X remains the spot for big political moments
…Is it because of Threads’ failure, or are we all just addicted?
To say X’s platform has been on a wild journey over the past year would be a major understatement. The company, under the leadership of Elon Musk, has alienated its elite political user base and advertisers alike by making confounding UX decisions, ditching commitments to content moderation, and causing whiplash with sudden, jarring product announcements.
Yet, despite those of us in the political class complaining ad nauseam about the deterioration of the platform and swearing we’ll never come back, many of us - journalists and political staffers alike - were glued to our feeds to watch this week’s congressional drama unfold.
In this week’s FWIW, we’ll break down why the site formerly known as Twitter continues to be a go-to place for tracking major news & political moments. But first…
By the numbers
FWIW, political advertisers spent just over $9.8 million on Facebook and Instagram ads last week. These were the top ten spenders nationwide:
Montana Sen. Jon Tester’s re-election campaign launched “boosted news” Facebook ads from a new page called “Montana Updates.” The ads promote news stories from local publications highlighting how Tester has stood up to Pres. Biden on occasion and worked on bipartisan deals to deliver for his constituents.
The LIBRE Initiative, a Koch Brothers-backed Latino outreach group, has increased its spending on digital ads in recent weeks. The organization is targeting Latino communities on Facebook with conservative messaging about big government and overspending.
And finally, the American Action Network, a dark-money conservative group tied to Congressional Republicans, started running ads on Monday thanking Speaker McCarthy for his work. McCarthy was then ousted as Speaker on Tuesday. Check out the ill-fated ads here >>>
Meanwhile, political campaigns spent $2.4 million on Google and YouTube ads last week. Here were the top ten spenders nationwide:
Future Forward USA Action, President Biden’s super PAC, was yet again the top spender on Google and YouTube ads last week. They spent over $300,000 on English + Spanish video ads targeting voters in key battleground states like MI, AZ, GA, PA, WI, and NV.
…and on Snapchat, political campaigns and organizations in the United States have spent around $1.8 million on advertising in 2023. Here are the top ten spenders YTD:
Your 2024 digital dispatch
FWIW, here’s how much money the 2024 presidential candidates have spent on Facebook + Google ads to date (1/1 - 9/30):
…and here’s how weekly digital ad spending compares between the Trump and Biden campaigns:
Some anti-Trump Republicans are giving up on their efforts to beat Donald Trump in the primary.
Despite raising tens of millions of dollars, Ron DeSantis’s team is still struggling with how to produce video content.
The Trump campaign reportedly brought in $45 million last quarter
From around the internet:
POLITICO and The Intercept report that Democratic tech juggernaut NGP VAN is in turmoil, with clients and former staff concerned about layoffs and software stagnation
Taylor Lorenz’s new book, Extremely Online, came out this week, and she’s been giving several must-read interviews as part of the book’s launch. Here’s a conversation with Platformer’s Zoe Schiffer and another smart sit down with Nieman Lab.
Donald Trump was in court on Monday, but the judge was the real star.
House Democrats are seizing upon the ousting of Kevin McCarthy to rake in some cash. Over 20 Congressional Democrats have reportedly sent fundraising emails about it.
COURIER is partnering with The New Republic to host the Stop Trump Summit at Cooper Union in New York City next Wednesday. The day-long event will feature speakers & panels including Miles Taylor, Molly Jong-Fast, Tara McGowan, Noah Bookbinder, and more. Tickets + details here >>
X remains the spot for big political moments
From Jamaal Bowman pulling a fire alarm amidst a last-minute government shutdown showdown to the dramatic and historic ousting of the Speaker of the House on Tuesday, it’s been a wild week in American politics. If you’re like me, you probably watched this week’s breaking political news unfold on Twitter (okay fine, we’ll call it X), which has historically been the go-to place for live tracking of major events from news to sports and politics.
To say X’s platform has been on a wild journey over the past year would be a major understatement. The company, under the leadership of Elon Musk, has alienated its elite political user base and advertisers alike by making confounding UX decisions, ditching commitments to content moderation, and causing whiplash with sudden, jarring product announcements.
Yet, despite those of us in the political class complaining ad nauseam about the deterioration of the platform and swearing we’ll never come back, many of us - journalists and political staffers alike - were glued to our X feeds to watch this week’s congressional drama unfold.
Why?
I think there are a few reasons, both structural and social. First, we’re addicted. Political journalists and staffers have had a hard time dealing with the fact that the way they’ve done things for many years could soon go away. Despite claims to the contrary, folks don’t want to lose their large audiences and niche fanbases they built on Old Twitter.
More important, however, is the fact that there is still no viable alternative platform for following these types of breaking news moments.
Earlier this summer, I wrote optimistically about the launch of Threads, Meta’s platform that is seeking to replace Old Twitter. I published my newsletter early in the morning, opining that Threads would become the place for news and politics – but just hours after hitting send, Instagram chief Adam Mosseri threw cold water on that idea, emphasizing that he did not want to prioritize political conversation on the app because it has caused really sticky problems for the company in the past.
In my opinion, that intentional decision to steer clear of news and politics has had a major, negative effect on Threads’ viability as a platform people actually want to use for, well, anything. Did anyone even attempt to “live-thread” this week’s political events on that platform? Is “Live-Threading” even a term people use?
Threads’ struggles to catch on were highlighted in several key reports this week, most notably by The Information on Monday. Sylvia Varnham O’Regan’s story detailed Instagram’s internal struggles to build a viable text-based social product while staying away from being a place for news and politics.
“…the debate about news on Threads reflects a broader discussion with Meta. Many product-level leaders at Meta are in favor of having news on Meta’s apps—arguing that it attracts users and keeps them engaged—while Meta's most senior leaders are strongly against it because they consider it to be fraught with problem.”
The Information piece went as far as stating: “Given Threads’ current trajectory, it’s in danger of becoming another failed effort by Meta to expand its range of apps.”
Yikes. After that story was published, Mosseri again weighed in on his previous position to deprioritize news and politics on the platform:
Twitter’s persistence and Threads’ failures are taking place in a rapidly changing social media ecosystem for news publishers and political content producers. AXIOS reported this week that traffic to news publishers from both Facebook and Twitter/X continues to sharply decline. Facebook’s former head of news, Campbell Brown, announced she’s leaving the company after a pivot away from investing in that sector. And yesterday, X abruptly changed the way it displays linked story cards, reducing the likelihood that users will “click-out” to read news articles off the platform.
There’s no doubt that the difficult issues that accompany political and news content (moderation, fact-checking, misinformation, transparency) have caused major headaches and scandals for nearly every technology company that has tried to play in that space.
But is a complete withdrawal from news and politics even possible? What does it mean for the media industry, which has struggled for years to build new revenue models in the internet age? And what does it mean for political outsiders and first-time candidates, who have historically relied on viral online moments to raise money and build an audience of supporters?
One last thing: New newsletter just dropped
On Monday, my team at COURIER launched a new newsletter as part of a slate of pro-democracy media products and national content we’re building. It’s called
and is written by former Chicago Tribune Metro editor Mark Jacob. Every week, Mark will share how right-wing extremism has exploited the weaknesses in American journalism and what we can do about it. Subscribe by hitting the button below:That’s it for FWIW this week! This email was sent to 17,056 readers. Help us reach more subscribers by forwarding this week’s issue to a few of your colleagues!
It’s the addiction. I dropped Twitter for Threads and followed along with the Speaker drama there just fine. There is a lot of news and political talk on Threads.
I am having areal issue with this new policy of not linking the actual articles in X. It may render it pretty much useless to me.