Good reasons for journalists to leave X -- and to stay

IMAGE BY ENRIQUE FROM PIXABAY

The journalists who have departed from X/Twitter since owner Elon Musk corrupted his social media platform and emerged as a leader of MAGA politics have been rightly unkind in their assessments. Some examples:

• Magazine/newsletter writer James Fallows (several hundred thousand X followers): “Elon Musk has made it a vehicle of propaganda, hatred, and lies.”

• Sports book/newsletter author Jeff Pearlman (85,000 followers): “Uniquely ugly and gross and cruel … an unambiguously anti-truth platform.”

• The Guardian (a whole news organization): “X is a toxic media platform.”

All true. But a question remains: Why aren’t more journalists and newsrooms doing this? The majority aren’t. It essentially comes down to how one weighs the value of a righteous stance against a lot of practical considerations that make remaining on X logical.

Some journalist dissatisfaction with X predates Musk’s purchase in 2022. One journalist wrote that she tried to tough it out “while Twitter’s endemic racist, sexist and transphobic harassment problems grew increasingly more sophisticated and organized.” She signed out in 2017.

Under Musk, X has gotten worse. After he eviscerated content moderation, X now welcomes and amplifies political and demographic hatred, along with blatant disinformation, a lot of it pumped by Musk himself. It has restored users banned by previous ownership, and the algorithm downplays progressive viewpoints. Musk was clearly insincere, if not lying, when he said in April 2022: “For Twitter to deserve public trust, it must be politically neutral, which effectively means upsetting the far right and the far left equally.”

All of this, along with Musk going more public as a funder and adviser of Donald Trump, has prompted a notable exodus of individuals, including some journalists, to other social media sites such as Threads, Mastodon and Bluesky, which I joined last week while still staying on X*.

X has lost an average of 14% of its daily users every month since Musk bought it. In the 24 hours after the presidential election, its daily user count dropped from 162 million to 157 million. Meanwhile, Bluesky gained 6 million total users since the election, giving it 20 million. Threads** said it has been adding 1 million signups per day for three months.

Despite the shift, you can still find most individual reporters and news outlets on X. The reasons generally relate to their ability to do their jobs and to the promotional benefits.

Reporters find X (and other social media platforms) useful in newsgathering. It’s a common way to gain story ideas, find people to interview, locate witnesses and visuals when news breaks, and assess public reaction to events. And occasionally, prominent figures who are otherwise inaccessible post newsworthy statements.

It’s also effective in getting more eyes on a journalist’s good work. It may seem like the whole world is on X. The reality is that X’s reach has never exceeded 25% of the U.S. adult population. But among the users of X are many influential individuals that journalists want to reach – decision makers, citizen activists, academics, other journalists. They hope to maximize the impact of their work, along with wanting to boost the reputation and relevance of themselves and their organizations. Nothing wrong with that.

AL.com, for one, remains on X. It evaluated circumstances after Musk’s purchase but didn’t see a mass departure of users. Director of Audience Katie Brumbeloe wrote in an email: “Ultimately, we decided we would not leave Twitter/X because we still have a large audience there and we need to continue to have a presence there, sharing our work and listening to and engaging with audiences there.” The newsroom’s political, investigative and sports stories get substantial reach and engagement on X, she said.

AL.com, which does not require its writers to post on any particular social media platform, recently started re-posting work on Bluesky “after taking a break over the summer when we were getting no engagement at all,” Brumbeloe said. It’s “experimenting” with both Bluesky and Threads.

Beyond the visibility, there’s also a good argument that journalists need to stay on X and inject as much truth as they can into the Xosphere, even if it feels like typing in a typhoon of tripe. To go elsewhere seems like a win for Musk and a loss for X users who don’t live permanently in an echo chamber.

Perhaps someday a different social media platform can become a major, credible, safe forum for political discussion that bumps X to the fringe. Part of accomplishing that would have to be a long list of newsrooms willing to make a difficult decision.

*I feel obligated to explain why I remain on X, which I use mostly to post links to this blog. The blog is primarily for my students (present and past) and they haven’t moved from X to Threads, Mastodon or Bluesky (I know because I searched). I also take some justification in that my small-community blog discussions do not attract mean and crazy people. I realize that all activity benefits the platform, but I do not subscribe to any of X’s paid services.

 **Threads, owned by Facebook, continues to grow its user count but it de-emphasizes posts about political issues. It has therefore opened a door for Bluesky, a pretty big blunder.