Twitter has not changed as a product. His Twitter blue has been a disaster so far. Hes getting attention for his much larger failure, being the worst tech company manager we've seen in a while.
You cant take credit for positive outcomes if you done nothing yet.
The same Twitter but with higher DAU is running with xx% less overhead. That's an objective improvement measured by numbers. That Twitter blue was a mess for a day doesn't matter in the long run.
Losing advertisers is a problem in the short term, but less overhead helps and they're pivoting the model. I thought we all hated ads? Now people suddenly support that model? Please. It's all so fake.
You’re giving him a lot of benefit of the doubt. So far we only have his untrustworthy[1] statements about DAU slightly ticking up, but we have third party confirmation that he’s lost a significant number of employees in critical job roles with no explanation about how Twitter can survive long term without them and advertisers leaving which is dropping revenue. Until he has an actual win or a compelling argument as to how his strategy is going to improve long term, I don’t see why you wouldn’t look at his management of Twitter as a disaster
[1]he already posted a conspiracy theory, deleted it when called out, and then said he never posted it. That’s his recent behavior, if you trust his statements I have a bridge to sell you
I give builders the benefit of the doubt, especially if they've done it before. Especially if they've put rockets in space.
That he deleted that stupid tweet was admission it was stupid. Where did he say he never posted it though? It's highly unlikely he said that and wasn't joking. He knows everything he posts is captured immediately.
>That he deleted that stupid tweet was admission it was stupid.
No, admitting that it was stupid would be an admission that it was stupid. Removing its existence is just hiding the mistake.
>Where did he say he never posted it though? It's highly unlikely he said that and wasn't joking.
Here[1], and inb4 you say that's obviously a joke. No it is not to a casual observer. He claims he never tweeted what was reported, and the only indication at all that the tweet should be read in a not monotone voice is the emphasis asterisks around not. All that indicates to a casual observer is that he is emphatically denying he ever made the first indirect tweet.
You cant take credit for positive outcomes if you done nothing yet.