Newsletter Subject

The Twitter fantasy

From

vox.com

Email Address

newsletter@vox.com

Sent On

Wed, Nov 1, 2023 11:00 AM

Email Preheader Text

To find out who killed Twitter, look all the way back to the start of the story. Hi there, This week

To find out who killed Twitter, look all the way back to the start of the story. Hi there, This week, I have something extra special to share with you. You can now listen to the latest from Land of the Giants, a podcast from Vox Media that examines the history of the tech companies that have changed the world. This season is all about Twitter, now known as X. Although it's not quite the giant that Amazon and Meta are, the company's outsized influence makes it an especially fascinating case study in Big Tech gone wrong. Read more about episode one below and [click here]( to listen on the platform of your choice. —Adam Clark Estes, senior technology and climate editor   Elon Musk didn't kill Twitter Twitter is a disaster. But you know that already. Why is Twitter a disaster? You probably think you know that, too: The usual suspect is Elon Musk, who has spent the year he’s owned Twitter doing his best to drive away users, advertisers, and any remaining sense of fun or utility the service used to have. (He’s also inexplicably renamed it “X,” which I’ll mention here solely to appease Vox’s excellent copy editors.) But I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about Twitter’s history recently — because I’m the host of The Twitter Fantasy, Vox Media’s newest installment of its [Land of the Giants]( podcast series, which launches today. And I don’t think Elon is the right answer for this whodunit. Elon has definitely, demonstrably made Twitter worse. But I’d argue that Twitter’s present is a direct consequence of its shambolic origin story, where its co-founders and funders couldn’t decide what it ought to be. And that when they finally did decide, they set themselves up for eventual disappointment. “Some people would look at it and say, ‘Oh God, this is like short-form email’ ... ‘This is the future of communications’ ... ‘This is the public square,’” says Betaworks CEO John Borthwick, who sold multiple startups to Twitter in its early years and had a ringside seat for its early growing pains. “Twitter didn’t actually state what they were. And so they could be many things to many different people.” What Twitter and its investors finally did decide is that the company would be the next Facebook: a venture-backed social network fueled by its users’ content and supported by advertising. And that didn’t seem crazy in the late 2000s: The brief history of social networks up until that time was that each one was bigger and more valuable than the last, and Twitter was following Facebook, which was already supposedly worth billions. The problem is that by the time Twitter went public in 2013, it was already clear that it wasn’t going to be Facebook. It wasn’t going to have anything like Facebook’s ginormous user base, and it didn’t have Facebook’s money-printing advertising machine. So if you wanted to invest in a fast-growing, money-making internet company, you invested in Facebook, not Twitter. Which meant Twitter’s stock languished while Facebook’s skyrocketed, and by the time Musk showed up and was willing to overpay for Twitter in 2022, no one had a better idea what to do with the company. And that’s part of the story we tell in this episode, which you can listen to below. It’s also not the whole story. And, I should point out, it’s not a story everyone agrees with. Former Twitter CEO Dick Costolo, for instance, thinks the key moment in Twitter’s history was its failed attempt to buy Instagram, months before Facebook actually did buy the startup for $1 billion. If Twitter had pulled off the deal, Costolo told me, “we would’ve won ... [and] that probably would’ve changed the course of the internet in some important way.” Even still, Twitter managed — often in spite of itself — to be a fundamentally important company, and it’s not going away anytime soon. So this has been a tremendously entertaining podcast series to put together. I hope you like it, and even if you don’t I’d love to hear your feedback. Please listen above or on [your favorite app](, and [drop me a line here](mailto:kafkaonmedia@recode.net) with your questions and commentary. —Peter Kafka, senior correspondent [US Supreme Court Associate Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch, and Elena Kagan attend the Presidential Medal of Freedom ceremony in the East Room of the White House in Washington, DC, on November 16, 2018.]( Cheriss May/NurPhoto via Getty Images [The Supreme Court seems stumped by two cases about free speech online]( [The justices appear to have no idea when they should get involved with online disputes between government officials and their constituents.](   [President Joe Biden, sitting at a desk, hands his pen to Vice President Kamala Harris, standing, while a presentation on AI is projected on a screen next to them.]( Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images [President Biden’s new plan to regulate AI]( [Now comes the hard part: Congress.](   [A lone Tesla is seen at a large charging station in a mountainous area.]( Sean Gallup/Getty Images [Why Norway — the poster child for electric cars — is having second thoughts]( [Electric cars are crucial, but not enough to solve climate change. We can’t let them crowd out car-free transit options.](    [Learn more about RevenueStripe...](   [Google CEO Sundar Pichai outside of court.]( Drew Angerer/Getty Images [What Google’s trial means for the company — and your web browsing]( [Which search engine do you use, and why is it Google? A judge will soon decide.](   [An illustration of a pair of eyes, hidden beneath a dark shadow, staring out to the left. Surrounding the eyes are white dots of the same size, against a red background.]( Vox; MirageC/Getty Images [Why some Palestinians believe social media companies are suppressing their posts]( [Shadowbanning and the Israel-Hamas war, explained.](   Support our work Vox Technology is free for all, thanks in part to financial support from our readers. Will you join them by making a gift today? [Give](   [Listen To This] [Listen to This]( [What We All Got Wrong About Twitter]( Twitter's power has always been misunderstood — by its leaders, by its users, and lately, by the world's richest person. [Listen to Apple Podcasts](   [This is cool] [How a Swiss triathlete built a $7 billion shoe company](  [Learn more about RevenueStripe...](   [Facebook]( [Twitter]( [YouTube]( This email was sent to {EMAIL}. Manage your [email preferences]( , or [unsubscribe](param=tech)  to stop receiving emails from Vox Media. View our [Privacy Notice]( and our [Terms of Service](. Vox Media, 1201 Connecticut Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20036. Copyright © 2023. All rights reserved.

Marketing emails from vox.com

View More
Sent On

31/05/2024

Sent On

31/05/2024

Sent On

30/05/2024

Sent On

29/05/2024

Sent On

29/05/2024

Sent On

29/05/2024

Email Content Statistics

Subscribe Now

Subject Line Length

Data shows that subject lines with 6 to 10 words generated 21 percent higher open rate.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Words

The more words in the content, the more time the user will need to spend reading. Get straight to the point with catchy short phrases and interesting photos and graphics.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Images

More images or large images might cause the email to load slower. Aim for a balance of words and images.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Time to Read

Longer reading time requires more attention and patience from users. Aim for short phrases and catchy keywords.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Predicted open rate

Subscribe Now

Spam Score

Spam score is determined by a large number of checks performed on the content of the email. For the best delivery results, it is advised to lower your spam score as much as possible.

Subscribe Now

Flesch reading score

Flesch reading score measures how complex a text is. The lower the score, the more difficult the text is to read. The Flesch readability score uses the average length of your sentences (measured by the number of words) and the average number of syllables per word in an equation to calculate the reading ease. Text with a very high Flesch reading ease score (about 100) is straightforward and easy to read, with short sentences and no words of more than two syllables. Usually, a reading ease score of 60-70 is considered acceptable/normal for web copy.

Subscribe Now

Technologies

What powers this email? Every email we receive is parsed to determine the sending ESP and any additional email technologies used.

Subscribe Now

Email Size (not include images)

Font Used

No. Font Name
Subscribe Now

Copyright © 2019–2024 SimilarMail.