Twitter begins faking metrics in attempt to gaslight its own shareholders

[Xzi]

​

This is one of hundreds of examples that can be found by quickly skimming the platform. People you've never heard of, talking about things that few people would realistically care about, getting hundreds of millions, if not billions of "views." Musk is seemingly trying to change the very definition of the word, but he better hope his shareholders don't catch on, because that's the type of thing which could open him up to a big lawsuit. If you thought Twitter couldn't possibly sink any lower under his ownership, you were yet again proven incorrect.

 

[Taleweaver]

Sorry, but what sources do you have four this accusation?
Yes, a billion is a lot, but it's not like those are all individual... Individuals viewing it. I presume every refresh counts, and I suspect a lot of personalities have their own way of faking viewbots in order to give the assumption of expertise. It's a bit easy to blame Musk for this when, like the OP's quote mentions, few people really care about.
I can't think what kind of shareholders presume these numbers mean anything, so I don't think they'll bail when learning it doesn't.

 

[FAST6191]

Begins? I thought the amount of bots was a big contention in buying the thing in the first place?

Also I think every website fakes metrics*, dukes the stats and otherwise fiddles with things, as does every government department, school** and probably business until it catches up with them.

*look at our list of top 20 games of a given style, have to click through 20 links to see it all despite none being more than a paragraph and a picture or being able to be loaded in via scripting, or here have 60% of the article but rest after the jump.

**a younger and somehow less cynical me wondered why they were sending all the trouble/going to grow up to be an oxygen thief kids to the agricultural school for 3 days a week all of a sudden, then realised it meant they counted as going there instead for the purposes of their exam results statistics. Also why when one of those actually turned out to be good at music they pushed that so hard it was not funny, and same for less academically gifted types that might have spoken an east Indian language (exams for which were in line with the "I have a pet bird. His name is..." and thus easily top marks just by dint of speaking to their parents in it) and also why when one of the natives thought it an amusing choice they pushed so very hard for it not to be taken despite pouncing on another other second or third language they wanted to take.

 

[yuyuyup]

you misunderstand it means 1 person b viewing it, you can trusk the musk

 

[The Catboy]

Sorry, but what sources do you have four this accusation?

So the numbers are rather concerning. Unless Twitter recounts repeat viewers as it only has 368 million daily active users.
https://www.businessofapps.com/data/twitter-statistics/
Which really makes that number rather dubious. Plus the interactions are extremely disproportionate. This to say that they are normal for Twitter posts but extremely abnormal for such a high viewer count.
So either Elon tampered with the number or Twitter counts repeat viewers, regardless the numbers really are rather absurd. So not really a source, more just noting the the numbers. I won’t pretend to know what goes on behind closed doors

 

[tabzer]

Ah. That's conspiracy nonsense. Do you have any peer reviewed studies?

 

[stanleyopar2000]

Spez is going to do the same thing eventually

 

[Viri]

Wait, does Twitter have share holders? I thought the entire point of Elon buying Twitter was to take it private?

 

[Glyptofane]

Twitter was already open about how the views would be counted back in like December.

About view counts

 

[Xzi]

Sorry, but what sources do you have four this accusation?

Figured a primary source would be best. I don't even have a Twitter account, but simply looking at the amount of views relatively-unpopular accounts get now, versus the amount they got in archived tweets a couple months ago, it's obvious there's been a change. Active users of the platform started noticing this some weeks ago.

I can't think what kind of shareholders presume these numbers mean anything, so I don't think they'll bail when learning it doesn't.

Ad revenue? A billion views equates to a whole lot of it, or it would if it was legitimate. I can only speculate that Elon might be trying to artificially inflate the stock price before bundling Twitter with his garbage AI startup and selling to recoup some losses. Seems his edgy "fellow kids" tweets aren't quite the money printing machine he thought they would be.

 

[The Catboy]

According to their fact check, they apparently do count repeat views. They also count views if the post is barely on screen, scrolled past, and so on. So they are inflating the numbers, through really silly programming.

 

[Xzi]

According to their fact check, they apparently do count repeat views. They also count views if the post is barely on screen, scrolled past, and so on. So they are inflating the numbers, through really silly programming.

Any number of shady tactics they could be using here. Link views are probably counted as views for the tweet. Every time the metadata is referenced or archived it probably counts as a view, despite the fact that it's almost always machines and not people doing that. Being desperate for attention is one thing, attempting to artificially manipulate the value of a company he vastly overpaid for is another.

 

[TraderPatTX]

Twitter doesn't have shareholders, you knucklehead.

Remember when the left used to say it was a private company? Now it really is private.

 

[Xzi]

Twitter doesn't have shareholders, you knucklehead.

Remember when the left used to say it was a private company? Now it really is private.

Trying to inflate its value for potential buyers then. Not that I believe he'll have any luck recouping even half of what he paid, Musk got fleeced in that buyout.

 

[Jdspa]

In my opinion Twitter got better under Musk. Less censorship and broader exchange of opinions and views.

 

[VinsCool]

More like this is what happens when you fire all the competent programmers and find out why things were made the way they were.

 

[TraderPatTX]

Trying to inflate its value for potential buyers then. Not that I believe he'll have any luck recouping even half of what he paid, Musk got fleeced in that buyout.

Who said he's even trying to sell it? Is that what the voices in your head are telling you?

 

[Xzi]

Who said he's even trying to sell it?

I suppose there is the remote possibility he's attempting to make his platform (and by extension himself) appear more popular than it actually is solely for the sake of vanity. Out of all possibilities, however, that one makes him look the weakest and most pathetic. So good on you for pitching it.

 

[TraderPatTX]

I suppose there is the remote possibility he's attempting to make his platform (and by extension himself) appear more popular than it actually is solely for the sake of vanity. Out of all possibilities, however, that one makes him look the weakest and most pathetic. So good on you for pitching it.

So in other words, you are just making shit up again. Tsk, Tsk.

 

[Deleted member 194275]

I don't know why it matters. Less and less people are caring about twitter, they can say they have billions, trillions, nobody cares anyway.

That's the future: minute long bouncing titties videos, and not strange people short texts. This should be obvious by now.