Slashdot Mirror
How Twitter Made the Tech World's Most Unlikely Comeback (buzzfeed.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from BuzzFeed: Two years ago, people were writing eulogies for Twitter. Rudderless and without product direction, the company was losing users and advertisers, and seemed unable to contain a metastasizing trolling crisis that was destroying its credibility. Employees left by the dozens and then got laid off by the hundreds. It tried to sell, and failed at that too. The press, Wall Street, and the public were merciless. The New Yorker declared it "The End of Twitter." Analyst Michael Nathanson said that at $14 per share there was "no compelling reason to own the stock," and his counterparts applied "sell" ratings in bunches. Over a single weekend in February 2016, more than one million people tweeted "#RIPTwitter."
But then, even as those eulogies were being published, things started changing. Twitter began beating earnings expectations. Star ex-employees trickled back in, finding a new, more positive internal culture than the toxic one they'd left. Advertisers came back too, as did users. The company finally began addressing its trolling problem. And its stock, once unappealing to analysts like Nathanson at $14, is now trading above $46. It's still somewhat taboo to say it, but it's no longer possible to deny it: Twitter is making an unexpected, somewhat miraculous comeback. It is the first major consumer social company to lose users and start growing again in a meaningful way. The report mentions four major factors that led to Twitter's resurgence: "Its acceptance it would never be Facebook, leading to a decision to focus on news as Facebook pulled back. Its move to aggressively add premium live video to its service. Its CEO Jack Dorsey's directive to its product team to rethink everything. And a key component of many great comebacks: luck."
But then, even as those eulogies were being published, things started changing. Twitter began beating earnings expectations. Star ex-employees trickled back in, finding a new, more positive internal culture than the toxic one they'd left. Advertisers came back too, as did users. The company finally began addressing its trolling problem. And its stock, once unappealing to analysts like Nathanson at $14, is now trading above $46. It's still somewhat taboo to say it, but it's no longer possible to deny it: Twitter is making an unexpected, somewhat miraculous comeback. It is the first major consumer social company to lose users and start growing again in a meaningful way. The report mentions four major factors that led to Twitter's resurgence: "Its acceptance it would never be Facebook, leading to a decision to focus on news as Facebook pulled back. Its move to aggressively add premium live video to its service. Its CEO Jack Dorsey's directive to its product team to rethink everything. And a key component of many great comebacks: luck."
Because Twitter is accessible from raw SMS, it can be the best way to get immediate news from some breaking event. Millions of users out there are tweeting trivia, but if you're that one guy who finds himself a close witness to a bombing that day, you scoop the world, even if your only communication channel is a flip phone connected to a crappy cell provider.
And of course it helps that there's this person in Washington who does nothing but tweet.
To be cruel, the hula hoop made a comeback, the yoyo made a comeback, lots of fads https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... made a comeback but a pet rock is still a pet rock. Twitter for attention seeks to climb up their tree and tweet out, 'my tree', 'my tree', 'my tree'. All still an exercise in narcissistic futility, which twit can get the most twits to follow them. Twitter serves no purpose better served by other means, if people did in public exactly what they did on twitter ie stand on random street corners, at random intervals, to scream at passers by and continue to do this regularly, we would lock them up.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
someone who is basically evil, in that he mostly cares about goals, and doesn't care about how you get there, or who or what is hurt in the process.
"How dare he try to stop a potential nuclear war if it means giving some bad guy a couple hours of his time and a little undeserved respect!!"
To him, a person who votes against him, is someone he can ignore, unless there is a chance of changing their mind and you can do it, without too much effort or costing other voters. It doesn't matter if they merely dislike him, or if they hate him with every fibre of their being's for what he is doing to the country. They are irrelevant, and they are not useful to advance his goals.
Otherwise known as 'the optimal strategy for succeeding in politics'. No politician in the history of mankind ever got anywhere trying to assuage the rabid hatred of the people obsessed with stopping them. In fact - if you haven't caught on - Trump intentionally provokes that hatred because it makes his opposition look fucking insane. Trump could have never directly damaged the media (for example) as much as they've damaged themselves over the last 2+ years.
He only really seems to have cared about the kids being torn from parents, when it looked like the optics endangered himself.
He's attempting to utilize the manufactured outrage to his advantage to advance proper immigration reform, which is the correct solution to the underlying issue anyway.
It is just a matter of time before all of his Chickens come home to roost.
>PLEASE HURRY MUELLER!! D:
womp womp
They still haven't fixed the Democratis Party troll problem. We don't need their gay culture or their toxic anti-Trump hate speech. And we really don't need their fake news. Here's what really happend last week:
https://www.rt.com/usa/429956-caged-boy-immigration-debunk/
The one thing Twitter has not done is reorganized itself and made a public move to fair and equitable enforcement of its policies. It takes a very serious violation of Twitter's rules to get anyone on the left banned from Twitter. You can unequivocally call for someone to be raped and murdered and stand a good chance of keeping your account if Twitter's "community standards enforcers" and "Trust and Safety Council" consider you an ally. Heck, a reporter from CNN got caught putting crosshairs on the President or something like that and Twitter did not lift a finger to punish him or CNN.
(Note that this is why people on the right have started giving zero fucks when seemingly civil liberals whine about "right wing violence." I have liberal friends on Facebooks that, lacking any irony, were whining about right wing violence not long after a Bernie Bro tried to gun down dozens of republican congressmen and nearly killed Scalise. These are the same class off people who call mask-clad rioters and people who mob individuals at their homes and restaurants "protesters")
A president is president of the entire country. This behaviour, that of trying to stoke hatred and rage is not the sign of a leader, unless your talking the leader of some rabid cult.
Coming from a likely Democrat that is just so rich. Stoking racial divide and general victimhood is the hallmark of the Democratic party and Obama & Clinton are masters of the art.
But surely some who calls her opponents "deplorables" isn't trying to stoke hatred now are they? Obama made his entire political career on seeding racial tension. So don't talk to me about imagined hatred stoking because someone supports the rule of law. Don't like immigration law? Change it. But somehow when Democrats held the presidency and both houses of congress they had no interest in fixing immigration. Why was that? Could it be because they wanted to perpetrate the problem for political reasons?
No. But if he had a son it would have looked like Trayvon.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba