WEBVTT - The Twitter Story, But Longer

0:00:04.400 --> 0:00:07.760
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to tech Stuff, a production from my Heart Radio.

0:00:11.800 --> 0:00:14.400
<v Speaker 1>Hey there, and welcome to tech Stuff. I'm your host,

0:00:14.480 --> 0:00:17.080
<v Speaker 1>Johnathan Strickland. I'm an executive producer with I Heart Radio

0:00:17.120 --> 0:00:19.959
<v Speaker 1>and how the Tech are You? You know, tech Stuff

0:00:20.320 --> 0:00:24.960
<v Speaker 1>has a long history with Twitter. Way back when I

0:00:25.000 --> 0:00:27.800
<v Speaker 1>was a writer for how Stuff works dot com, I

0:00:28.000 --> 0:00:32.000
<v Speaker 1>became one of the first employees to establish a Twitter account,

0:00:32.479 --> 0:00:35.280
<v Speaker 1>and I would use that account to share articles I

0:00:35.320 --> 0:00:37.840
<v Speaker 1>had written, as well as you know, make goofy jokes

0:00:37.880 --> 0:00:40.960
<v Speaker 1>and share photos of pets and tacos and that kind

0:00:40.960 --> 0:00:43.839
<v Speaker 1>of thing. And my use of Twitter actually got me

0:00:43.920 --> 0:00:47.040
<v Speaker 1>an award at work because I had found a new

0:00:47.120 --> 0:00:51.559
<v Speaker 1>form of outreach. I didn't set out to win an award.

0:00:51.680 --> 0:00:54.120
<v Speaker 1>This just kind of happened because I was just using Twitter,

0:00:54.280 --> 0:00:57.880
<v Speaker 1>and I honestly was really worried because the thing I

0:00:57.920 --> 0:01:00.520
<v Speaker 1>was doing on my own for funzies is likely to

0:01:00.560 --> 0:01:04.120
<v Speaker 1>become a mandated part of our work, which meant my

0:01:04.200 --> 0:01:06.800
<v Speaker 1>co workers who had no interest in creating Twitter accounts

0:01:06.880 --> 0:01:10.240
<v Speaker 1>might find that they were obligated to. So whoop. See,

0:01:10.520 --> 0:01:13.520
<v Speaker 1>this is why we can't have nice things now. When

0:01:13.520 --> 0:01:17.680
<v Speaker 1>we launched the podcast text Stuff, Twitter was front of mind.

0:01:17.840 --> 0:01:22.440
<v Speaker 1>We actually did an episode about Twitter on our twelfth episode. Ever,

0:01:23.360 --> 0:01:25.919
<v Speaker 1>this was back when Chris Palette was my co host,

0:01:26.440 --> 0:01:29.440
<v Speaker 1>and then six years after that, Lauren Vogelbaum and I

0:01:29.440 --> 0:01:34.240
<v Speaker 1>would do an episode called The Twitter Story back in

0:01:34.280 --> 0:01:37.560
<v Speaker 1>the early Feen, I should add, and this was back

0:01:37.600 --> 0:01:40.880
<v Speaker 1>when she was my co host. But a lot has

0:01:40.920 --> 0:01:43.960
<v Speaker 1>happened since two thousand fourteen, not the least of which

0:01:44.000 --> 0:01:47.000
<v Speaker 1>is the ongoing drama between Elon Musk and Twitter, which

0:01:47.000 --> 0:01:49.920
<v Speaker 1>we will get to. I mean, for one thing, now,

0:01:49.960 --> 0:01:52.640
<v Speaker 1>I have no co host, so today I thought we'd

0:01:52.640 --> 0:01:55.120
<v Speaker 1>do an update on what's been going on now. I'm

0:01:55.160 --> 0:01:59.160
<v Speaker 1>also gonna do a rundown of the early history of Twitter,

0:01:59.480 --> 0:02:02.200
<v Speaker 1>so that way you don't have to seek out those

0:02:02.240 --> 0:02:04.680
<v Speaker 1>older episodes if you don't want to. However, I want

0:02:04.680 --> 0:02:07.440
<v Speaker 1>to say I'm not gonna go over everything we covered

0:02:07.440 --> 0:02:10.440
<v Speaker 1>in those previous episodes. I'm gonna hit kind of the

0:02:10.520 --> 0:02:13.120
<v Speaker 1>highlights at Twitter. But if you want to learn more,

0:02:13.560 --> 0:02:17.560
<v Speaker 1>including some of the pivotal moments in history that Twitter

0:02:17.639 --> 0:02:20.120
<v Speaker 1>played a part in, I recommend going back through the

0:02:20.240 --> 0:02:24.160
<v Speaker 1>archives and checking out those episodes, particularly The Twitter Story,

0:02:24.240 --> 0:02:30.280
<v Speaker 1>which published I think maybe February four Okay, once upon

0:02:30.320 --> 0:02:33.120
<v Speaker 1>a time, you had a fellow by the name of

0:02:33.200 --> 0:02:36.000
<v Speaker 1>Noah Glass who built a tool that would let you

0:02:36.040 --> 0:02:40.120
<v Speaker 1>convert a phone message into an MP three file, and

0:02:40.200 --> 0:02:42.560
<v Speaker 1>you could host that MP three file on a service

0:02:42.600 --> 0:02:45.360
<v Speaker 1>on the Internet. And this was the core focus of

0:02:45.360 --> 0:02:48.560
<v Speaker 1>a company that was called Odeo o d e O.

0:02:49.480 --> 0:02:52.400
<v Speaker 1>Odio brought on a guy named Evan Williams to become

0:02:52.480 --> 0:02:56.359
<v Speaker 1>the CEO. Williams had co founded Blogger, so he already

0:02:56.360 --> 0:02:59.560
<v Speaker 1>had a winning record in startups, if by winning record

0:02:59.639 --> 0:03:01.720
<v Speaker 1>you mean creating a tool that would later get bought

0:03:01.800 --> 0:03:05.280
<v Speaker 1>by Google and being a little snarky. But Blogger is

0:03:05.320 --> 0:03:07.600
<v Speaker 1>actually still around today. It's one of the few things

0:03:07.639 --> 0:03:11.240
<v Speaker 1>Google purchased that it did not subsequently shut down just

0:03:11.280 --> 0:03:13.840
<v Speaker 1>a few years later. In fact, I don't really have

0:03:13.880 --> 0:03:17.320
<v Speaker 1>it in this episode, but Google did purchase a Twitter

0:03:17.680 --> 0:03:21.919
<v Speaker 1>like service called Jaku and then subsequently shut that down,

0:03:22.000 --> 0:03:27.040
<v Speaker 1>so that happens a lot anyway. Evan Williams brought over

0:03:27.200 --> 0:03:31.840
<v Speaker 1>biz Stone from Google to join Odio, and another person

0:03:31.880 --> 0:03:34.680
<v Speaker 1>who was working at Odeo as a web developer was

0:03:34.800 --> 0:03:38.920
<v Speaker 1>named Jack Dorsey. And obviously these folks would become very

0:03:38.960 --> 0:03:42.680
<v Speaker 1>important in the history of Twitter. One of the company's

0:03:42.720 --> 0:03:46.200
<v Speaker 1>first big projects was to build out a podcasting platform.

0:03:46.560 --> 0:03:49.480
<v Speaker 1>So podcasting at this time was still a pretty young

0:03:49.680 --> 0:03:52.720
<v Speaker 1>art form, and the leaders at Odeo saw an opportunity

0:03:52.760 --> 0:03:56.040
<v Speaker 1>to become kind of the dominant podcasting platform in the space,

0:03:56.280 --> 0:04:00.680
<v Speaker 1>to allow people to discover and subscribe to podcast easily,

0:04:01.320 --> 0:04:05.120
<v Speaker 1>and they launched their platform, and then shortly after, Apple

0:04:05.200 --> 0:04:09.000
<v Speaker 1>launched its own podcast section in iTunes, and that was

0:04:09.040 --> 0:04:13.720
<v Speaker 1>pretty much curtains for Odio's product. Apple already had incredible reach,

0:04:13.800 --> 0:04:16.520
<v Speaker 1>I bought owners were reliant on iTunes in order to

0:04:16.600 --> 0:04:20.200
<v Speaker 1>add new content to their devices, and so incorporating a

0:04:20.200 --> 0:04:24.040
<v Speaker 1>podcast subscription feature into iTunes kind of shut the door

0:04:24.160 --> 0:04:27.640
<v Speaker 1>down on everybody else at that time. I mean, we

0:04:27.720 --> 0:04:33.159
<v Speaker 1>do call them podcasts after all. Odios podcast platform, technically

0:04:33.360 --> 0:04:37.240
<v Speaker 1>launched ahead of iTunes, went live earlier in two thousand five.

0:04:37.360 --> 0:04:40.400
<v Speaker 1>But even after Odio flipped the switched on, there was

0:04:40.400 --> 0:04:42.880
<v Speaker 1>a big problem because no one was using Odio, Not

0:04:42.920 --> 0:04:46.200
<v Speaker 1>even Odio employees were using it. They had built a tool,

0:04:46.440 --> 0:04:48.839
<v Speaker 1>but they hadn't convinced anyone that the tool was, you know,

0:04:49.000 --> 0:04:54.080
<v Speaker 1>worth using. Jack Dorsey meanwhile, was contemplating a different course altogether.

0:04:54.200 --> 0:04:56.880
<v Speaker 1>Dorsey thought it might be interesting to create a service

0:04:56.880 --> 0:04:59.880
<v Speaker 1>that would let people post status updates in real time,

0:05:00.320 --> 0:05:03.760
<v Speaker 1>sort of like a very stripped down social media platform,

0:05:03.880 --> 0:05:06.400
<v Speaker 1>one where you could just post your stats update and

0:05:06.480 --> 0:05:09.520
<v Speaker 1>push it out to folks in your social circle, like

0:05:09.640 --> 0:05:13.400
<v Speaker 1>the people in your contact list. For example. Maybe for

0:05:13.680 --> 0:05:15.520
<v Speaker 1>you might be thinking about you want to go bowling,

0:05:15.640 --> 0:05:17.039
<v Speaker 1>and you want to see if any of your friends

0:05:17.040 --> 0:05:19.400
<v Speaker 1>are down, so you could send out a what would

0:05:19.400 --> 0:05:22.080
<v Speaker 1>be more or less a group text message using the service,

0:05:22.120 --> 0:05:24.960
<v Speaker 1>saying going bowling, want to join, and then waiting to

0:05:25.000 --> 0:05:28.200
<v Speaker 1>see if anyone responds. Now, according to Dorsey, he had

0:05:28.240 --> 0:05:31.479
<v Speaker 1>actually been mulling this over for several years already. He

0:05:31.560 --> 0:05:34.040
<v Speaker 1>wanted a tool that would let folks update their status

0:05:34.320 --> 0:05:37.680
<v Speaker 1>in real time using a mobile device. Now, remember this

0:05:37.800 --> 0:05:41.800
<v Speaker 1>was before iPhones and therefore before the smartphone phenomenon, at

0:05:41.880 --> 0:05:44.080
<v Speaker 1>least among the mainstream. Back in the early to mid

0:05:44.120 --> 0:05:48.320
<v Speaker 1>two thousand's, most devices that would qualify as a smartphone

0:05:48.360 --> 0:05:51.000
<v Speaker 1>were in the hands of executives and maybe a few

0:05:51.080 --> 0:05:54.000
<v Speaker 1>curious early adopters, and they looked, you know, more like

0:05:54.040 --> 0:05:58.839
<v Speaker 1>the old BlackBerry. Phones often had physical keyboards. Dorsey wanted

0:05:58.839 --> 0:06:01.560
<v Speaker 1>to create something that would work with simple cell phones

0:06:01.600 --> 0:06:05.280
<v Speaker 1>because that's what most people had. Dorsey eventually teamed up

0:06:05.279 --> 0:06:08.240
<v Speaker 1>with Noah Glass and they brought in a contract developer

0:06:08.320 --> 0:06:11.679
<v Speaker 1>named Florian Webber, and together they fleshed out this idea

0:06:11.720 --> 0:06:15.440
<v Speaker 1>and began to build what would become Twitter. You would

0:06:15.440 --> 0:06:18.520
<v Speaker 1>have the platform that would support status updates. You could

0:06:18.680 --> 0:06:22.200
<v Speaker 1>follow folks that you knew, so you could essentially subscribe

0:06:22.200 --> 0:06:24.880
<v Speaker 1>to them and then keep up with what was going

0:06:24.880 --> 0:06:27.040
<v Speaker 1>on in their lives. So when they posted an update,

0:06:27.080 --> 0:06:29.799
<v Speaker 1>you could get an alert. You can get a text

0:06:29.800 --> 0:06:33.240
<v Speaker 1>message telling you about that update that actually has the

0:06:33.360 --> 0:06:37.080
<v Speaker 1>update in it. You could still text person to person obviously,

0:06:37.200 --> 0:06:40.440
<v Speaker 1>but this would let folks communicate one too many, not

0:06:40.640 --> 0:06:45.000
<v Speaker 1>just one to one. So the team presented the idea

0:06:45.080 --> 0:06:49.640
<v Speaker 1>to Odio's leadership and and this was in two thousand six,

0:06:49.680 --> 0:06:52.080
<v Speaker 1>and originally they were going to call it Twitter with

0:06:52.160 --> 0:06:56.240
<v Speaker 1>no vowels so t W T t r UH, and

0:06:56.240 --> 0:06:58.560
<v Speaker 1>they got a tentative go ahead from Odeo, which was

0:06:58.640 --> 0:07:02.480
<v Speaker 1>mostly in crisis mode over its primary product not going anywhere.

0:07:03.200 --> 0:07:06.159
<v Speaker 1>On March twenty one, two thousand six, Jack Dorsey would

0:07:06.200 --> 0:07:09.200
<v Speaker 1>send the first message on Twitter, and just like with

0:07:09.279 --> 0:07:12.480
<v Speaker 1>the first video of YouTube, the actual historical first is

0:07:12.520 --> 0:07:16.760
<v Speaker 1>a bit underwhelming, He wrote, quote, just setting up my

0:07:17.000 --> 0:07:21.360
<v Speaker 1>Twitter again t W T t R. Now a quick

0:07:21.400 --> 0:07:23.800
<v Speaker 1>reminder for folks who may have forgotten. Way back in

0:07:23.840 --> 0:07:26.640
<v Speaker 1>the earliest days of Twitter, there was a one hundred

0:07:26.720 --> 0:07:31.200
<v Speaker 1>forty character limit on messages. And you might wonder why. Well,

0:07:31.280 --> 0:07:34.080
<v Speaker 1>the whole service was built on top of the SMS

0:07:34.120 --> 0:07:37.560
<v Speaker 1>texting service, and SMS could only carry messages of up

0:07:37.560 --> 0:07:41.400
<v Speaker 1>to one hundred sixty characters in length. Twitter allowed just

0:07:41.440 --> 0:07:44.600
<v Speaker 1>a hundred forty because it would reserve twenty characters for

0:07:44.760 --> 0:07:48.040
<v Speaker 1>user handles and that kind of thing. Using SMS was

0:07:48.080 --> 0:07:51.280
<v Speaker 1>important for Twitter because all the work building out the

0:07:51.320 --> 0:07:54.600
<v Speaker 1>technology to actually make texting possible had already been done.

0:07:54.640 --> 0:07:58.200
<v Speaker 1>Twitter didn't have to invent that it existed. Twitter's technology

0:07:58.480 --> 0:08:01.920
<v Speaker 1>could be on top of that foundation. Twitter would go

0:08:01.960 --> 0:08:04.880
<v Speaker 1>on to build both a web based interface and also

0:08:04.920 --> 0:08:08.600
<v Speaker 1>allow users to interact with Twitter purely through texting on

0:08:08.640 --> 0:08:11.720
<v Speaker 1>their cell phones. This would also mean that early Twitter users,

0:08:11.760 --> 0:08:14.600
<v Speaker 1>depending on how they enabled Twitter and how they used it,

0:08:14.960 --> 0:08:16.680
<v Speaker 1>would have to keep in mind that they could get

0:08:16.720 --> 0:08:20.120
<v Speaker 1>charged for texting due to Twitter activity. Uh and it's

0:08:20.120 --> 0:08:22.000
<v Speaker 1>not so much the case today, but back in the day,

0:08:22.360 --> 0:08:27.240
<v Speaker 1>like cell phone companies, carriers would find lots of creative

0:08:27.240 --> 0:08:31.680
<v Speaker 1>ways to charge you, including if you used too many

0:08:31.720 --> 0:08:35.120
<v Speaker 1>messages in a month. In July of two thousand six,

0:08:35.240 --> 0:08:39.160
<v Speaker 1>Twitter again still t w t t R, launched sort of.

0:08:39.800 --> 0:08:42.280
<v Speaker 1>It was a pretty small launch and that most of

0:08:42.280 --> 0:08:46.960
<v Speaker 1>the users were either Odio people or Silicon Valley folks

0:08:46.960 --> 0:08:49.920
<v Speaker 1>like investors and people who worked at other tech companies.

0:08:50.559 --> 0:08:53.720
<v Speaker 1>In September of two thousand and six, Evan Williams would

0:08:53.800 --> 0:08:57.960
<v Speaker 1>buy back the stake that various investors had in Odio.

0:08:58.120 --> 0:09:01.000
<v Speaker 1>So Williams was saying that Odio's podcast platform was a

0:09:01.040 --> 0:09:04.640
<v Speaker 1>bust and that very few people, maybe around five thousand,

0:09:04.760 --> 0:09:08.440
<v Speaker 1>had even registered with Twitter. So he was saying, rather

0:09:08.480 --> 0:09:13.040
<v Speaker 1>than have your investment become a loss, I will buy

0:09:13.080 --> 0:09:17.080
<v Speaker 1>back your investment now. Later speculation suggested that Williams could

0:09:17.120 --> 0:09:20.160
<v Speaker 1>see where Twitter was going, and so he wanted to

0:09:20.160 --> 0:09:22.720
<v Speaker 1>get ahead of it in order to really profit off

0:09:22.760 --> 0:09:25.080
<v Speaker 1>of it. Like he would spend the money now to

0:09:25.200 --> 0:09:28.480
<v Speaker 1>buy back these investments, but then once Twitter took off,

0:09:28.520 --> 0:09:31.080
<v Speaker 1>he would really be making bank. Now. I don't know

0:09:31.120 --> 0:09:34.000
<v Speaker 1>about that. It's possible, but then nothing in tech is

0:09:34.040 --> 0:09:37.079
<v Speaker 1>a sure bet, and that sounds like a really hefty

0:09:37.160 --> 0:09:39.480
<v Speaker 1>gamble to me, but it might have been the case,

0:09:39.840 --> 0:09:41.800
<v Speaker 1>and if it was a gamble, it did pay off.

0:09:42.280 --> 0:09:46.360
<v Speaker 1>Around this time, Noah Glass got fired from Odio. Now

0:09:46.400 --> 0:09:50.760
<v Speaker 1>apparently Glass and Evan Williams had opposing personalities, and Glass

0:09:50.760 --> 0:09:53.120
<v Speaker 1>would later say that he had actually been planning to

0:09:53.200 --> 0:09:57.559
<v Speaker 1>spend Twitter off from Odio and then lead Twitter himself.

0:09:57.920 --> 0:10:01.240
<v Speaker 1>That obviously never happened. Instead, Video changed its name to

0:10:01.400 --> 0:10:06.360
<v Speaker 1>Obvious Corporation and it prepped for two thousand seven. That's

0:10:06.440 --> 0:10:10.520
<v Speaker 1>when the platform made a big appearance at south By Southwest.

0:10:11.040 --> 0:10:14.560
<v Speaker 1>That's obviously this this huge event that happens in Austin, Texas,

0:10:15.240 --> 0:10:20.840
<v Speaker 1>and if it revolves around three major topics. There's music,

0:10:21.520 --> 0:10:23.880
<v Speaker 1>so all these different bands from around the world come

0:10:23.960 --> 0:10:27.240
<v Speaker 1>to Austin and play shows. There's movies, so you've got

0:10:27.280 --> 0:10:32.160
<v Speaker 1>lots of studios and independent filmmakers showing films at south

0:10:32.200 --> 0:10:36.640
<v Speaker 1>By Southwest. And then there's interactive or technology, and that's

0:10:36.640 --> 0:10:40.640
<v Speaker 1>what you know Obvious Court was going to. And so

0:10:40.760 --> 0:10:43.880
<v Speaker 1>Twitter made an appearance and it won an award and

0:10:44.080 --> 0:10:46.440
<v Speaker 1>got a lot more coverage. So while the service had

0:10:46.480 --> 0:10:49.240
<v Speaker 1>been up for a little less than a year, you

0:10:49.240 --> 0:10:51.840
<v Speaker 1>could argue that March two thousand seven was the real

0:10:51.920 --> 0:10:54.160
<v Speaker 1>starting point for Twitter, because it was at south By

0:10:54.200 --> 0:10:57.920
<v Speaker 1>Southwest that the tech world in general really latched onto

0:10:57.960 --> 0:11:01.280
<v Speaker 1>it and it began to grow rap and a month later,

0:11:01.520 --> 0:11:06.560
<v Speaker 1>Obvious Corporations spun off Twitter as a standalone company. Dorsey

0:11:06.640 --> 0:11:10.480
<v Speaker 1>would end up serving as CEO of Twitter and Evan

0:11:10.559 --> 0:11:13.400
<v Speaker 1>Williams would be Chairman of the board. Twitter would go

0:11:13.400 --> 0:11:16.559
<v Speaker 1>on to raise nearly six million dollars in initial funding

0:11:16.600 --> 0:11:20.560
<v Speaker 1>with investors, and for many many years, Twitter, getting a

0:11:20.600 --> 0:11:24.000
<v Speaker 1>fresh influx of investor cash would be how the company

0:11:24.040 --> 0:11:27.679
<v Speaker 1>would stay in business. It actually became something of a

0:11:27.760 --> 0:11:30.680
<v Speaker 1>running joke that Twitter would be a tool that everyone wanted,

0:11:30.880 --> 0:11:33.839
<v Speaker 1>everyone used, but it had no real way to make

0:11:33.880 --> 0:11:36.520
<v Speaker 1>any money. So the only way it could stay in

0:11:36.559 --> 0:11:39.240
<v Speaker 1>business is if it asked investors to pour more cash

0:11:39.280 --> 0:11:42.120
<v Speaker 1>into it. Something else that would become a running joke

0:11:42.200 --> 0:11:45.800
<v Speaker 1>with Twitter for a few years anyway, involved its web interface,

0:11:46.200 --> 0:11:48.200
<v Speaker 1>so this was still kind of coming together in two

0:11:48.280 --> 0:11:50.760
<v Speaker 1>thousand seven and two thousand eight. But the web interface

0:11:51.000 --> 0:11:53.880
<v Speaker 1>would let you scroll through tweets and post new tweets

0:11:54.120 --> 0:11:56.319
<v Speaker 1>without having to use your phone. You could navigate to

0:11:56.360 --> 0:11:58.120
<v Speaker 1>the web page into it. You can still do that today.

0:11:58.160 --> 0:12:00.200
<v Speaker 1>In fact, a lot of people do how of her.

0:12:00.240 --> 0:12:04.200
<v Speaker 1>Twitter was really growing very quickly, and sometimes stuff broke,

0:12:04.800 --> 0:12:07.720
<v Speaker 1>particularly during you know, busy moments, like if there was

0:12:07.760 --> 0:12:09.840
<v Speaker 1>a big cultural event that a lot of people were

0:12:09.880 --> 0:12:14.200
<v Speaker 1>reacting to that could really tax Twitter's servers, and when

0:12:14.200 --> 0:12:17.920
<v Speaker 1>that happened, web users would frequently encounter an error page

0:12:17.920 --> 0:12:20.520
<v Speaker 1>that had a cartoon whale on it. It was a

0:12:20.559 --> 0:12:23.120
<v Speaker 1>cartoon whale being lifted into the air by a bunch

0:12:23.120 --> 0:12:25.800
<v Speaker 1>of little birds. It was artwork that was created by

0:12:25.800 --> 0:12:29.440
<v Speaker 1>an artist named ye Inglu for a stock art site.

0:12:29.720 --> 0:12:32.000
<v Speaker 1>Lou had originally created the image for a birthday card,

0:12:32.400 --> 0:12:36.040
<v Speaker 1>and she called the image lifting a dreamer. But on

0:12:36.080 --> 0:12:39.680
<v Speaker 1>Twitter this image had a different name. It became known

0:12:39.760 --> 0:12:42.520
<v Speaker 1>as the fail Whale, and back in the old days,

0:12:42.559 --> 0:12:44.839
<v Speaker 1>he saw it fairly frequently if you were an avid

0:12:44.880 --> 0:12:48.000
<v Speaker 1>Twitter user. If you're not familiar with the fail Whale,

0:12:48.280 --> 0:12:51.000
<v Speaker 1>chances are your experience with Twitter started after the year

0:12:51.040 --> 0:12:54.679
<v Speaker 1>two thousand and thirteen, because that's when Twitter finally discontinued

0:12:54.720 --> 0:12:58.960
<v Speaker 1>the use of the image. In October two thousand eight,

0:12:59.040 --> 0:13:02.200
<v Speaker 1>Jack Dorsey would stepped down as CEO of Twitter for

0:13:02.240 --> 0:13:06.000
<v Speaker 1>the first time, but not the last time. Evan Williams

0:13:06.040 --> 0:13:08.680
<v Speaker 1>became the new CEO and Dorsey became the new chairman

0:13:08.679 --> 0:13:10.520
<v Speaker 1>of the board, which meant that the two of them

0:13:10.559 --> 0:13:14.960
<v Speaker 1>just did the old switchero. Apparently working for Dorsey could

0:13:14.960 --> 0:13:19.200
<v Speaker 1>be a bit challenging, according from insider reports on Twitter,

0:13:19.679 --> 0:13:22.480
<v Speaker 1>so there appeared to be an impetus for this change.

0:13:23.360 --> 0:13:26.440
<v Speaker 1>In January two thousand nine, Twitter would make world headlines

0:13:26.520 --> 0:13:30.320
<v Speaker 1>because a tweet actually broke a news story before any

0:13:30.360 --> 0:13:32.720
<v Speaker 1>major media outlet could do it, and that news story

0:13:33.200 --> 0:13:36.920
<v Speaker 1>was the crash landing of US Airways Flight fifty nine

0:13:37.000 --> 0:13:39.959
<v Speaker 1>into the Hudson River. The plane had collided with a

0:13:39.960 --> 0:13:43.280
<v Speaker 1>flock of birds shortly after it took off from LaGuardia Airport,

0:13:43.760 --> 0:13:48.440
<v Speaker 1>and pilots Jeffrey Skiles and Chesley Sully Sullenberg glided the

0:13:48.480 --> 0:13:52.280
<v Speaker 1>plane into the Hudson. All passengers and crew survived. A

0:13:52.320 --> 0:13:55.920
<v Speaker 1>few folks received some serious injuries, but other than that, uh,

0:13:55.960 --> 0:14:00.360
<v Speaker 1>it was remarkably safe, and the message on Twitter got

0:14:00.400 --> 0:14:03.040
<v Speaker 1>boosted and seen before any official news outlets could get

0:14:03.080 --> 0:14:05.680
<v Speaker 1>word out, and it became obvious that Twitter could play

0:14:05.760 --> 0:14:08.959
<v Speaker 1>a critical role in covering important events in real time,

0:14:09.520 --> 0:14:11.800
<v Speaker 1>not just an app that let you say what you

0:14:11.840 --> 0:14:15.200
<v Speaker 1>were having for lunch. Okay, we're gonna take a quick

0:14:15.200 --> 0:14:24.600
<v Speaker 1>break here. When we come back, we will continue Twitter's history.

0:14:26.320 --> 0:14:29.720
<v Speaker 1>We're back. So in two thousand nine, Jack Dorsey co

0:14:29.880 --> 0:14:35.040
<v Speaker 1>founded another company, and this company is a payment processing service,

0:14:35.120 --> 0:14:37.760
<v Speaker 1>with the big selling point at the time being that

0:14:37.840 --> 0:14:41.080
<v Speaker 1>you could get an attachment for a mobile device that

0:14:41.160 --> 0:14:45.680
<v Speaker 1>would let you swipe credit cards and process the fees

0:14:46.240 --> 0:14:49.440
<v Speaker 1>right there, which drastically reduced the infrastructure you needed in

0:14:49.520 --> 0:14:51.800
<v Speaker 1>order to have a point of sale that could accept

0:14:51.840 --> 0:14:55.920
<v Speaker 1>credit cards. So this is when suddenly merchants who would

0:14:56.080 --> 0:14:58.360
<v Speaker 1>go to like festivals and stuff would be able to

0:14:58.400 --> 0:15:01.840
<v Speaker 1>easily accept credit cards because using a mobile device that's

0:15:01.840 --> 0:15:06.160
<v Speaker 1>connected to the cellular network, using this add on and

0:15:06.200 --> 0:15:09.960
<v Speaker 1>then swiping a card, they could actually process payments without

0:15:10.000 --> 0:15:13.720
<v Speaker 1>having to get the old carbon copy stuff out. That

0:15:13.880 --> 0:15:16.880
<v Speaker 1>company is of course named Square, and while it's not

0:15:16.960 --> 0:15:20.200
<v Speaker 1>directly tied to Twitter, Square would have a huge impact

0:15:20.280 --> 0:15:25.280
<v Speaker 1>on Twitter's history. Later on, in October, Evan Williams would

0:15:25.280 --> 0:15:29.160
<v Speaker 1>step down as CEO to focus on product strategy, and

0:15:29.320 --> 0:15:34.080
<v Speaker 1>former CEO of Twitter, Dick Costello would take over and

0:15:34.120 --> 0:15:41.200
<v Speaker 1>remain CEO until now. In Twitter would launch Vine, which

0:15:41.200 --> 0:15:44.000
<v Speaker 1>is a short form video app, or was a short

0:15:44.040 --> 0:15:46.920
<v Speaker 1>form video app. They'll let users post videos that were

0:15:46.960 --> 0:15:51.840
<v Speaker 1>just six seconds long. And you know, their original intent

0:15:51.960 --> 0:15:54.680
<v Speaker 1>was just to create a video version of a tweet,

0:15:54.800 --> 0:15:57.880
<v Speaker 1>like something that's very short and very timely that you

0:15:57.920 --> 0:16:02.520
<v Speaker 1>could then share online. However, people took to Vine in

0:16:02.640 --> 0:16:06.240
<v Speaker 1>order to build stories and very short films and making

0:16:06.240 --> 0:16:10.920
<v Speaker 1>a really good Vine became a real art form and

0:16:10.920 --> 0:16:13.880
<v Speaker 1>and a lot of people use it for storytelling or

0:16:14.000 --> 0:16:17.560
<v Speaker 1>more accurately, joke telling. And Vine would stick around for

0:16:17.600 --> 0:16:19.960
<v Speaker 1>a few years, but Twitter would ultimately shut it down

0:16:20.040 --> 0:16:24.600
<v Speaker 1>in and I'll talk about why that happened and a

0:16:24.680 --> 0:16:30.480
<v Speaker 1>little bit. In November, Twitter held its initial public offering

0:16:30.600 --> 0:16:32.560
<v Speaker 1>or i p O. Now, in case you're not familiar

0:16:32.640 --> 0:16:36.240
<v Speaker 1>with that term, that's when a privately held company transitions

0:16:36.240 --> 0:16:41.000
<v Speaker 1>into becoming a publicly traded company with shares trading on

0:16:41.160 --> 0:16:44.320
<v Speaker 1>a stock market somewhere. This lets anyone who has the

0:16:44.360 --> 0:16:48.480
<v Speaker 1>cash become an investor by buying up a share or

0:16:48.520 --> 0:16:51.760
<v Speaker 1>maybe a few shares or maybe a few thousand shares

0:16:52.320 --> 0:16:55.360
<v Speaker 1>before the stock market opened. The offer price was to

0:16:55.360 --> 0:16:57.800
<v Speaker 1>be around twenty six dollars per share, so part of

0:16:57.840 --> 0:17:00.080
<v Speaker 1>the process of the I p O is that a

0:17:00.160 --> 0:17:03.720
<v Speaker 1>company has to kind of figure out what they think

0:17:04.320 --> 0:17:07.879
<v Speaker 1>a share price is worth. And this is supposed to

0:17:07.880 --> 0:17:09.719
<v Speaker 1>be based upon the value of the company, and you're

0:17:09.720 --> 0:17:12.000
<v Speaker 1>supposed to take all these different things into account. There's

0:17:12.000 --> 0:17:15.600
<v Speaker 1>a very long process for doing it. So in Twitter's case,

0:17:15.600 --> 0:17:19.840
<v Speaker 1>they thought this merit's a twenty six dollar price for

0:17:20.000 --> 0:17:24.040
<v Speaker 1>a share of stock of Twitter. Instead, due to intense

0:17:24.440 --> 0:17:28.919
<v Speaker 1>interest in the market, when sales opened up, those shares

0:17:28.960 --> 0:17:32.480
<v Speaker 1>were moving at forty five dollars per share. At the

0:17:32.560 --> 0:17:34.800
<v Speaker 1>end of the day, it closed just slightly lower than that,

0:17:34.960 --> 0:17:38.160
<v Speaker 1>at forty four dollars ninety cents per share, and still

0:17:38.240 --> 0:17:41.560
<v Speaker 1>much higher than twenty six bucks. Right now, if you're curious,

0:17:41.960 --> 0:17:44.879
<v Speaker 1>the day I'm recording this episode, Twitter is currently trading

0:17:44.880 --> 0:17:48.960
<v Speaker 1>in around thirty three dollars and fifty cents to thirty

0:17:48.960 --> 0:17:51.359
<v Speaker 1>three dollars and sixty cents per share, somewhere around in

0:17:51.359 --> 0:17:54.359
<v Speaker 1>that range. So still higher than what the opening offer

0:17:54.440 --> 0:17:57.040
<v Speaker 1>price was going to be, but lower than what the

0:17:57.080 --> 0:17:59.840
<v Speaker 1>actual price of Twitter stock was for that first day

0:17:59.840 --> 0:18:03.760
<v Speaker 1>of trading. Not Over time, Twitter's stock price would grow

0:18:04.480 --> 0:18:07.520
<v Speaker 1>um not steadily. There were times where it would dip

0:18:07.560 --> 0:18:09.280
<v Speaker 1>a bit and then it would grow a bit. It

0:18:09.400 --> 0:18:12.399
<v Speaker 1>hit a high, but not an all time high, in

0:18:12.480 --> 0:18:15.280
<v Speaker 1>December of two thousand thirteen, when it closed at a

0:18:15.359 --> 0:18:19.040
<v Speaker 1>price of seventy three dollars and thirty one cents per share.

0:18:20.000 --> 0:18:24.800
<v Speaker 1>Really amazing, Like when you consider that's one month after

0:18:26.200 --> 0:18:30.439
<v Speaker 1>it started trading, that's phenomenal. However, in February two thousand

0:18:30.440 --> 0:18:34.199
<v Speaker 1>and fourteen, Twitter reported that its growth had slowed, with

0:18:34.280 --> 0:18:39.800
<v Speaker 1>an increase of just five additional users. So the way

0:18:39.840 --> 0:18:42.879
<v Speaker 1>that these metrics work, it's not just that you have

0:18:42.920 --> 0:18:45.800
<v Speaker 1>to keep growing in order to be perceived as valuable.

0:18:46.640 --> 0:18:50.080
<v Speaker 1>You need to be growing at an increasingly faster rate

0:18:50.520 --> 0:18:54.440
<v Speaker 1>for the market to consider your company as still being valuable.

0:18:54.760 --> 0:18:58.480
<v Speaker 1>When your growth begins to slow, investors get nervous because

0:18:58.520 --> 0:19:00.640
<v Speaker 1>they're worried that's just a matter of time before that

0:19:00.720 --> 0:19:04.400
<v Speaker 1>growth number levels out and then begins to be a

0:19:04.480 --> 0:19:08.160
<v Speaker 1>lost number instead of a growth number. So you never

0:19:08.240 --> 0:19:11.600
<v Speaker 1>want to see the growth rate decrease. At best, you

0:19:11.640 --> 0:19:14.000
<v Speaker 1>want to level it out, but you don't want to

0:19:14.040 --> 0:19:17.760
<v Speaker 1>see it go down from one year to the next anyway.

0:19:17.800 --> 0:19:21.280
<v Speaker 1>The stock price began to decline starting around early two

0:19:21.320 --> 0:19:25.199
<v Speaker 1>thousand fourteen, and by May fourteen, it was down to

0:19:25.320 --> 0:19:29.439
<v Speaker 1>thirty dollars fifty cents per share, less than half of

0:19:29.480 --> 0:19:32.800
<v Speaker 1>what it had been at its earlier peak. But then

0:19:32.920 --> 0:19:35.440
<v Speaker 1>two years later, on May twenty six, two thousand sixteen,

0:19:35.760 --> 0:19:38.480
<v Speaker 1>it would be all the way down to fourteen dollars

0:19:38.520 --> 0:19:43.000
<v Speaker 1>and three cents per share. Yikes, um, and a lot

0:19:43.040 --> 0:19:45.280
<v Speaker 1>of stuff was going on to make this happen. Right,

0:19:45.440 --> 0:19:50.080
<v Speaker 1>The stock price was reacting to lots of investor worries.

0:19:50.280 --> 0:19:54.640
<v Speaker 1>Whenever Twitter would say that they hadn't met their revenue goals,

0:19:55.200 --> 0:19:58.760
<v Speaker 1>or that their growth rate was lower than expected, or

0:19:58.800 --> 0:20:04.240
<v Speaker 1>that user engage it wasn't on the incline, then you

0:20:04.280 --> 0:20:07.879
<v Speaker 1>would see a loss of investor confidence and ultimately a

0:20:08.000 --> 0:20:12.440
<v Speaker 1>drop in share price. Now, over time, that price would recover.

0:20:13.160 --> 0:20:15.400
<v Speaker 1>It was in the teams for a really long time,

0:20:15.440 --> 0:20:17.560
<v Speaker 1>but eventually it would grow back into the twenty and

0:20:17.600 --> 0:20:20.639
<v Speaker 1>thirty dollar range and then higher. So by two thousand eighteen,

0:20:20.640 --> 0:20:23.520
<v Speaker 1>the price would still be fluctuating, but generally was on

0:20:23.560 --> 0:20:25.919
<v Speaker 1>a path of growth, and by March first, two thousand

0:20:26.000 --> 0:20:29.000
<v Speaker 1>twenty one, the price hit its all time high of

0:20:29.080 --> 0:20:34.800
<v Speaker 1>seventy seven dollars sixty three cents per share. All right, um,

0:20:34.920 --> 0:20:38.000
<v Speaker 1>we're now past the point where the old Twitter Story

0:20:38.080 --> 0:20:40.920
<v Speaker 1>podcast left off, because, like I said, we recorded that

0:20:41.000 --> 0:20:45.919
<v Speaker 1>in the winter often like the early winter. February I

0:20:45.960 --> 0:20:48.840
<v Speaker 1>think is when we recorded it. So let's talk about

0:20:48.880 --> 0:20:54.040
<v Speaker 1>stuff that happened after February fourteen. If we go to

0:20:54.080 --> 0:20:58.359
<v Speaker 1>the end of that year, December, Twitter released some anti

0:20:58.440 --> 0:21:01.760
<v Speaker 1>harassment tools, so it was bowing to pressure to do

0:21:01.840 --> 0:21:06.040
<v Speaker 1>something about the intense abuse some users were receiving for

0:21:06.119 --> 0:21:09.000
<v Speaker 1>having the audacity to do radical things like being a

0:21:09.040 --> 0:21:11.639
<v Speaker 1>woman or you know, having an opinion that was different

0:21:11.680 --> 0:21:15.200
<v Speaker 1>from other people. I'm being more than a little snarky here,

0:21:15.240 --> 0:21:17.800
<v Speaker 1>but we have to remember, Okay. August of two thousand

0:21:17.920 --> 0:21:21.800
<v Speaker 1>fourteen was when we had the beginning of gamer gait,

0:21:22.000 --> 0:21:27.160
<v Speaker 1>which was a truly awful campaign in which angry people,

0:21:27.720 --> 0:21:32.359
<v Speaker 1>mostly men and mostly straight, began to target mostly women

0:21:32.840 --> 0:21:36.960
<v Speaker 1>in the video games industry. Now not exclusively, there were

0:21:37.000 --> 0:21:39.480
<v Speaker 1>other people who were targeted to the way this was

0:21:39.560 --> 0:21:43.040
<v Speaker 1>framed was that it was a crusade to weed out

0:21:43.160 --> 0:21:49.000
<v Speaker 1>corruption and misinformation in the video game industry and video

0:21:49.000 --> 0:21:53.160
<v Speaker 1>game journalism, the idea being that video game reviewers were

0:21:53.200 --> 0:21:57.160
<v Speaker 1>frequently compensated in some way or had some vested interest

0:21:57.600 --> 0:22:00.800
<v Speaker 1>in how games were doing, and that that was guiding

0:22:00.880 --> 0:22:05.320
<v Speaker 1>their their what they would write about games. Like in

0:22:05.359 --> 0:22:07.879
<v Speaker 1>some cases it was just that someone didn't like a

0:22:07.960 --> 0:22:12.800
<v Speaker 1>game that you know, the rabid fan base absolutely loved,

0:22:12.800 --> 0:22:17.640
<v Speaker 1>and that that was akin to committing treason, and so

0:22:17.960 --> 0:22:21.919
<v Speaker 1>this rabid group of fans would want to punish the

0:22:22.040 --> 0:22:24.960
<v Speaker 1>person who wrote something critical about a game they loved.

0:22:25.600 --> 0:22:28.520
<v Speaker 1>So again, a lot of the people who are targeted

0:22:28.560 --> 0:22:30.640
<v Speaker 1>in gamer Gate were women, and some of those women

0:22:30.680 --> 0:22:33.160
<v Speaker 1>were journalists who covered video games. Some of the women

0:22:33.200 --> 0:22:37.080
<v Speaker 1>were developers in the space or publishers, and the gamer

0:22:37.119 --> 0:22:40.639
<v Speaker 1>Gate jerks would use all sorts of abusive tactics, including

0:22:40.800 --> 0:22:44.680
<v Speaker 1>but not limited to, dockx ing and swatting their targets.

0:22:44.720 --> 0:22:47.359
<v Speaker 1>So dockx ing is when you reveal a person's personal

0:22:47.359 --> 0:22:51.439
<v Speaker 1>information online, so it's someone else like someone else's info,

0:22:51.720 --> 0:22:55.920
<v Speaker 1>and you're sharing it online. Swatting is when you use

0:22:56.000 --> 0:23:00.840
<v Speaker 1>personal information to call in a police act and on

0:23:00.920 --> 0:23:05.320
<v Speaker 1>a target. So you would give your targets home address

0:23:05.400 --> 0:23:09.520
<v Speaker 1>and say that there was something really like critically dangerous

0:23:09.560 --> 0:23:12.040
<v Speaker 1>going on there in order to get police to send,

0:23:12.560 --> 0:23:15.480
<v Speaker 1>you know, people, perhaps even a whole swat team to

0:23:15.560 --> 0:23:17.880
<v Speaker 1>go and check in on that target, and it's all

0:23:17.920 --> 0:23:21.080
<v Speaker 1>in an effort to harass, terrorize, or otherwise disrupt the

0:23:21.080 --> 0:23:26.240
<v Speaker 1>target's life. So this was happening with gamer Gate a lot.

0:23:26.320 --> 0:23:30.840
<v Speaker 1>And while the supposed reason for gamer Gate was to

0:23:31.600 --> 0:23:35.680
<v Speaker 1>try and uh and hold the video game industry accountable,

0:23:36.040 --> 0:23:40.600
<v Speaker 1>what it really was about was these these people who

0:23:40.760 --> 0:23:44.320
<v Speaker 1>were who felt ownership over an industry that they did

0:23:44.359 --> 0:23:49.040
<v Speaker 1>not own, and having an ax to grind against anyone

0:23:49.160 --> 0:23:53.439
<v Speaker 1>who had a different opinion than themselves and using whatever

0:23:53.480 --> 0:23:58.800
<v Speaker 1>tactics they could to make that person's life miserable. So, uh,

0:23:58.920 --> 0:24:00.560
<v Speaker 1>I know there are people out there still to this

0:24:00.680 --> 0:24:03.639
<v Speaker 1>day who will argue that that's not really what Gamergate

0:24:03.680 --> 0:24:06.240
<v Speaker 1>was about. Gammer Kate was about the games, and I'm

0:24:06.240 --> 0:24:09.000
<v Speaker 1>just here to tell you that's not true. It's it

0:24:09.119 --> 0:24:11.680
<v Speaker 1>was never true. There might have been people who were

0:24:11.720 --> 0:24:15.320
<v Speaker 1>concerned about the games industry who got lumped into gamer Gate,

0:24:15.600 --> 0:24:18.120
<v Speaker 1>but that's not what gamer Gate was about. Gamer Gate

0:24:18.200 --> 0:24:23.600
<v Speaker 1>was about organized, intense harassment of people who did not

0:24:23.760 --> 0:24:26.680
<v Speaker 1>deserve to have that kind of abuse heaped upon them.

0:24:26.720 --> 0:24:30.200
<v Speaker 1>So Twitter, several months after gamer Gate had just got going,

0:24:30.800 --> 0:24:33.120
<v Speaker 1>release some tools that were intended to help people who

0:24:33.119 --> 0:24:37.040
<v Speaker 1>had become targets of abuse, So this was one small

0:24:37.119 --> 0:24:40.520
<v Speaker 1>slice of what was going on in the world at

0:24:40.520 --> 0:24:42.800
<v Speaker 1>that time in an effort to try and protect people

0:24:43.119 --> 0:24:46.199
<v Speaker 1>who otherwise we're finding themselves on the receiving end of

0:24:46.280 --> 0:24:51.800
<v Speaker 1>some truly awful behavior. Twitter would then continue to make

0:24:51.840 --> 0:24:56.240
<v Speaker 1>acquisitions and grow. Uh. It bought the live streaming video

0:24:56.359 --> 0:25:00.000
<v Speaker 1>service Periscope, which is an interesting story all in its own,

0:25:00.119 --> 0:25:02.720
<v Speaker 1>but we're gonna skip over it because that could merit

0:25:02.760 --> 0:25:06.760
<v Speaker 1>an entire episode by itself. In the spring of Twitter

0:25:06.840 --> 0:25:10.800
<v Speaker 1>also announced it would begin using targeted advertising, so using

0:25:10.880 --> 0:25:15.800
<v Speaker 1>data gathered from Twitter to let advertisers target specific audiences

0:25:15.880 --> 0:25:18.800
<v Speaker 1>for specific types of ads. This was a critical part

0:25:18.800 --> 0:25:21.520
<v Speaker 1>of Twitter's revenue strategy because the company at this time

0:25:21.560 --> 0:25:24.879
<v Speaker 1>was still mostly known as that huge tech company that

0:25:25.080 --> 0:25:29.199
<v Speaker 1>wasn't really making money through its business, even though it

0:25:29.240 --> 0:25:32.560
<v Speaker 1>was a publicly traded company. In fact, Twitter wouldn't even

0:25:32.600 --> 0:25:36.440
<v Speaker 1>have its first profitable year until a bit later, until ten,

0:25:36.560 --> 0:25:39.120
<v Speaker 1>so this is not we're talking about. It would still

0:25:39.119 --> 0:25:42.560
<v Speaker 1>be three years before Twitter would turn a profit. So

0:25:42.560 --> 0:25:46.840
<v Speaker 1>back to Twitter's performance was again lackluster in terms of

0:25:46.840 --> 0:25:50.040
<v Speaker 1>growth and user engagement, so we saw the stock price

0:25:50.080 --> 0:25:53.160
<v Speaker 1>continued to kind of languish and that would keep going

0:25:53.240 --> 0:25:55.560
<v Speaker 1>for the next couple of years. That explains how that

0:25:55.600 --> 0:25:57.880
<v Speaker 1>stock price went from being in the sixty and seventy

0:25:57.880 --> 0:26:00.359
<v Speaker 1>dollar range to drop all the way down like the

0:26:00.400 --> 0:26:05.560
<v Speaker 1>fourteen to eighteen dollar range. In the summer of Dick

0:26:05.720 --> 0:26:09.400
<v Speaker 1>Costello would step down as CEO and Jack Dorsey would

0:26:09.440 --> 0:26:13.200
<v Speaker 1>come back to serve, at least initially as an interim

0:26:13.359 --> 0:26:17.199
<v Speaker 1>CEO while the company looked for a permanent replacement. Eventually

0:26:17.440 --> 0:26:20.520
<v Speaker 1>that permanent replacement ended up being Jack Dorsey, so he

0:26:20.600 --> 0:26:23.760
<v Speaker 1>we just accepted that he was CEO. Twitter share price

0:26:23.760 --> 0:26:27.560
<v Speaker 1>actually had a small recovery once that news published that

0:26:27.680 --> 0:26:31.120
<v Speaker 1>Dorsey had come back. This idea of a company's founder

0:26:31.520 --> 0:26:36.480
<v Speaker 1>having the right uh perspective and right knowledge to lead

0:26:36.520 --> 0:26:43.119
<v Speaker 1>the company forward. So in November of the Twitter was

0:26:43.160 --> 0:26:46.480
<v Speaker 1>once again rocking the boat. So up to that time,

0:26:46.560 --> 0:26:49.960
<v Speaker 1>if you enjoyed someone's tweet, you could favorite it and

0:26:50.000 --> 0:26:52.760
<v Speaker 1>that would create a little star connected to that tweet.

0:26:53.040 --> 0:26:55.879
<v Speaker 1>But all of that change because favorites would become likes

0:26:56.320 --> 0:27:00.920
<v Speaker 1>and stars would become hearts. Suspicions immediately on the lepre

0:27:00.960 --> 0:27:04.199
<v Speaker 1>con Lucky, the mascot for Lucky Charms as being behind this.

0:27:05.000 --> 0:27:08.480
<v Speaker 1>That's a bad joke. But the fact that this was

0:27:08.520 --> 0:27:12.200
<v Speaker 1>even newsworthy seems ridiculous today. But I do remember back

0:27:12.240 --> 0:27:15.760
<v Speaker 1>in the day when this happened, people were talking about

0:27:15.800 --> 0:27:18.240
<v Speaker 1>it a lot, and yes, some people were upset by it,

0:27:18.359 --> 0:27:21.800
<v Speaker 1>which seems silly. However, for Twitter, it seemed to work because,

0:27:21.840 --> 0:27:27.480
<v Speaker 1>according to Twitter's metrics, user engagement increased after Twitter rolled

0:27:27.520 --> 0:27:31.000
<v Speaker 1>out this change. So maybe that actually encouraged people to

0:27:32.359 --> 0:27:35.560
<v Speaker 1>interact more on Twitter. Uh, it might just be one

0:27:35.560 --> 0:27:40.920
<v Speaker 1>of those little psychological triggers that gets people interested. It's

0:27:40.960 --> 0:27:45.119
<v Speaker 1>kind of weird. In t s, Twitter had a massive

0:27:45.240 --> 0:27:49.280
<v Speaker 1>rollout of its recommended tweets offering, which meant by default,

0:27:49.280 --> 0:27:52.640
<v Speaker 1>Twitter feeds would no longer be listed in reverse chronological order,

0:27:52.680 --> 0:27:57.760
<v Speaker 1>at least not not completely. Instead, you would get tweets

0:27:57.800 --> 0:28:01.119
<v Speaker 1>that were held for you. Say that you were looking

0:28:01.160 --> 0:28:03.760
<v Speaker 1>at Twitter on Monday and then you don't look at

0:28:03.760 --> 0:28:06.760
<v Speaker 1>it again until Thursday. Twitter would actually present to you

0:28:06.960 --> 0:28:08.960
<v Speaker 1>some of the things you missed while you were gone,

0:28:09.680 --> 0:28:11.920
<v Speaker 1>and not in the order in which they were posted,

0:28:12.000 --> 0:28:15.000
<v Speaker 1>so that you know, you would see stuff that presumably

0:28:15.040 --> 0:28:19.119
<v Speaker 1>you would have wanted to have seen. Well. Uh. That

0:28:19.160 --> 0:28:22.879
<v Speaker 1>would also sometimes include tweets from people you don't follow,

0:28:23.400 --> 0:28:26.199
<v Speaker 1>so you might get some tweets from folks that you

0:28:26.240 --> 0:28:29.679
<v Speaker 1>know you never followed them, but maybe they kind of

0:28:29.720 --> 0:28:34.560
<v Speaker 1>relate to stuff you do follow. Um. Anyway, this meant

0:28:34.600 --> 0:28:37.040
<v Speaker 1>that you could no longer just log into Twitter and

0:28:37.119 --> 0:28:39.960
<v Speaker 1>read in reverse chronological order all the stuff that the

0:28:39.960 --> 0:28:43.240
<v Speaker 1>people you follow had posted, and that upsets some folks

0:28:43.440 --> 0:28:48.120
<v Speaker 1>like me because it made it trickier to to actually

0:28:48.200 --> 0:28:50.640
<v Speaker 1>follow what was going on, and you might be tempted

0:28:50.680 --> 0:28:54.440
<v Speaker 1>to respond to something, not realizing that in fact the

0:28:54.480 --> 0:28:57.440
<v Speaker 1>message you're responding to was posted hours or maybe even

0:28:57.520 --> 0:29:00.280
<v Speaker 1>days earlier, and you think, oh, this was just posted

0:29:00.320 --> 0:29:04.040
<v Speaker 1>because it's high up on my Twitter feed. Now, Twitter

0:29:04.160 --> 0:29:07.800
<v Speaker 1>did include away for users to go in and opt

0:29:07.880 --> 0:29:12.080
<v Speaker 1>out of the recommended tweets approach and go back to

0:29:12.240 --> 0:29:16.080
<v Speaker 1>reverse chronological but Twitter also said hardly anyone did that,

0:29:16.280 --> 0:29:20.000
<v Speaker 1>probably because it requires effort, and we know that a

0:29:20.000 --> 0:29:23.000
<v Speaker 1>lot of Twitter users were upset at the change, but

0:29:23.160 --> 0:29:25.400
<v Speaker 1>even more of them were too lazy to change it back.

0:29:25.920 --> 0:29:29.640
<v Speaker 1>And I include myself in that two sixteen wasn't necessarily

0:29:29.680 --> 0:29:32.040
<v Speaker 1>a great year for Twitter, though. This was again where

0:29:32.160 --> 0:29:35.800
<v Speaker 1>those stock prices were really low and the company would

0:29:35.840 --> 0:29:38.360
<v Speaker 1>end up laying off nearly ten percent of its workforce.

0:29:38.880 --> 0:29:43.240
<v Speaker 1>Several high ranking Twitter executives also chose to exit stage

0:29:43.360 --> 0:29:47.160
<v Speaker 1>left at this point, like people in leadership positions were

0:29:47.280 --> 0:29:50.360
<v Speaker 1>jumping ship, and it led to speculation that the company

0:29:50.400 --> 0:29:53.680
<v Speaker 1>was in some serious trouble. But Twitter was able to

0:29:53.680 --> 0:29:57.680
<v Speaker 1>weather the storm. So even though it looked bad, Twitter

0:29:57.800 --> 0:30:00.680
<v Speaker 1>was able to get through it. Okay, we're getting up

0:30:00.680 --> 0:30:04.160
<v Speaker 1>to seventeen. Let's take another quick break. We'll be back

0:30:04.240 --> 0:30:15.760
<v Speaker 1>and we will continue Twitter's more recent history. Okay, so

0:30:15.920 --> 0:30:19.720
<v Speaker 1>now we'll skip over to November two thousand seventeen. Twitter

0:30:19.840 --> 0:30:23.320
<v Speaker 1>expanded the character limit from a hundred forty characters to two,

0:30:24.240 --> 0:30:27.680
<v Speaker 1>and Twitter would also allow users to display names that

0:30:27.720 --> 0:30:30.720
<v Speaker 1>would be as long as fifty characters in length. At

0:30:30.720 --> 0:30:34.120
<v Speaker 1>this point, Twitter was no longer beholden to SMS limitations

0:30:34.560 --> 0:30:37.760
<v Speaker 1>like that had been the foundation for Twitter in the past.

0:30:37.960 --> 0:30:41.040
<v Speaker 1>That was no longer the case, and Twitter was now

0:30:41.160 --> 0:30:45.000
<v Speaker 1>using its own internet based distribution system. So at least

0:30:45.600 --> 0:30:48.680
<v Speaker 1>that meant that you could have more space, and Twitter

0:30:48.800 --> 0:30:51.480
<v Speaker 1>decided to double the amount of space that people would have,

0:30:51.600 --> 0:30:53.680
<v Speaker 1>or the number of characters they could use in their

0:30:53.720 --> 0:30:57.480
<v Speaker 1>messages for the short term, most tweets would remain around

0:30:57.520 --> 0:31:00.480
<v Speaker 1>a hundred forty characters or fewer, with only twelve percent

0:31:00.640 --> 0:31:04.280
<v Speaker 1>of messages going beyond a d forty characters at least

0:31:04.720 --> 0:31:07.160
<v Speaker 1>as far as h as late two thousand eighteen. According

0:31:07.160 --> 0:31:10.400
<v Speaker 1>to tech Crunch, that was the case, but for the

0:31:10.600 --> 0:31:15.240
<v Speaker 1>more loquacious among us, the chatty cathy's such as yours truly,

0:31:15.800 --> 0:31:18.960
<v Speaker 1>Twitter was generous and gave us the ability to create

0:31:19.000 --> 0:31:22.640
<v Speaker 1>an entire thread of tweets all at once and then

0:31:22.760 --> 0:31:27.720
<v Speaker 1>post them simultaneously to Twitter. So instead of posting a

0:31:27.800 --> 0:31:31.480
<v Speaker 1>message and then following it up a few seconds later

0:31:31.520 --> 0:31:33.720
<v Speaker 1>with another one, and then maybe like half a minute later,

0:31:33.760 --> 0:31:36.600
<v Speaker 1>another one, you could craft all of them in a

0:31:36.680 --> 0:31:39.760
<v Speaker 1>thread and post the entire thread at the same time.

0:31:39.800 --> 0:31:41.920
<v Speaker 1>I've used that feature several times to take a more

0:31:41.960 --> 0:31:46.240
<v Speaker 1>expanded approach to addressing a topic, and I've read lots

0:31:46.280 --> 0:31:49.280
<v Speaker 1>of other really great Twitter threads about all sorts of stuff,

0:31:49.320 --> 0:31:54.160
<v Speaker 1>from thoughts about tech to rapidly changing political situations. Now

0:31:54.160 --> 0:31:57.560
<v Speaker 1>in the summer of Twitter made a change that affected

0:31:57.600 --> 0:32:01.120
<v Speaker 1>some folks way more than others. And only Sometimes Twitter

0:32:01.240 --> 0:32:05.320
<v Speaker 1>locks out or suspends an account for some reason, maybe

0:32:05.360 --> 0:32:09.840
<v Speaker 1>the person violated Twitter's policies. Maybe Twitter figures out, oh,

0:32:09.960 --> 0:32:12.520
<v Speaker 1>this account is a fake account, like there's no one

0:32:12.640 --> 0:32:16.040
<v Speaker 1>behind it. It's just it's just taking up a spot.

0:32:16.480 --> 0:32:19.000
<v Speaker 1>So for whatever reason, Twitter will lock those out or

0:32:19.040 --> 0:32:22.120
<v Speaker 1>suspend them, and until the summer of two thousand eighteen,

0:32:22.560 --> 0:32:25.560
<v Speaker 1>if some of those locked out accounts happened to be

0:32:25.600 --> 0:32:29.160
<v Speaker 1>following you, they would actually count towards your follower accounts,

0:32:29.200 --> 0:32:33.240
<v Speaker 1>so you can see how many people follow anyone on Twitter. However,

0:32:33.280 --> 0:32:36.000
<v Speaker 1>Twitter decided to clean house in the summer of eighteen,

0:32:36.080 --> 0:32:39.560
<v Speaker 1>and from that point on, any account that had received

0:32:39.600 --> 0:32:43.040
<v Speaker 1>a suspension or lockout would no longer show up in

0:32:43.240 --> 0:32:47.680
<v Speaker 1>follower counts. So a lot of accounts across Twitter lost

0:32:47.840 --> 0:32:51.800
<v Speaker 1>thousands or tens of thousands of followers as a result,

0:32:52.080 --> 0:32:54.360
<v Speaker 1>because it turned out a ton of the the quote

0:32:54.400 --> 0:32:59.800
<v Speaker 1>unquote people following that account had been locked out or suspended. Now,

0:33:00.000 --> 0:33:03.120
<v Speaker 1>one reason for this move is that it was a

0:33:03.200 --> 0:33:08.120
<v Speaker 1>fairly common practice for folks to purchase Twitter followers. See,

0:33:08.160 --> 0:33:11.800
<v Speaker 1>follower accounts are kind of like a status symbol, and moreover,

0:33:11.840 --> 0:33:15.040
<v Speaker 1>they can translate into lucrative deals for people who are

0:33:15.040 --> 0:33:18.480
<v Speaker 1>seen as influencers. So if I were trying to make

0:33:18.520 --> 0:33:22.080
<v Speaker 1>a living as an influencer. I need brands to see

0:33:22.080 --> 0:33:25.960
<v Speaker 1>me as having a ton of followers, because you know,

0:33:26.000 --> 0:33:28.720
<v Speaker 1>what good is an influencer if you don't have anyone

0:33:28.760 --> 0:33:33.080
<v Speaker 1>to influence. So those follower accounts are kind of like

0:33:33.120 --> 0:33:36.600
<v Speaker 1>a resume when you are shopping around with brands to

0:33:37.000 --> 0:33:39.320
<v Speaker 1>figure out if you could be an ambassador for that brand.

0:33:39.880 --> 0:33:42.640
<v Speaker 1>And so people would buy up Twitter followers in an

0:33:42.640 --> 0:33:45.240
<v Speaker 1>attempt to kind of make them seem more relevant and

0:33:45.280 --> 0:33:48.960
<v Speaker 1>more influential. But Twitter would often do these big sweeps

0:33:49.000 --> 0:33:52.120
<v Speaker 1>to detect accounts that were just junk or spam accounts,

0:33:52.160 --> 0:33:55.920
<v Speaker 1>and once identified, those accounts would no longer factor into

0:33:56.360 --> 0:34:00.560
<v Speaker 1>follower counts on influencer page, and so it became something

0:34:00.600 --> 0:34:04.840
<v Speaker 1>of an embarrassment to see a person's follower account drop drastically,

0:34:04.880 --> 0:34:09.240
<v Speaker 1>the implication being that most of the followers were actually

0:34:09.520 --> 0:34:12.279
<v Speaker 1>spam or junk. This would not be the last time

0:34:12.320 --> 0:34:14.799
<v Speaker 1>we would see activity like this. In fact, recently there's

0:34:14.840 --> 0:34:18.760
<v Speaker 1>been a massive uh issue with fluctuations and follower accounts

0:34:18.840 --> 0:34:21.799
<v Speaker 1>due to what Twitter calls quote an increase in new

0:34:21.840 --> 0:34:25.799
<v Speaker 1>account creation and deactivation end quote. A lot of that

0:34:25.880 --> 0:34:29.560
<v Speaker 1>has happened around the Elon Musk situation, which I promise

0:34:29.840 --> 0:34:33.520
<v Speaker 1>we will get to. It might be this, this episode

0:34:33.560 --> 0:34:35.080
<v Speaker 1>might be a long one, but we will get to

0:34:35.120 --> 0:34:38.719
<v Speaker 1>Elon Musk. Anyway, let's get back to our timeline. So

0:34:40.520 --> 0:34:45.120
<v Speaker 1>Congress called several tech leaders, including Jack Dorsey from Twitter,

0:34:45.280 --> 0:34:48.080
<v Speaker 1>to have here before Congress to talk about the issue

0:34:48.200 --> 0:34:54.000
<v Speaker 1>of election meddling in the election. Also, conservative leaders were

0:34:54.040 --> 0:34:58.600
<v Speaker 1>accusing Twitter of shadow banning. So that's when a platform

0:34:58.800 --> 0:35:02.600
<v Speaker 1>de emphasizes a particular accounts output so that it doesn't

0:35:02.640 --> 0:35:05.719
<v Speaker 1>have as great a reach as it's supposed to. So

0:35:05.840 --> 0:35:08.719
<v Speaker 1>let's give a hypothetical. Let's say that I have a

0:35:08.840 --> 0:35:13.120
<v Speaker 1>hundred thousand followers, but then Twitter has shadow banned me.

0:35:13.400 --> 0:35:16.880
<v Speaker 1>My posts might only reach a small percentage of my followers,

0:35:16.920 --> 0:35:19.720
<v Speaker 1>maybe even less than five percent of the people following

0:35:19.719 --> 0:35:23.800
<v Speaker 1>me would see my message. The other of followers wouldn't

0:35:23.800 --> 0:35:27.560
<v Speaker 1>see those posts, even though they were following me. Twitter,

0:35:27.840 --> 0:35:31.080
<v Speaker 1>for the record, denied that it had ever used shadow banning,

0:35:31.480 --> 0:35:35.680
<v Speaker 1>and those accusing Twitter were primarily conservative politicians who claimed

0:35:35.680 --> 0:35:39.320
<v Speaker 1>that platforms like Twitter and Facebook had an inherent bias

0:35:39.400 --> 0:35:42.399
<v Speaker 1>against conservatives, something that I feel I need to point

0:35:42.440 --> 0:35:46.840
<v Speaker 1>out has been refuted numerous times in two thousand, nineteen,

0:35:47.120 --> 0:35:50.719
<v Speaker 1>Twitter revealed that it had investigated issues with fake accounts

0:35:50.760 --> 0:35:54.000
<v Speaker 1>linked to foreign agents that were engaged in conversations around

0:35:54.120 --> 0:35:59.440
<v Speaker 1>US politics and social movements. Essentially, Twitter acknowledged that there

0:35:59.440 --> 0:36:02.360
<v Speaker 1>were missing forformation campaigns that we're playing out over Twitter,

0:36:02.440 --> 0:36:05.320
<v Speaker 1>and the accounts were mostly linked to places like Iran

0:36:05.520 --> 0:36:10.040
<v Speaker 1>and Russia. Dorsey would again appear before Congress in twenty

0:36:10.920 --> 0:36:14.480
<v Speaker 1>at a hearing called Breaking the News, Censorship, Suppression, and

0:36:14.520 --> 0:36:19.200
<v Speaker 1>the Election. This time, conservatives went after Twitter even harder,

0:36:19.640 --> 0:36:22.920
<v Speaker 1>arguing that there was this bias on Twitter, despite you know,

0:36:23.600 --> 0:36:26.120
<v Speaker 1>not actually having evidence to show that there was bias.

0:36:26.920 --> 0:36:30.520
<v Speaker 1>Twitter was, however, taking action against accounts that were actively

0:36:30.520 --> 0:36:35.919
<v Speaker 1>spreading misinformation, particularly about the coronavirus, because by now we're

0:36:35.960 --> 0:36:39.480
<v Speaker 1>into the actual pandemic, and some of the accounts that

0:36:39.520 --> 0:36:44.160
<v Speaker 1>were pushing misinformation happened to belong to high profile conservative figures,

0:36:44.719 --> 0:36:49.760
<v Speaker 1>including then President Donald Trump. Now even the President wasn't

0:36:49.800 --> 0:36:52.960
<v Speaker 1>excused from Twitter's content policies, and so the platform had

0:36:53.040 --> 0:36:58.680
<v Speaker 1>labeled some posts containing misinformation and otherwise restricted the spread

0:36:58.760 --> 0:37:02.960
<v Speaker 1>of that misinformation, which fueled these accusations of this anti

0:37:03.000 --> 0:37:07.839
<v Speaker 1>conservative bias, where it really it was an anti misinformation policy,

0:37:08.320 --> 0:37:12.400
<v Speaker 1>not an anti conservative bias. Twitter had also restricted the

0:37:12.440 --> 0:37:15.640
<v Speaker 1>spread of tweets from the media outlet The New York Post,

0:37:15.680 --> 0:37:19.600
<v Speaker 1>which had published articles about Hunter Biden, son of Joe Biden,

0:37:20.480 --> 0:37:23.560
<v Speaker 1>and the claims against Hunter Biden had not been verified

0:37:23.640 --> 0:37:27.080
<v Speaker 1>by any other trusted media outlet, so Twitter was taken

0:37:27.120 --> 0:37:30.440
<v Speaker 1>the stance that since the claims appeared to be unsubstantiated,

0:37:30.760 --> 0:37:34.080
<v Speaker 1>they would therefore qualify as misinformation. But those actions were

0:37:34.160 --> 0:37:37.239
<v Speaker 1>enough to fuel the conservative claims that Twitter was anti conservative,

0:37:37.600 --> 0:37:40.560
<v Speaker 1>which is a narrative that continues to this day. And

0:37:40.600 --> 0:37:44.480
<v Speaker 1>then a year later, in one Dorsey once again got

0:37:44.520 --> 0:37:47.920
<v Speaker 1>called to testify in front of Congress, virtually at this

0:37:47.960 --> 0:37:51.360
<v Speaker 1>point because we're still talking pandemic here. This time the

0:37:51.400 --> 0:37:54.799
<v Speaker 1>subject was about the insurrection in the United States on

0:37:54.880 --> 0:37:58.240
<v Speaker 1>January six, two thousand twenty one, which included the storming

0:37:58.360 --> 0:38:02.040
<v Speaker 1>of the US Capitol Building. Congress wanted to know what role,

0:38:02.120 --> 0:38:05.719
<v Speaker 1>if any, social media played in the radicalizing and organizing

0:38:05.719 --> 0:38:08.759
<v Speaker 1>of groups that were involved in the violent acts of

0:38:08.800 --> 0:38:12.400
<v Speaker 1>that day. We're still learning facts relevant to the questions

0:38:12.480 --> 0:38:16.080
<v Speaker 1>asked back then during those those Congressional hearings, and that's

0:38:16.080 --> 0:38:18.920
<v Speaker 1>been more than a year since then, and to jump

0:38:18.920 --> 0:38:20.920
<v Speaker 1>off on a little bit of a tangent, I think

0:38:20.960 --> 0:38:25.760
<v Speaker 1>it's entirely fair to say that social networks facilitate radicalization

0:38:25.880 --> 0:38:29.719
<v Speaker 1>and in some cases even promote radicalization. We've talked in

0:38:29.760 --> 0:38:34.360
<v Speaker 1>the past about how various recommendation algorithms can reinforce radical

0:38:34.440 --> 0:38:37.239
<v Speaker 1>messages and create a situation in which a person is

0:38:37.280 --> 0:38:43.719
<v Speaker 1>presented with radical viewpoints repeatedly, thus reinforcing these beliefs. And

0:38:43.840 --> 0:38:47.040
<v Speaker 1>this doesn't happen in a vacuum. Of course, I would

0:38:47.080 --> 0:38:49.719
<v Speaker 1>never go so far as to say that social platforms

0:38:49.760 --> 0:38:54.880
<v Speaker 1>are solely responsible for radicalization. That would be untrue, but

0:38:54.960 --> 0:38:57.280
<v Speaker 1>it does seem fair to at least say that social

0:38:57.320 --> 0:39:01.319
<v Speaker 1>platforms play a part in this, and depend upon the

0:39:01.400 --> 0:39:05.600
<v Speaker 1>recommendation algorithms being used, it could be an important part

0:39:06.280 --> 0:39:12.200
<v Speaker 1>of radicalizing and recruitment. Anyway, back to Twitter. In late one,

0:39:12.280 --> 0:39:15.839
<v Speaker 1>Jack Dorsey stepped down as Twitter CEO. The company's chief

0:39:15.840 --> 0:39:21.400
<v Speaker 1>technology officer, parag Agreval, replaced Dorsey, and you might wonder, Okay,

0:39:21.400 --> 0:39:24.359
<v Speaker 1>so why did Jack Dorsey step down? Now? He said

0:39:24.400 --> 0:39:26.880
<v Speaker 1>it was because Twitter was ready to move beyond the

0:39:27.000 --> 0:39:31.680
<v Speaker 1>vision of its founders, but he was also still helming

0:39:31.800 --> 0:39:34.919
<v Speaker 1>Square he was still acting as CEO of Square, which

0:39:34.960 --> 0:39:36.759
<v Speaker 1>was something that was requiring a lot of his time

0:39:36.760 --> 0:39:39.440
<v Speaker 1>and focus, and that meant that Twitter would end up

0:39:39.440 --> 0:39:42.600
<v Speaker 1>being treated like a redheaded stepchild, as they say, with

0:39:42.719 --> 0:39:46.320
<v Speaker 1>Dorsey not devoting at least his full attention to help

0:39:46.520 --> 0:39:50.560
<v Speaker 1>grow the company. So people were saying that Dorsey wasn't

0:39:50.640 --> 0:39:54.200
<v Speaker 1>giving Twitter the amount of attention needed to make Twitter

0:39:54.239 --> 0:39:58.120
<v Speaker 1>a success. Instead, he was dividing his attention between Twitter

0:39:58.200 --> 0:40:01.840
<v Speaker 1>and Square, and so do or See ended up stepping

0:40:01.840 --> 0:40:04.720
<v Speaker 1>back and saying, all right, I'm gonna just focus on Square. Also,

0:40:04.800 --> 0:40:06.960
<v Speaker 1>it's possible that he was tired of being called up

0:40:07.000 --> 0:40:09.760
<v Speaker 1>to appear in front of Congress at that point, because

0:40:09.760 --> 0:40:12.520
<v Speaker 1>he had had to do it three times in four years,

0:40:12.560 --> 0:40:16.040
<v Speaker 1>and that's a lot. And then we get to this

0:40:16.120 --> 0:40:20.359
<v Speaker 1>year two and Elon Musk's announcement that he intended to

0:40:20.400 --> 0:40:25.279
<v Speaker 1>purchase Twitter. Uh Now, before that even happened, news broke

0:40:25.360 --> 0:40:28.360
<v Speaker 1>that Musk had purchased nine point two percent of Twitter's

0:40:28.520 --> 0:40:32.520
<v Speaker 1>stock on April fourth, two thousand twenty two. At that time,

0:40:32.680 --> 0:40:36.719
<v Speaker 1>that made him the largest single shareholder in Twitter. That

0:40:36.840 --> 0:40:40.080
<v Speaker 1>revelation led to Twitter shares jumping in value, and on

0:40:40.120 --> 0:40:44.120
<v Speaker 1>Friday April one, Twitter was trading at thirty nine dollars

0:40:44.160 --> 0:40:47.480
<v Speaker 1>thirty one since per share, so that's before the announcement.

0:40:48.040 --> 0:40:50.920
<v Speaker 1>Then on Monday, April four, when news broke that Elon

0:40:51.000 --> 0:40:54.160
<v Speaker 1>Musk had made this huge purchase, the closing price was

0:40:54.239 --> 0:40:57.040
<v Speaker 1>up to forty nine dollars nine cents per share, So

0:40:57.040 --> 0:41:02.000
<v Speaker 1>I went from thirty nine thirty one to that's a

0:41:02.040 --> 0:41:06.000
<v Speaker 1>significant jump. It really shows how people were thinking, if

0:41:06.080 --> 0:41:08.440
<v Speaker 1>Musk is buying this much, something must be going on

0:41:08.480 --> 0:41:11.720
<v Speaker 1>with Twitter. And immediately there were discussions about whether Musk

0:41:11.800 --> 0:41:14.279
<v Speaker 1>was angling to get a seat at the board of

0:41:14.320 --> 0:41:18.280
<v Speaker 1>directors or maybe even preparing for an actual takeover of Twitter.

0:41:18.680 --> 0:41:21.600
<v Speaker 1>Speculation reigned for more than a week before it became

0:41:21.680 --> 0:41:25.040
<v Speaker 1>clear that Musk really was moving to purchase the company,

0:41:25.160 --> 0:41:28.160
<v Speaker 1>and it would take another week before that would really

0:41:28.200 --> 0:41:32.479
<v Speaker 1>start to settle into something certain and we would learn

0:41:32.640 --> 0:41:38.160
<v Speaker 1>of the terms. On April twenty two, uh, we learned

0:41:38.160 --> 0:41:40.720
<v Speaker 1>that Musk had agreed to buy out shares of Twitter

0:41:40.960 --> 0:41:43.400
<v Speaker 1>at fifty four dollars twenty sins per share, which was

0:41:43.440 --> 0:41:47.320
<v Speaker 1>significantly higher than what he would have paid for those shares,

0:41:47.800 --> 0:41:50.520
<v Speaker 1>and after some debate at the board level, Twitter had

0:41:50.600 --> 0:41:53.520
<v Speaker 1>agreed to that price. It seemed at first that the

0:41:53.560 --> 0:41:56.600
<v Speaker 1>company was going to resist Elon Musk's move. It went

0:41:56.680 --> 0:42:00.200
<v Speaker 1>so far as to put a poison pill plan in ace.

0:42:00.280 --> 0:42:03.400
<v Speaker 1>That's a lot of alliteration, um. A poison bill is

0:42:03.400 --> 0:42:05.640
<v Speaker 1>a strategy to try and head off a hostile takeover.

0:42:05.719 --> 0:42:09.000
<v Speaker 1>A hostile takeovers when someone convinces shareholders to make really

0:42:09.040 --> 0:42:12.480
<v Speaker 1>big changes to a company's ownership by going over the

0:42:12.520 --> 0:42:15.240
<v Speaker 1>head of the board of directors. So instead of arranging

0:42:15.280 --> 0:42:18.239
<v Speaker 1>things through the board of directors, you go and you

0:42:18.280 --> 0:42:21.080
<v Speaker 1>try and buy up enough shares to force a shareholder

0:42:21.200 --> 0:42:24.319
<v Speaker 1>vote to potentially change the ownership of the company. That's

0:42:24.400 --> 0:42:28.680
<v Speaker 1>that's a hostile takeover. A poison pill is a way

0:42:28.719 --> 0:42:31.960
<v Speaker 1>for a company to affect share price or the number

0:42:31.960 --> 0:42:34.120
<v Speaker 1>of shares in such a way that it makes a

0:42:34.160 --> 0:42:39.000
<v Speaker 1>hostile takeover impractical or impossible. Anyway, all of that ended

0:42:39.040 --> 0:42:42.160
<v Speaker 1>up being moot because Twitter's board ultimately agreed to Elon's

0:42:42.280 --> 0:42:46.200
<v Speaker 1>terms on April uh. The deal meant that Musk waved

0:42:46.239 --> 0:42:48.400
<v Speaker 1>his right to due diligence, which is sort of like

0:42:48.440 --> 0:42:52.000
<v Speaker 1>agreeing to buy a house site unseen and just hope

0:42:52.040 --> 0:42:55.160
<v Speaker 1>that you didn't overpay for whatever you bought. There's also

0:42:55.200 --> 0:42:57.200
<v Speaker 1>a clause in the deal that states if Musk were

0:42:57.239 --> 0:42:59.840
<v Speaker 1>two back out of the deal, which could only have

0:43:00.040 --> 0:43:04.600
<v Speaker 1>and if there were a situation that fundamentally meant Twitter's

0:43:04.680 --> 0:43:08.799
<v Speaker 1>value would be drastically different from what it should be,

0:43:09.200 --> 0:43:11.040
<v Speaker 1>then Musk would still be on the hook to pay

0:43:11.080 --> 0:43:14.440
<v Speaker 1>a one billion dollar exit price. So, in other words,

0:43:14.719 --> 0:43:18.439
<v Speaker 1>first the deal has to be untenable because of some

0:43:19.000 --> 0:43:23.560
<v Speaker 1>fundamental reason, then Musk would be allowed to back out,

0:43:23.600 --> 0:43:25.400
<v Speaker 1>but you have to pay a billion dollars to do it.

0:43:26.800 --> 0:43:28.560
<v Speaker 1>As it turns out, that part is going to be

0:43:28.600 --> 0:43:32.600
<v Speaker 1>really important now. Since the day that the news broke

0:43:32.680 --> 0:43:35.239
<v Speaker 1>that Musk was gonna try and buy Twitter, hardly a

0:43:35.320 --> 0:43:38.200
<v Speaker 1>day has gone by without more Musk and Twitter news.

0:43:38.400 --> 0:43:42.239
<v Speaker 1>It's frankly exhausting. Part of the problem is that Musk

0:43:42.320 --> 0:43:45.799
<v Speaker 1>initially talked about how his goals involved making Twitter a

0:43:45.880 --> 0:43:49.360
<v Speaker 1>platform for free speech, with Musk implying that some of

0:43:49.400 --> 0:43:54.840
<v Speaker 1>the criticisms about Twitter's content moderation policies were merited. So again,

0:43:54.960 --> 0:43:58.080
<v Speaker 1>this starts to play into that perception that Twitter has

0:43:58.160 --> 0:44:03.520
<v Speaker 1>this anti conservative bias or that it made a mistake to,

0:44:03.960 --> 0:44:06.600
<v Speaker 1>you know, limit the spread of misinformation about stuff like

0:44:06.719 --> 0:44:11.040
<v Speaker 1>COVID and election manipulation and that sort of thing. So

0:44:11.280 --> 0:44:14.880
<v Speaker 1>Musk's message seems to indicate that his version of Twitter

0:44:15.440 --> 0:44:19.520
<v Speaker 1>would reverse some of these actions, making it a true

0:44:19.560 --> 0:44:23.520
<v Speaker 1>free speech platform, which by the way, it can't actually do,

0:44:24.200 --> 0:44:26.319
<v Speaker 1>at least not all over the world because there's some

0:44:26.360 --> 0:44:31.320
<v Speaker 1>places that have very strict content policies, you know, like India.

0:44:31.800 --> 0:44:36.120
<v Speaker 1>So some of the things that people have guessed Musk

0:44:36.280 --> 0:44:40.160
<v Speaker 1>might do include some controversial moves, like even reinstating former

0:44:40.200 --> 0:44:43.600
<v Speaker 1>President Trump's account. One thing I didn't cover is that

0:44:43.680 --> 0:44:47.360
<v Speaker 1>President Trump lost his account in the wake of the

0:44:47.440 --> 0:44:54.280
<v Speaker 1>January six insurrection in um he continuously violated Twitter's policies,

0:44:54.320 --> 0:45:00.480
<v Speaker 1>and Twitter then banned his account. So there's been some

0:45:00.520 --> 0:45:05.160
<v Speaker 1>speculation that Musk would reverse that decision, but obviously we

0:45:05.200 --> 0:45:07.200
<v Speaker 1>can't speak to that one way or the other because

0:45:07.239 --> 0:45:10.399
<v Speaker 1>it hasn't happened yet. Okay, we're gonna take one last break.

0:45:10.400 --> 0:45:12.719
<v Speaker 1>When we come back, I'm gonna talk more about this

0:45:12.800 --> 0:45:25.600
<v Speaker 1>Musk Twitter situation. Okay, So, another big thing that Musk

0:45:25.719 --> 0:45:29.319
<v Speaker 1>talked about early on when it became known that he

0:45:29.440 --> 0:45:33.600
<v Speaker 1>was he was moving to purchase Twitter was his goal

0:45:33.680 --> 0:45:38.000
<v Speaker 1>to wipe out bots on Twitter spam bots and junk bots.

0:45:38.960 --> 0:45:41.440
<v Speaker 1>He identified that as one of the big problems on Twitter,

0:45:41.520 --> 0:45:46.880
<v Speaker 1>one of the problems being this, uh, this, this position

0:45:47.160 --> 0:45:50.279
<v Speaker 1>on free speech, like being anti free speech, and and

0:45:50.360 --> 0:45:54.640
<v Speaker 1>Elon Musk's eyes. The other one being that there was

0:45:54.719 --> 0:45:56.759
<v Speaker 1>there were too many bots on Twitter and need to

0:45:56.760 --> 0:45:59.160
<v Speaker 1>be cleaned out. There need to be a verification process

0:45:59.239 --> 0:46:02.360
<v Speaker 1>to make sure that whomever holds a Twitter account is

0:46:02.400 --> 0:46:06.160
<v Speaker 1>in fact a human being. Now, later on, he began

0:46:06.239 --> 0:46:08.479
<v Speaker 1>to use the bots as a reason that he wasn't

0:46:08.560 --> 0:46:11.320
<v Speaker 1>so sure that the deal should go through, which again

0:46:11.480 --> 0:46:14.920
<v Speaker 1>is confusing because at the very earliest stages he was

0:46:14.960 --> 0:46:18.880
<v Speaker 1>saying one of his goals was to clean up Twitter

0:46:18.960 --> 0:46:21.719
<v Speaker 1>from bots, like that was one of the reasons he

0:46:21.800 --> 0:46:24.880
<v Speaker 1>wanted to purchase it. So it's somewhat confusing that a

0:46:24.880 --> 0:46:26.640
<v Speaker 1>bit later he's like, hey, hey, I don't think I

0:46:26.680 --> 0:46:29.560
<v Speaker 1>want to buy this anymore. There are bots on it,

0:46:29.760 --> 0:46:33.120
<v Speaker 1>and and and meanwhile I'm sitting here saying, you knew

0:46:33.200 --> 0:46:35.160
<v Speaker 1>there were bots on it, that was one of the

0:46:35.200 --> 0:46:39.000
<v Speaker 1>reasons you said you wanted to buy the thing. Um,

0:46:39.080 --> 0:46:42.640
<v Speaker 1>But hey, you know, who am I to judge? I

0:46:42.680 --> 0:46:47.759
<v Speaker 1>guess anyway, I found it really frustrating because you know,

0:46:48.000 --> 0:46:50.759
<v Speaker 1>it seemed like he was going backward and saying like, oh,

0:46:50.840 --> 0:46:53.400
<v Speaker 1>I didn't realize there were bots here. So he began

0:46:53.480 --> 0:46:56.640
<v Speaker 1>to demand information on how many bots are actually on Twitter.

0:46:57.600 --> 0:47:00.880
<v Speaker 1>Twitter came back and said that, according to their estimates,

0:47:01.320 --> 0:47:05.080
<v Speaker 1>fewer than five percent of all monetize herbal accounts on

0:47:05.120 --> 0:47:09.560
<v Speaker 1>Twitter or bots. Musk disputed that. He just said that's

0:47:09.600 --> 0:47:13.000
<v Speaker 1>not true. He didn't present evidence of that not being true,

0:47:13.040 --> 0:47:15.279
<v Speaker 1>but he said that's not true, and he suspected the

0:47:15.360 --> 0:47:18.640
<v Speaker 1>number was much higher. Uh, and by much higher, it

0:47:18.680 --> 0:47:22.680
<v Speaker 1>went anywhere from to more than nine percent in some accounts,

0:47:23.000 --> 0:47:26.719
<v Speaker 1>which more than seems more than a little unrealistic to me,

0:47:26.880 --> 0:47:31.320
<v Speaker 1>but whatever. Anyway, Twitter would go on to actually send

0:47:31.600 --> 0:47:34.680
<v Speaker 1>raw data to Musk's team. They said, you know, we

0:47:34.760 --> 0:47:37.719
<v Speaker 1>told you what our methodology was, we told you what

0:47:37.840 --> 0:47:41.759
<v Speaker 1>we found. You said, that's not true. So here's the

0:47:41.840 --> 0:47:44.680
<v Speaker 1>raw data. You figure it out, You come up with

0:47:44.719 --> 0:47:49.759
<v Speaker 1>your approach to determine how many bots are on the platform,

0:47:49.800 --> 0:47:53.120
<v Speaker 1>and you let us know what you found. Now. Most recently,

0:47:53.239 --> 0:47:56.040
<v Speaker 1>Musk has indicated that he wants out of this deal

0:47:56.760 --> 0:47:59.399
<v Speaker 1>due to the bot issue, which again I'm not really

0:47:59.440 --> 0:48:02.080
<v Speaker 1>sure what's that actually going on here, but his legal

0:48:02.120 --> 0:48:05.560
<v Speaker 1>team may have to argue that reason in court because

0:48:05.600 --> 0:48:08.800
<v Speaker 1>Twitter's board of directors have indicated that they're holding Musk

0:48:09.400 --> 0:48:12.759
<v Speaker 1>to his agreement that they will sue him. They will

0:48:12.800 --> 0:48:15.560
<v Speaker 1>take him to court over this matter if he tries

0:48:15.600 --> 0:48:17.640
<v Speaker 1>to back out of the deal, and if a court

0:48:17.719 --> 0:48:22.960
<v Speaker 1>decides that the bought issue is not crucial to Twitter's

0:48:23.040 --> 0:48:26.839
<v Speaker 1>value right, that it doesn't meet that bar that must

0:48:26.840 --> 0:48:29.000
<v Speaker 1>be met in order for Musk to be able to

0:48:29.040 --> 0:48:31.959
<v Speaker 1>back out of the deal, well, then Musk is gonna

0:48:31.960 --> 0:48:33.400
<v Speaker 1>have to go through with it. He's gonna have to

0:48:33.680 --> 0:48:36.360
<v Speaker 1>bite the bullet and purchase the company for like forty

0:48:36.400 --> 0:48:41.320
<v Speaker 1>four billion dollars, which is what he agreed to. The

0:48:41.360 --> 0:48:47.320
<v Speaker 1>activity has led to massive speculations about what Musk's motives

0:48:47.480 --> 0:48:51.120
<v Speaker 1>have been, and theories have been posted everywhere from like

0:48:51.239 --> 0:48:55.160
<v Speaker 1>sub Credits and Twitter to mainstream media. So let's run

0:48:55.200 --> 0:48:58.600
<v Speaker 1>down a couple of the big hypotheses of what's quote

0:48:58.680 --> 0:49:03.080
<v Speaker 1>unquote really going on here now. One is that Musk

0:49:03.200 --> 0:49:06.520
<v Speaker 1>actually wanted to buy Twitter, that that he was sincere

0:49:06.800 --> 0:49:10.160
<v Speaker 1>in his desire to purchase the platform, but then a

0:49:10.280 --> 0:49:14.959
<v Speaker 1>downturn in the economy made that more expensive than Musk

0:49:15.160 --> 0:49:20.440
<v Speaker 1>was comfortable going with the value of Twitter's stock dropped,

0:49:20.760 --> 0:49:24.719
<v Speaker 1>and so did Tesla's stock value. Now a lot of

0:49:24.800 --> 0:49:28.640
<v Speaker 1>Musk's personal wealth is tied in with Tesla stock. Like

0:49:29.719 --> 0:49:33.040
<v Speaker 1>Musk is the world's richest man, but it's not like

0:49:33.080 --> 0:49:36.280
<v Speaker 1>he has billions of dollars in a bank vault Allah

0:49:36.280 --> 0:49:38.839
<v Speaker 1>Scrooge mc duck. Most of his money is tied up

0:49:39.000 --> 0:49:43.680
<v Speaker 1>in stocks, including Tesla stocks. So some have said that

0:49:43.800 --> 0:49:46.800
<v Speaker 1>Musk wants out of the deal because his personal wealth

0:49:46.920 --> 0:49:50.120
<v Speaker 1>has already taken a heck of a clubbing due to

0:49:50.239 --> 0:49:53.800
<v Speaker 1>Tesla's stock performance, because that that stock price of that

0:49:54.080 --> 0:50:00.719
<v Speaker 1>company has gone down significantly since the spring. Also, not

0:50:00.840 --> 0:50:03.479
<v Speaker 1>all the cash to buy Twitter is actually coming from

0:50:03.480 --> 0:50:06.400
<v Speaker 1>Elon Musk himself. In fact, most of it is coming

0:50:06.600 --> 0:50:09.560
<v Speaker 1>from other sources. He had to secure a few financial

0:50:09.600 --> 0:50:12.799
<v Speaker 1>partners to get funding, so of a lot of this

0:50:13.040 --> 0:50:16.840
<v Speaker 1>is him putting up stock as collateral in order to

0:50:16.920 --> 0:50:21.080
<v Speaker 1>get the funding necessary to make this purchase. And again,

0:50:21.440 --> 0:50:25.040
<v Speaker 1>if the stock price for Tesla is going down, then

0:50:25.080 --> 0:50:29.560
<v Speaker 1>it requires more shares of Tesla to meet that collateral,

0:50:29.960 --> 0:50:32.880
<v Speaker 1>which means he's putting up even more of his personal

0:50:33.360 --> 0:50:37.360
<v Speaker 1>wealth up as a in a way to guarantee alone.

0:50:37.960 --> 0:50:41.000
<v Speaker 1>Rich people, by the way, mostly are buying things on credit,

0:50:41.360 --> 0:50:43.960
<v Speaker 1>and they're using the wealth they have and things like

0:50:44.040 --> 0:50:48.279
<v Speaker 1>stocks as collateral, so they're not they live in a

0:50:48.280 --> 0:50:51.760
<v Speaker 1>totally different world that I live in. But anyway, once

0:50:51.800 --> 0:50:54.319
<v Speaker 1>things are going boldly in the stock market, that makes

0:50:54.360 --> 0:50:59.239
<v Speaker 1>this more uh personally costly for Elon Musk. It means

0:50:59.239 --> 0:51:03.080
<v Speaker 1>he has to dedicate more of his personal assets towards

0:51:03.239 --> 0:51:06.239
<v Speaker 1>establishing the collateral he needs in order to get the

0:51:06.280 --> 0:51:10.120
<v Speaker 1>loans he needs. So it's harder for him to get

0:51:10.120 --> 0:51:13.680
<v Speaker 1>the money together to buy Twitter, and that that might

0:51:13.719 --> 0:51:16.839
<v Speaker 1>be making must have second thoughts that he wants out

0:51:16.880 --> 0:51:18.640
<v Speaker 1>of the deal because he doesn't want to commit that

0:51:18.719 --> 0:51:23.239
<v Speaker 1>much of his own personal wealth to the to the endeavor.

0:51:24.280 --> 0:51:27.239
<v Speaker 1>But there's another hypothesis as well, and this one says

0:51:27.280 --> 0:51:31.400
<v Speaker 1>that Musk never intended to buy Twitter in the first place. Instead,

0:51:31.440 --> 0:51:34.279
<v Speaker 1>he just wanted to have a reason to liquefy some

0:51:34.440 --> 0:51:38.880
<v Speaker 1>of his stocks in Tesla without triggering a larger negative

0:51:38.920 --> 0:51:43.400
<v Speaker 1>reaction to him doing that. And here's the thinking. So

0:51:43.440 --> 0:51:45.839
<v Speaker 1>when a leader sells off a big old chunk of

0:51:45.880 --> 0:51:49.759
<v Speaker 1>stock in the company that they lead, other investors might

0:51:49.760 --> 0:51:52.000
<v Speaker 1>see that as a sign that the leader has lost

0:51:52.080 --> 0:51:55.960
<v Speaker 1>confidence in their company. So the investors then may also

0:51:56.040 --> 0:51:59.080
<v Speaker 1>move to sell off their shares. That results in a

0:51:59.200 --> 0:52:03.080
<v Speaker 1>stock price drop, perhaps even a drastic one. So then

0:52:03.080 --> 0:52:06.160
<v Speaker 1>the question is, how can a leader liquefy a significant

0:52:06.160 --> 0:52:08.759
<v Speaker 1>amount of stock to the tune of more than eight

0:52:08.800 --> 0:52:11.440
<v Speaker 1>billion dollars in the case with Elon Musk and Tesla

0:52:12.120 --> 0:52:16.960
<v Speaker 1>without causing that kind of panic among investors. Well, according

0:52:17.000 --> 0:52:21.800
<v Speaker 1>to this hypothesis, Musk's approach was to make it appear

0:52:22.000 --> 0:52:25.840
<v Speaker 1>as though he were going to purchase Twitter. And obviously,

0:52:25.880 --> 0:52:28.239
<v Speaker 1>in order to purchase Twitter, he would have to fund

0:52:28.280 --> 0:52:32.640
<v Speaker 1>that purchase. And you know the overall price when you

0:52:32.760 --> 0:52:35.320
<v Speaker 1>add up those fifty four dollars twenty since per share

0:52:35.680 --> 0:52:38.160
<v Speaker 1>would be around forty four billion dollars. So as part

0:52:38.160 --> 0:52:41.440
<v Speaker 1>of that, Musk would need to liquefy some of his

0:52:41.520 --> 0:52:45.080
<v Speaker 1>stock in Tesla in order to have cash as part

0:52:45.200 --> 0:52:47.960
<v Speaker 1>of his offer to Twitter. So the sell off of

0:52:48.080 --> 0:52:50.840
<v Speaker 1>Tesla stock would thus be seen as a business move

0:52:51.200 --> 0:52:55.800
<v Speaker 1>for Musk to acquire another company, not that Musk wanted

0:52:55.840 --> 0:52:58.920
<v Speaker 1>to sell his shares or had somehow lost confidence in

0:52:58.960 --> 0:53:02.160
<v Speaker 1>Tesla itself, Because while he was selling a lot of

0:53:02.200 --> 0:53:06.319
<v Speaker 1>stock he still owns, more like he still owns of

0:53:06.480 --> 0:53:11.200
<v Speaker 1>all the shares in Tesla. So maybe, say the speculators,

0:53:11.600 --> 0:53:15.160
<v Speaker 1>Musk was looking to cash in on eight point four

0:53:15.200 --> 0:53:19.560
<v Speaker 1>billion dollars worth of Tesla stock without tanking share prices

0:53:19.560 --> 0:53:22.440
<v Speaker 1>of Tesla, and he used Twitter as kind of a

0:53:22.480 --> 0:53:25.160
<v Speaker 1>cover story with the intent of never going through with

0:53:25.200 --> 0:53:29.800
<v Speaker 1>the deal. But if that is the case, he made

0:53:29.880 --> 0:53:34.960
<v Speaker 1>some pretty darned stupid business decisions when he was forging

0:53:35.000 --> 0:53:38.480
<v Speaker 1>that deal with Twitter, because backing out is not an

0:53:38.520 --> 0:53:41.080
<v Speaker 1>easy thing to do, and if even if he does

0:53:41.200 --> 0:53:43.680
<v Speaker 1>manage to back out, he's going to have to pay

0:53:43.800 --> 0:53:48.600
<v Speaker 1>a billion dollar fee. So maybe he was willing to

0:53:48.680 --> 0:53:51.360
<v Speaker 1>spend a billion in order to cash out eight point

0:53:51.440 --> 0:53:54.879
<v Speaker 1>four billion, But if so, this was a dumb way

0:53:54.880 --> 0:53:58.160
<v Speaker 1>to do it, because if his lawyers can't convince a

0:53:58.239 --> 0:54:02.560
<v Speaker 1>court that sacking out is justified, he's still going to

0:54:02.680 --> 0:54:05.719
<v Speaker 1>have to go through with the purchase, or what I

0:54:05.719 --> 0:54:08.399
<v Speaker 1>think is more likely is go through a much more

0:54:08.440 --> 0:54:12.640
<v Speaker 1>expensive settlement where he'll pay out not the full forty

0:54:12.640 --> 0:54:14.600
<v Speaker 1>four billion dollars, but it's going to be more than

0:54:14.640 --> 0:54:17.719
<v Speaker 1>the one billion fee he would have incurred if he

0:54:17.760 --> 0:54:21.040
<v Speaker 1>could back out. Musk is currently showing a lot of

0:54:21.080 --> 0:54:23.959
<v Speaker 1>bravado in the face of threats from Twitter to bring

0:54:24.000 --> 0:54:26.520
<v Speaker 1>the case to court. Musk says this is going to

0:54:26.680 --> 0:54:29.200
<v Speaker 1>vindicate his claims that Twitter is going to be forced

0:54:29.280 --> 0:54:34.880
<v Speaker 1>to reveal actual bot statistics in a courtroom. Like he says,

0:54:35.040 --> 0:54:38.440
<v Speaker 1>I asked Twitter to give me real statistics on bots.

0:54:38.480 --> 0:54:41.200
<v Speaker 1>Twitter refused. Twitter then says it's going to take me

0:54:41.280 --> 0:54:43.400
<v Speaker 1>to court. But in court, it's going to have to

0:54:43.440 --> 0:54:45.960
<v Speaker 1>show those bots statistics, so I win. Ha ha ha

0:54:45.960 --> 0:54:49.279
<v Speaker 1>ha ha. Now I'm no legal expert. I don't know

0:54:49.480 --> 0:54:50.960
<v Speaker 1>if that's going to be part of the case. I

0:54:50.960 --> 0:54:53.440
<v Speaker 1>don't know if Twitter can just say, hey, we sent

0:54:53.640 --> 0:54:57.080
<v Speaker 1>Musk everything. We sent him the fire hose of data.

0:54:57.280 --> 0:55:00.120
<v Speaker 1>He's complaining about nothing, So make him go through through

0:55:00.400 --> 0:55:02.640
<v Speaker 1>with the deal and make him buy us, and that

0:55:02.760 --> 0:55:07.560
<v Speaker 1>might be what the court decides. So yeah, this isn't over.

0:55:08.880 --> 0:55:11.880
<v Speaker 1>I don't know whether Musk will end up owning Twitter

0:55:12.080 --> 0:55:15.880
<v Speaker 1>or not at this point. Um, I definitely think it's

0:55:15.880 --> 0:55:18.400
<v Speaker 1>going to go to court. I don't think Musk is

0:55:18.400 --> 0:55:22.000
<v Speaker 1>gonna win. So either he's going to have to pay

0:55:22.040 --> 0:55:25.160
<v Speaker 1>a big settlement to get out of this, or he's

0:55:25.160 --> 0:55:27.240
<v Speaker 1>going to have to bite the bullet and purchase Twitter.

0:55:27.960 --> 0:55:31.080
<v Speaker 1>I don't see it going another way. Now I could

0:55:31.120 --> 0:55:35.360
<v Speaker 1>be wrong. Maybe a court will find that Musk's reasons

0:55:35.360 --> 0:55:38.960
<v Speaker 1>for backing out are legitimate and they meet the qualifications

0:55:39.000 --> 0:55:41.799
<v Speaker 1>required by the deal, and he'll only owe the one

0:55:41.840 --> 0:55:44.920
<v Speaker 1>billion dollars and then that will be that. Um, I

0:55:44.960 --> 0:55:46.920
<v Speaker 1>think Twitter is going to take a big hit in

0:55:46.960 --> 0:55:50.279
<v Speaker 1>its value if that happens. So we'll have to see

0:55:50.320 --> 0:55:53.399
<v Speaker 1>how this plays out. But yeah, that's the update on

0:55:53.440 --> 0:55:58.000
<v Speaker 1>Twitter's tumultuous history. A lot has happened in just the

0:55:58.080 --> 0:56:00.040
<v Speaker 1>last few months, in fact, that you could argue with

0:56:00.120 --> 0:56:03.160
<v Speaker 1>that Twitter's history got way more complicated since April of

0:56:03.200 --> 0:56:06.400
<v Speaker 1>this year than in the rest of its history combined.

0:56:06.440 --> 0:56:09.239
<v Speaker 1>And I think you'd have a pretty strong argument there.

0:56:10.080 --> 0:56:14.400
<v Speaker 1>I'm sure once this comes to some sort of definitive end,

0:56:14.480 --> 0:56:17.400
<v Speaker 1>whatever that may be, I will come back and revisit it,

0:56:17.440 --> 0:56:20.279
<v Speaker 1>maybe do a much shorter kind of update episode. But

0:56:20.360 --> 0:56:25.160
<v Speaker 1>I wanted to do this to talk about it because, um, yeah,

0:56:25.200 --> 0:56:29.080
<v Speaker 1>it's it's a weird situation and Twitter has been such

0:56:29.080 --> 0:56:33.080
<v Speaker 1>an important component in tech and in journalism and an

0:56:33.160 --> 0:56:36.920
<v Speaker 1>activism as well as in you know, not great stuff

0:56:36.960 --> 0:56:43.479
<v Speaker 1>like in organized campaigns of harassment and election meddling and

0:56:43.640 --> 0:56:46.360
<v Speaker 1>misinformation campaigns like Twitter has been at the center of

0:56:46.400 --> 0:56:49.520
<v Speaker 1>all this. I think it would be foolish to say

0:56:49.520 --> 0:56:52.760
<v Speaker 1>that Twitter is not important. I think it's not foolish

0:56:52.800 --> 0:56:57.000
<v Speaker 1>to say Twitter is in trouble because it hasn't like

0:56:57.640 --> 0:57:01.600
<v Speaker 1>it's not growing really and it's not becoming more relevant.

0:57:01.640 --> 0:57:06.160
<v Speaker 1>It's not like it's increasing user engagement either. But you

0:57:06.200 --> 0:57:09.719
<v Speaker 1>can still see where it plays an important part. The

0:57:09.840 --> 0:57:12.960
<v Speaker 1>question is isn't an important enough part for it to

0:57:13.080 --> 0:57:17.280
<v Speaker 1>justify its existence? And I just don't know, Like when

0:57:17.280 --> 0:57:20.400
<v Speaker 1>when the world eventually boils down to how much money

0:57:20.400 --> 0:57:24.640
<v Speaker 1>did you make? It starts getting pretty complicated. Okay, that's

0:57:24.680 --> 0:57:27.160
<v Speaker 1>it for this episode. Hope you enjoyed it. If you

0:57:27.240 --> 0:57:29.400
<v Speaker 1>have anything you would like to send me, well, why

0:57:29.440 --> 0:57:31.200
<v Speaker 1>don't you send it on Twitter. I'm just gonna talk

0:57:31.240 --> 0:57:33.560
<v Speaker 1>about Twitter on this one. You could do that by

0:57:33.600 --> 0:57:38.240
<v Speaker 1>sending a message to tech Stuff HSW on Twitter, and

0:57:38.280 --> 0:57:47.680
<v Speaker 1>I'll talk to you again really soon. Tech Stuff is

0:57:47.680 --> 0:57:50.840
<v Speaker 1>an I Heart Radio production. For more podcasts from my

0:57:50.960 --> 0:57:54.560
<v Speaker 1>Heart Radio, visit the I Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts,

0:57:54.680 --> 0:58:00.240
<v Speaker 1>or wherever you listen to your favorite shows. Two