profitable. Over the last few years it was mostly profitable, with a few negative quarters. https://www.statista.com/statistics/299119/twitter-net-income-quarterly/

It might not have been thriving, but the idea that it was “failing financially” is just outright false.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

“Left-skewed”

What does this mean? It’s bullshit of course.
There is no left anymore.
You should call it center-skewed.

“Now you live on an equal playing field.”

I live on the internet? No, I have a real life.
Equal is a word I doubt you understand and I doubt that present BS is called playing.

“conservative folks are remarking how people actually reply to their posts now.”

Because that is what is important, it’s all about Me!

“more interesting ideas”

Interesting in what way(s)? How to be more cruel than you already are? How to twist the knife after backstabbing? What then?

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Violet Aubergine says:

Re:

Well now Twitter in the morning
Twitter in the evening
Twitter at suppertime
Be my little Twitter and love me all the time
Now Twitter time is anytime that you’re near oh you’re so dear
Now don’t you roam just be my honeycomb and live in a heaven of love cuz it’s Twitter all the time

Apologies to Johnny Cash.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

I mean, you’re not wrong. The numbers show just how much Twitter has enshittified: you get 5% or so of your followers to see your tweets. That may be Old Twitter’s fault, but if I need my users to stay on my website the last thing I want is to show them just how few people actually see their posts. Like, if my work promised me $100 net an hour for my work and then my direct deposit shows me $5 an hour on payday, I’m gonna look for a new job!

To extend the analogy, Elon is in charge of the payroll here: he could change the policy to get me my pay, or he could follow his company’s shortsighted incentive to save on the expenses. And then wonder why no revenue is coming in when there’s no one left to make the product.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
That One Guy (profile) says:

User count is not the same thing as ACTIVE user count

Here’s a screenshot of the Twitter post. Notice the view count, which Elon had just recently pushed as a new feature.

… And one that I can’t help but suspect he’s going to be quietly getting rid of once more people start noticing just how ‘much’ traffic and attention there actually is on the platform these days.

Ninja (profile) says:

Re:

I don’t fully trust those numbers. Some tweets with very little view counts with tons of likes and retweets have been crossing the TL when I bother to check my account.

That said, what I felt was a degradation of quality content. Many people I follow and consider to be valuable sources of content have greatly diminished their activity and the content I get on the TL has become dumber and more problematic. Example: far-right, bigoted content I’m not even remotely interested in and don’t ever interact with to justify. I mean, the amount of such content has increased sensibly and reporting it has zero consequence.

I admit I’m morbidly curious about what’s going to happen to Twitter and watching a dumb billionaire burn his cash like this is being kind of entertaining.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...