As Twitter makes ‘Verified for Organizations’ available globally, several businesses around the world are prepared to lose their verified checkmarks rather than pay $1,000 a month to stay verified and an additional $50 for each affiliate Twitter account that they choose to add. In India, that translates to Rs 82,300 (or nearly Rs 9.88 lakh per year) for the organisation and Rs 4,120 for affiliate acounts (Nearly Rs 50,000 annually).

Before Elon Musk's takeover, being verified on Twitter was important, especially for news organisations as it helps users know that they are getting their information from a legitimate source. But now, many publications have reportedly refused to pay the hefty fee for staying verified.

CNN reporter Oliver Darcy broke the news on a Twitter thread that prominent media houses like The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, BuzzFeed and others will not be paying for verification.

In a statement shared with Forbes, an NYT spokesperson said, “We aren't planning to pay the monthly fee for checkmark status for our institutional Twitter accounts. We also will not reimburse reporters for Twitter Blue for personal accounts, except in rare instances where this status would be essential for reporting purposes.”

Also Read: Twitter makes 'Verification for Organisations' globally available as it plans to take down legacy blue ticks from April 1

News company Semafor’s Washington Bureau Chief Benjy Sarlin said in a tweet that Twitter is not a revenue driver for NYT. “It’s not a huge traffic driver and they make their money off of paywall, premium ads, games, cooking, etc, not raw pageviews anyway,” he added.

He also shared that Twitter has been a “huge headache” for NYT and even the Washington Post, from well before Elon Musk took over in October.

The Washington Post also said it would pay for the service. "The Washington Post will not pay for Twitter Blue service as an institution or on behalf of our journalists. It's evident that verified checkmarks no longer represent authority and expertise," a spokesperson told Darcy as per his tweet.

Sarlin also believes that if brands and businesses don’t pay to get verified, the whole “paying for verification” model would fall apart. According to Forbes, researchers have found that only 220,000 Twitter users have decided to pay for Twitter Blue, and about 17 percent of them have fewer than 100 followers.

“The $8 thing is a sideshow. The kind of verification that matters to brands/news/celebs is $1,000 a month to start,” he added.

Also Read: Twitter blue tick | Here's how you can retain it for free

BuzzFeed is also of similar thought that a checkmark no longer means “verified” or "reliable".

"As an organization, we (BuzzFeed) will not cover fees for individuals to keep their blue checkmarks moving forward. There are several reasons for this, but one outweighs them all: a blue checkmark no longer means the handle is 'verified’,” read Darcy’s tweet.

An internal note from The Los Angeles Times’ managing editor Sara Yasin states that the company will not be paying for Twitter Blue and it will not be paying to verify the organisation as well stating “verification no longer establishes authority or credibility” and that Twitter is “not as reliable as it once was”.

A Vox Media spokesperson told Darcy, "While Vox Media will take advantage of legacy account verification when provided to our brand accounts, it will generally not pay for employees to keep or gain Twitter verification."

And these news organisations are not wrong in doing so. The blue tick held a much higher value when it was free and was only available to select users who were verified by the system. Taking away its exclusivity also took away its weight. Now, it’s just another internet feature that you pay for — completely robbing it of legitimacy.

Also Read: No legacy verified blue ticks on Twitter without subscription from April 1

First Published:Mar 31, 2023 3:16 PM IST