this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2026
653 points (99.4% liked)
Technology
82250 readers
3950 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Well, you kind of said it yourself: The fact that, since it's sadly still one of the largest social outlets, there's a whole economy around it. If Europe banned X tomorrow, a lot of people and companies would take a non-negligible hit to their revenue. We can argue that probably these people are not a majority of the other half of people in Europe that don't want X gone, but in the end, politicians and lawmakers care about money and (in a very distant second place) what the majority of their constituents say.
I wonder how feasible it would be if they'd announce a deadline whereby it would be blocked and recommend people and business to move onto a federated alternative.
You and I both know people, politicians, journalists would just move to Threads before they move to the fedi or Bluesky or any FOSS alternative.
They want an algorithm.
Care to back up that claim? What exactly is Twitter's contribution to their bottom line that they cannot live without?
I mean, it's obvious, the reach.
Big follower count = More Reach = More people likely to click the links or contact you
And that can be done elsewhere, but would require basically starting again from scratch, a big risk for a lot of corporations, and a big risk for independent creators (especially smut creators)
Tbh, I very much doubt that the bottom lines of, say, Dassault, BMW, Metro, or UBS would even budge if Twitter were to self-ignite over night, and their Twitter accounts with it. They're (still) on this dumpster fire of a platform because "everybody is" and some bellend in marketing thinks it impossible not to do what all the others are doing. I'd argue no consumer cares what the Twitter account of Tesco's has or hasn't been posting this week, and it has zero effect on their purchasing decisions there.
"Self-employed creators", aka influencers, aka people shilling products while pretending to be your friend, might be affected more because they lack any non-virtual connection to their "customers" But then again, we could ask ourselves if these provide any real-world value and should exist in the first place.
I mean I enjoy porn, and they are included in your much maligned self-employed creators. Also I enjoy YouTubers also in that category, and Twitch streamers, and Artists.
Also you're entirely ignoring there's a middle point, the companies with less than 500 employees total.
And honestly it's less often that they use it that matters to them, but that it's seen by fools as dodgy for a company to not have any social media presence.
Thankfully the ones at highest risk from Twitter getting enshitification are those which are trying to move away by doing posts that are like
They wouldn't suddenly ban it though.
Any ban would roll in without enough time for people to switch away. Twitter doesn't do anything special that can't be replicated elsewhere.