Slashdot Mirror


Twitter Exploring Letting Everyone Get a Blue Tick For Verification, CEO Jack Dorsey Says (cnbc.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: Twitter could one day allow everyone to be verified by one of the company's signature blue ticks, according to CEO Jack Dorsey. In a livestream on Periscope, Dorsey said Thursday that opening verification to more people could help to make sure people on the platform are who they say they are. "The intention is to open verification for everyone, and to do it in a way that is scalable where we (Twitter) are not in the way. And people can verify more facts about themselves and we don't have to be the judge or imply any bias on our part," Dorsey said. Twitter introduced the blue checkmark in 2009. It was initially available to public figures such as celebrities, but has since expanded to others like journalists and bloggers. Users need to apply for the blue tick, explaining why they need one.

62 comments

  1. The Tick you say? by Sporkinum · · Score: 4, Funny

    SPOON!

    --
    "He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
    1. Re:The Tick you say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      We need a tick vs neo battle:

      --

      'SPOOOOOOON!'

      'There is no spoon.'

      --

  2. Stupid article, but by turp182 · · Score: 1

    Shouldn't everyone have the blue tick (verified).

    To prevent the bots. Or prevent bots.

    Of course Twitter enjoys inflated user counts and usage.

    I enjoy completely ignoring it.

    --
    BlameBillCosby.com
    1. Re:Stupid article, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You get a blue tick if you toe the party line and don't say anything controversial. They're suddenly not sure you are who they verified you were when you say something that makes the problem glasses turn in your direction.

    2. Re:Stupid article, but by Kierthos · · Score: 1, Funny

      The problem is, if everyone automatically got the blue tick, then you'd have, for sake of example, hundreds of accounts all claiming to be Tom Hiddleston and "verified" as such.

      Or Donald Trump. And if you think the actual Donald Trump on Twitter doesn't cause enough problems, imagine hundreds of them, again, all verified, and posting all kinds of shit. One is enough, thank you.

      --
      Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
    3. Re:Stupid article, but by nospam007 · · Score: 1

      "Shouldn't everyone have the blue tick (verified)."

      No, I'm afraid of Lyme disease.

    4. Re:Stupid article, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shouldn't everyone have the blue tick (verified).

      To prevent the bots. Or prevent bots.

      Of course Twitter enjoys inflated user counts and usage.

      I enjoy completely ignoring it.

      This kind of thing is not a bad idea, given the alternatives. It wouldn't mean jack shit to a competent group with resources though. They would find a way to get the blue tick.

      In fact, if the group that helped Trump had the option of getting one with some extra effort to prove they were "Real Americans" I'm sure they would have met that bar, bots and all. That doesn't mean you don't try, just that the battle is a difficult one.

    5. Re:Stupid article, but by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      "Shouldn't everyone have the blue tick (verified)."

      No, I'm afraid of Lyme disease.

      I came to make that joke.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
  3. The Sneetches by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sneetches_and_Other_Stories

            "...until neither the Plain nor the Star-Bellies knew
            whether this one was that one... or that one was this one...
            or which one was what one... or what one was who."

    1. Re:The Sneetches by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      It'd be interesting if it ever got to the point where not having a blue check mark was seen as a sign that you were saying stuff that was edgy enough to potentially be interesting.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    2. Re: The Sneetches by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Itâ(TM)s already gotten to that point on the bleeding edge of the right. Assange is glorified for having no blue checkmark, regardless of his political leanings, because his case demonstrates clearly that Twitter hands out checkmarks not on the basis of importance but of adherence to the party line of political correctness. Richard Spencer finally had his blue check stripped, but for a while it was assumed that his blue checkmark meant that he was an FBI plant: why else would Twitter let him continue to sperg out about racism if not because he was controlled opposition?

    3. Re: The Sneetches by johanw · · Score: 0

      Better go to Gab (https://gab.ai/) for a twityter that does not censor.

    4. Re: The Sneetches by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Richard Spencer is controlled opposition.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    5. Re: The Sneetches by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      It's best when the semi-official opposition are clowns.

    6. Re: The Sneetches by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one can be as reliably counterproductive as him purely by accident.

  4. nutjobs can be 'verified', too... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    verified certifiable.

    won't solve anything, and will piss everybody off if they go even further and move to a RN-only policy.

  5. Blue tick? by TimMD909 · · Score: 2

    We all know The Tick is blue (now), but do we all need a hero behind us yelling, "Spoon!"?

    1. Re: Blue tick? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is this a reference to a stupid american superhero with a spoon?

  6. Easy to get a blue tick already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    All you have to do is agree in every detail with Jack.

    Because Jack is that older sibling who knows best. Jack only wants what is good for everyone. Sometimes, Jack has to silence a tiny minority so that their distracting voices don't degrade the utopia that is Jack's vision. But Jack knows best. In the end, there will be complete free speech and expression on Jack's monopolistic platform. All you have to do is agree with Jack.

  7. Everyone is famous! by sqorbit · · Score: 1

    Now everyone will be rushing to get a "blue tick" so they can keep the fantasy going that their Twitter account somehow makes them interesting and famous.

    --
    Sent from my TARDIS
  8. Twitter Needs to ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never mind. I was going to say something about Twitter until it occurred to me that doing so would be pretty much like Twitter.

    So I'm going to Pornhub instead.

  9. Unless they don't like you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Twitter has a habit of removing verification from people they don't like even though they are who they say they are.

    1. Re:Unless they don't like you by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah. That's one of the reasons my Twitter account is my second-least used.

      Just ahead of Snapchat.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    2. Re: Unless they don't like you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wah. Cry moar faggit and tell us anout how HARD life is for you. BIGLY.

    3. Re: Unless they don't like you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love that Trump haters are indulging themselves by calling people faggots anonymously.

  10. yes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Give the Russian-infested cesspool even more of your personal data!

  11. Finally some Equality! by Fly+Swatter · · Score: 1

    I don't use twitter, but isn't this the type of thing they have been preaching to people for a long time now? Why has it taken them so long to also have equality on their data collection convenience platform?

  12. Super Blue Tick? by ruddk · · Score: 1

    So will they have a Super Blue Tick?
    What I hear is that people with the blue tick, has extra features, such as filtering out tweets and replys from all the riff raff without the blue tick.
    Which might also explain why people with the wrong opinions have been stripped of their blue tick so the good people won't have to look at them.

    1. Re:Super Blue Tick? by Spamalope · · Score: 1

      They will have to add a problem glasses approved persons tick. A tick blue hair naturally.

  13. Yeah, of course ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And people can verify more facts about themselves and we don't have to be the judge or imply any bias on our part

    And then we'll know exactly who you are for purposes of marketing and analytics, and for handing your personal information over to governments who demand it.

    Fuck, these social media assholes get creepier every year. I'm sure they'd love to have verified accounts for everyone on the planet.

    Fuck Twitter, Fuck Facebook, Fuck all of this goddamned invasive social media.

  14. except by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 2

    Except this things has not just been used for verification, the withdrawal of it has been used as "punishment" for people saying things that Twitter management and staff do not like.

    1. Re:except by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. You can already pay for Twitter verification from shady third party services, and the reason you'd want to is because:

      - Verified users are boosted in search results. When you do a search, you see "top tweets" and those are basically filtered to only show verified users.
      - Verified users have features "regular" users don't. Things like scheduled tweets and various filtering options are only offered to verified users. I don't know the entire list of special features, I just know they exist.
      - Verified users are boosted in notifications. If you mention someone as a "regular" user, there's a very good chance Twitter will just silence your mention, even if the other person isn't verified either. Verified people always go through. Similar things apply to "retweets" and "liking" a post: these notifications are more likely to be sent if you're verified than if you're not. (It's unclear how Twitter decides to send notifications.)

      There's a very good reason Twitter can punish "problematic" people with taking away The Blue Check, and it's because not having one basically makes you invisible.

    2. Re: except by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its sure a good thing youre constitutionally gaurenteed free speech on someone's private platform, right?

      SHAME.

    3. Re: except by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      can a muslim baker refuse service to a jew?

    4. Re:except by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Twitter Verification: The Tick That Strokes Your Dick
      Excerpt: (3:52) Twitter is supposed to be using verification in the way that it tells you, that a popular account belonging to a public figure is actually the public figure and not some sort of bot, scam, account &c. Verification does not mean endorsement or that you just like them. You're just verifying someone or that's what it's supposed to mean. ... (4:19) Twitter uses verification as a kind of perk or special treatment or reward of trust for people who have the right points. ... (5:07) And a lot of people would be verified until they do something, and Twitter doesn't like that thing, so they'll unverify this person. Take what happened to Milo Yiannopoulos. He apparently was saying ‘misogynistic’ things and now he's unverified even though his account is still his own.

    5. Re: except by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 2

      You're the first person to bring the Constitution into the conversation. We can criticize a company for doing things with its platform that we don't like without saying they're doing anything illegal. They're free to ignore us, we're free to stop using the platform.

      --
      Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
  15. How about Green Ticks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It can be a bad consequence sweepstakes: one out of every 10 clicks gets you lime disease.

  16. So now we all *want* our real identity on Twitter? by herrlich_98 · · Score: 2

    ... unless you can have some sort of weird twitter username that doesn't reveal your real identify *and* have a blue tick.

    First people want to be anonymous, then the government (like China?) wants to force us to use our real names but this seems like some mental jujitsu that makes us all want to use our real verified names because the blue tick means we are special?

    I am actually not some super paranoid person about doing this. It is an ok idea, seems like a good idea to be able to have some sort of verification or even Slashdot-like karma that you are a good actor.

  17. I'm Spartacus by Chrisq · · Score: 1

    I'm Spartacus .... (listens)

    1. Re:I'm Spartacus by psergiu · · Score: 1

      No, no ...
      I'm Spartacus

      --
      1% APY, No fees, Online Bank https://captl1.co/2uIErYq Don't let your $$$ sit in a no-interest acct.
  18. Utterly pointless. by Chas · · Score: 1

    At this point, it's been shown that the "Verified" system is naught but a mutual back-patting club for those whose ideals line up with those "in the fold" at Twitter, or who're simply too damn popular to be left alone.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
    1. Re:Utterly pointless. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If every schmuck can get blue ticks, not just the current "verified club", then blue ticks will cease to represent social cachet as they see it.
      If the current in-the-fold verified people see this as a problem, then great. The new trolls can politely remind them that they are acting like religious conservatives who want to preserve the sanctity of marriage by preventing undesirables to get married.

    2. Re:Utterly pointless. by cancerintheheart · · Score: 1

      You're looking at this from the point of an adult trying to rationalize something aberrant and horrible.
      "Oh it's just those popular kids excluding the losers (like me), as usual"
      Stop being such a pusillanimous coward.

      Twitter is for kids. It's a tool to influence the most easily influenceable.
      This 'blue checkmark' signals MORALITY to kids. They are being BRAINWASHED, trained on a narrow set of stimulus that directly factors into their judgement of society.

      DO SOMETHING YOU FAT LAZY BASTARD

    3. Re: Utterly pointless. by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      I, for one, plan to make an angry post on Slashdot!

  19. Don't need no stinkin' Blue Tick. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please add me to the army of the tickless.

  20. Re:So now we all *want* our real identity on Twitt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You'd want it because verification unlocks features and allows you to show up in search results and have mentions read.

    If you aren't verified, you're basically filtered out of existence to other Twitter users. Tweets you post may or may not show up, mentioning people may or may not cause them to see your tweet, and various other notifications you can generate may or may not show. Verified users show up in the default search results, non-verified users have to break a certain "retweet" or "like" threshold to be seen.

    No matter what Twitter says, they treat verified users as being "special" and offer them perks that other users don't get. That's why this (sort of) makes sense, even if they don't do any real verification to a real name. (Of course what would make more sense is to NOT offer perks to verified users and just make the checkmark indicate that a user is who they say they are.)

  21. Everyone? Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As the majority of the world has never even heard of Twitter then good luck with that.
    I've heard of it but as www.twitter.com is blocked by my firewall, I don't need to say anything else.

    Die Twitter, die...

  22. Good way to weed out the crap by Kazoo+the+Clown · · Score: 2

    I unfollow blue-ticked accounts.

    1. Re:Good way to weed out the crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      shariablue-ticked accounts

    2. Re:Good way to weed out the crap by cancerintheheart · · Score: 1

      WELL THANK GOD you do that, I bet the millions of kids being brainwashed by hand-picked stimulus will follow your example, taking into account how FUCKING COOL you are

      PROBLEM SOLVED EVERYBODY, it's just a matter of exercising our discretion on an individual/familial scale, it will all sort itself out from here.

    3. Re:Good way to weed out the crap by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I unfollow blue-ticked accounts.

      I have a better solution. I have a Twitter account and I made it solely so I could follow one user: @DonaldTrump. It has saved me a lot of money since for the past year I have no longer needed to subscribe to The Comedy Channel.

    4. Re:Good way to weed out the crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah the only truth tellers are anonymous losers posting political propaganda

  23. super by lexlthr · · Score: 1

    Helen: Everyone's special, Dash.
    Dash: [muttering] Which is another way of saying no one is.
    or
    Syndrome: *Everyone* can be super! And when everyone's super... [laughs maniacally] ...*no one* will be.

  24. Useless by aglider · · Score: 1

    When everyone has it, it becomes useless.

    --
    Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
  25. Translation by cancerintheheart · · Score: 1

    "We're just going to ban everyone well-known we don't like so the Official Seal of Certified Politically Correct Drone-hood essentially maintains the same meaning"

  26. Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does the tick bite? Is it a carrier of rocky mountain spotted fever?

  27. Verify them the very same way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You do any employee, only this could end the bullshit.

  28. Steemit by dirtaddshp · · Score: 0

    Twitter knows Steemit is coming for their lunch. They need to do things to keep people on their platform. Gotta admit, its nice being paid directly by other users.. instead of depending on advertisers.

  29. Periscope is still up and running? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oops, wrong year. Must have punched it in wrong in the DeLorean.

  30. PR problem of bias by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Administrators used to be above the politics of their users.

    Twitter did this to themselves.

    Look where it's gotten them.

    Idiots.

    Good administrators apply their site policies with no bias whatsoever, if someone breaks the rules, they get punished, that's integrity, that's a quality service.

    Not this "I don't like this person, let's revoke their blue tick, har har!" that's just shit.

  31. Sounds like a great NSA upgrade. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's america! Must find new ways to find out who you are, steal your data, let's over correct!!!