| > I don't see the failure in Twitter. It's a platform capable of influencing elections, that's definitely worth more than people think. In a functioning democracy, every platform influences elections. Twitter isn't special in this regard. > Advertisers want control They want things that don't actively damage their brands. That's not the same thing. > Why do you think You tube removed the downvote counter? My guess is "seeing downvotes lead to less engagement". But as I've not seen the discussion, that's a guess. > If crowds of people are allowed to freely light a brand on fire on Twitter, why would they pay to advertise there? They could do that before he bought it. > Meta paid like 22 Billion for WhatsApp which is hardly bringing in revenue. The actual revenue is not published, but is claimed to be at least $1 billion/year based on the preceeding quarter: """Alice Newton-Rex, WhatsApp's vice president of product, told the Financial Times in late September 2024, that "paid messaging is a bit earlier in the journey, but it's also doing well, and we've passed a $1 billion run rate."""" - https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/04091... That said, nobody's going around saying "gosh what a great investment decision by Zuckerberg, he nailed this one", if they're saying anything at all it's usually along the lines of "huh, is this a monopoly issue?" |