Now that Meta has also jumped on the subscription-based verification bandwagon, now coming in neck-to-neck with Twitter and Snapchat, what does that mean for the future of accessibility for major platforms? Is that a good thing? Should people even be charged for being given extra ad reach? Does this trend defeat the purpose of blue checkmarks? So far, Twitter and Snap have made millions from their programs, which also positions Meta to generate a significant amount of revenue from a new stream. The real question is – would you pay?

Get in The Ring!

To give users a better understanding of what’s being offered with these new subscription options, take a look at this overview that goes over the key features of ‘Twitter Blue’ and ‘Meta Verified’, as announced thus far. This simple comparison should help expand your perspective on each by a bit, which is still better than being totally clueless.

It’s a relatively short overview, so there isn’t really much to break down, but let’s take a look at the variables either way. First up is price, with Meta exceeding Blue’s $8 a month subscription fee by an extra $4 ($11.99), however, in-app, the price shows up as $14.99. So, nearly double on Meta? They better offer twice as much utility and exclusive features as well.

When it comes to benefits offered, Twitter Blue gives paying subscribers ‘Priority Listing’ in Replies and Search, while paying Meta Verified subscribers get to enjoy improved visibility and reach, which is a bit generic if you ask us. If you think about it, almost all major platforms can promise ‘increased visibility and reach’ in one way or another; exclusive subscription offers, by default, already include an element or two that help out with these two core engagement factors.

Lastly, let’s take a look at the extras each of these subscription options offers. Twitter Blue gives users the ability to edit Tweets, access custom app icons, NFT profile pictures, custom navigation, an improved reading experience, longer Tweets and video uploads, and 2FA SMS. On Meta’s side, users would get dedicated account support, proactive monitoring for impersonation, exclusive stickers, and, which is probably the main selling point, 100 free Stars per month.

The Wrap

Again, it’s a relatively simple comparison, and these elements don’t really need much breaking down to at least understand, from a face-value perspective, that is. If you want more in-depth and technical explanations of what each of these elements is about, then we recommend visiting the respective apps and looking up their various explainers and notes. Still, despite the utility of this comparison, it doesn’t justify the cost, or even rationalize why users would be okay with paying for these so-called ‘additional features’. For those who have been on either for quite some time, they might be able to see the true benefits of these new subscription offers, but for the average Joe, they might come off as simply being cash grabs. With a little more tweaking (and sweetening), perhaps Twitter and Meta’s verification programs can really take off.

Sources

http://bit.ly/3xGgofl