Tweet views don't mean watching video, and are not comparable to TV viewers metric.
We'll see how this X-career pans out. Remember when Facebook used to report massive video viewership, and it turned out to be miscounted nonsense that ruined businesses that pivoted to videos on FB?
You guys are crazy if you believe those view counts. Musk just said X/Twitter has 550M monthly users (and a giant bot problem which I'm sure makes up a sizable number there). So 480M views could mean tens of millions of users viewed "an interview with an Argentinian presidential candidate" dozens of times or, in the most extreme, that 87% of Twitter's monthly "users" viewed it exactly once. It just doesn't make sense. In reality, those numbers are juiced to make content look more viral than reality because it's nearly impossible for Twitter to know if a "person" actually "viewed" the content. Many former Twitter engineers said as much when Musk rolled out the new view count.
These "views" are just non-unique impressions ("tweet was for a couple of seconds in some user's viewport", including quote tweets), it surely doesn't mean someone watched the video.
480m does not sound legit. Something doesn't add up when it's a candidate from a country with a population of 46m and twitter has a possible user base of 550m.
For some context Mr Beast videos have ~100m views and his content is geared towards children with a ton of time on their hands.
IIRC views are just impressions, i.e. someone scrolling their for you page sees a clip and keeps scrolling. It doesn't even count unique impressions. Some poor smuck doomscrolling might scroll past it 5-10x that night and each one would be a view.
We'll see how this X-career pans out. Remember when Facebook used to report massive video viewership, and it turned out to be miscounted nonsense that ruined businesses that pivoted to videos on FB?