The layout was fubar so I had to create paragraphs, fix capitalization problems, etc.
Years ago, before verified accounts were a thing, back when I was on Eastenders, I was contacted multiple times by parents of children who had been "conversing" with me online. 11-15 year old children that had been talking with a fake me. I was informed one of these children went missing.
I didn't have social media at the time, I didn't understand it. It's a horror show, for years people pushed for some way, to root out the fakes. There was a phase, if you remember, of people posting images of themselves with their URL. I did that on every site I could find, Facebook, myspace, Bebo, anything. I felt powerless to stop people using my name and face to scam or groom people. That's why verification came to be. Because it was important to protect people.
It wasn't for clout, or for leveraging money from a platform. It was to protect people from utter scumbags. I think that perhaps, in this age of social media, there are some CEO's who may have forgotten the importance of protecting people, of having trustworthy sources. I don't tweet much, I am scared of the internet, I struggle with a lot of things in life. But this account exists so that fake accounts can't.
If @elonmusk removes that simple ability to protect people, to protect children with verification then this company is dead in the water. I don't know if it's been expressed to him, I doubt he will see this thread. But I hope someone is explaining to @elonmusk the actual dangers to children and the vulnerable and why removing that protection, is an action that will lead directly to a child being endangered.
Verification is a public service, it is a good deed performed by companies who contribute very little good to the world in my opinion. We should be making easier clearer paths to verification for everyone, not making it harder. It is their responsibility, not a business model.
I mean blue checks as they exist are definitely for clout, what he's actually arguing for here is some kind of government Internet ID system so no more anonymity.
Not quite, it would be pretty trivial for a government identity verification system to mark public persons and companies that want to participate in the verification scheme as verified, while anyone who wishes to remain anonymous or not participate in that remains unverified.
What if I'm a streamer with 5000 followers. Why can't I be verified?
What if I'm a community leader in a town with 1000 residents. Why won't Twitter verify me?
Because bluechecks are not for us. They don't exist for the stated reason. They exist to confer status on those whom Twitter executives deem worthy.