The number of X users in the US has fallen by a fifth since Musk took over, claims report

[midian182]

In brief: It's been around a year and a half since Elon Musk took full control of his favorite social media site, Twitter. The billionaire has made a ton of changes during this time, including changing the platform's name to X. How has that impacted users in the United States? According to a new report, the number of daily users in the country has fallen by around a fifth during Musk's time in charge.

According to data from market intelligence firm Sensor Tower (via NBC News), X's US user base has been declining every month since Musk's first full month in charge. The 27 million daily active users it had in February marked a 27% decline compared to November 2022. It's also down 18% from the same period a year earlier.

Sensor Tower adds that X's global user numbers have also fallen, though not as much – by 15% to 174 million. Its worldwide user figures have been flat or declined every month during Musk's reign except for one.

Musk might take solace in the fact that while X has seen the largest decline among the big social media apps, all its rivals' US user numbers are down compared to November 2022. TikTok saw the second-largest fall, down 9.5%, followed by Instagram (down 4.4%), Snapchat (down 1.7%), and Facebook (down 0.6%). Unlike X, all the apps saw their global user numbers grow during the same period.

X has refuted Sensor Tower's claim. The company said 250 million people use the platform every day, with 550 million visitors each month. X added that both the daily average time spent on the platform and daily active user minutes are up year on year. Musk responded with a post on X pointing to the decline in "legacy media" users. On Sunday, he asked X users to send links from the platform to friends who are "still being misled by the legacy media."

On the other hand, legacy media did actually decline by 20% last year https://t.co/EkVqnOwuA5

– Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 26, 2024

Back in January, mutual fund firm Fidelity, one of the financial backers behind Musk's acquisition of X, said it believed the company was worth 71.5% less than the $44 billion it was worth at the time of Musk's purchase. Fidelity now values the firm at just over $12.5 billion.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/102411-number-us-twitter-x-users-has-fallen-fifth.html

 

[m4a4]

And queue the usual Musk hater comments...

Heh, even if it was 20%, that's far less that the "Twitter is going to crash and burn" crowd that was screaming about when the deal went through.
And then I wonder how much either figure takes into account bots...

 

[The Talking Tech]

The number of subscribers are still too high.

 

[Achaios]

BS propaganda IMO.

They hate Elon Musk so they are trying to harm his business.

 

[m3diapers]

So, get this: he axed half the staff, ditched all that censorship crap, and I believe the falling 20% are just fake news spreaders or followers. The sh!t ton of money saved moving away from cloud services; it's a good company to invest in. Too bad it's not a public trade company anymore.

 

[toooooot]

BS propaganda IMO.

They hate Elon Musk so they are trying to harm his business.

Some people left, I could believe that.
What I could not believe is info coming out of someone who is indeed from that group of people
who claim he does the things he has never done. That is the thing with certain people, whenever someone claims something they have done, you doubt automatically as soon as you hear the name.
And having heard a lot of things Musk has not done before, I have to doubt this information.

 

[Che Cazzo]

Oh no!! I mean, the Lemon Musk guy is the most amazing, sweet, super-intelligent, peaceful, racists-hating (well except for a few dozen of them) non-xenophobic (ditto), misogynist - hating (ditto), most reasonable guy on the planet!!

How could people be leaving his play den??

I am certain his adoring fans will be posting 10 x more on X (what an amazing name!!) to make up for the 20% less posts full of hot air on X!.

 

[axiomatic13]

The quality of the discourse on Twitter is at its lowest ever.

 

[ScottSoapbox]

This can't be right. I remember the legacy media saying 80% of the users left in the first few weeks.

 

[VaRmeNsI]

I wonder how many of them were bots.

 

[Endymio]

Since Twitter/X is no longer illegally conspiring with the FBI to silence true, but politically damaging content, I'll take that as a win. Had Musk not released 'The Twitter Files', we'd have never known how deep the corruption went:

"...(Reuters) - A U.S. federal judge restricted agencies and officials of the administration of President Joe Biden from meeting and communicating with social media companies to moderate their content..."

https://www.reuters.com/legal/judge-blocks-us-officials-communicating-with-social-media-companies-newspaper-2023-07-04/

 

[p51d007]

I wonder how many of those "1/5th" were bots?

 

[bviktor]

And queue the usual Musk hater comments...

Heh, even if it was 20%, that's far less that the "Twitter is going to crash and burn" crowd that was screaming about when the deal went through.
And then I wonder how much either figure takes into account bots...

There's no reason not to hate Musk anymore.

 

[kiwigraeme]

Musk just lost a court case , on trying to close down free speech . Didn't even make it past the judge it was so bad

 

[Ashford]

Was on X for a while... got off for a week on the recommendation of a friend... never went back. I couldn't believe the amount of time I was wasting on... nothing... but more than that... especially with the Israel/Gaza event, you really got to see the worst of humanity... often unexpectedly in graphic detail. Pictures of dead kids, parents wailing... that stuff affects you... and not in a good way. To think our children had front row access to that unmoderated horror is terrifying to consider.

 

[Endymio]

Musk just lost a court case , on trying to close down free speech . Didn't even make it past the judge it was so bad

Why spread disinformation? This wasn't a free speech case, but rather a simple case of defamation. It was clearly warranted, given CCDH brought forth zero evidence that antisemitic speech had flourished since Musk took the reigns of Twitter. And the judge who dismissed the case? Charles Breyer -- the younger brother of Stephen Breyer, the most blatantly Left-wing activist judge to ever set on the Supreme Court.

What's even more pathetic is the brazenly hypocritical claim of your caring about "free speech", when CCDH's entire campaign against Twitter was to get it to restrict free speech, in the name of "countering hate".

 

[m4a4]

There's no reason not to hate Musk anymore.

Lol, imagine thinking I need to hate anyone

You need help if you actually believe that.

 

[DonquixoteIII]

Misleading title... There was no "X" before Musk.

 

[kiwigraeme]

Why spread disinformation? This wasn't a free speech case, but rather a simple case of defamation. It was clearly warranted, given CCDH brought forth zero evidence that antisemitic speech had flourished since Musk took the reigns of Twitter. And the judge who dismissed the case? Charles Breyer -- the younger brother of Stephen Breyer, the most blatantly Left-wing activist judge to ever set on the Supreme Court.

What's even more pathetic is the brazenly hypocritical claim of your caring about "free speech", when CCDH's entire campaign against Twitter was to get it to restrict free speech, in the name of "countering hate".

argue with the judge
Breyer wrote that CCDH’s writing about X “unquestionably constitutes” an exercise of the group’s free speech rights and that the group “makes a compelling case” that its data scraping from X “was newsgathering in furtherance of CCDH’s protected rights.”


“If CCDH’s publications were defamatory, that would be one thing, but X Corp. has carefully avoided saying that they are,” Breyer wrote.

He added that X “wishes to have it both ways,” trying to impose “punishing damages” on CCDH but without having to clear the high bar of a defamation suit

So you are spreading misinformation

It was free speech and Musk shied away from saying it was defamation

Musk tried to bully and beat down free speech with threat of expensive legal action

He can appeal.

Does change the info this group put forward hate speech has increased significantly on X.

Not sure you will find one legal pundit with standing supporting Musks stance here , just whiny cry babies who don't like free speech

 

[Endymio]

He added that X “wishes to have it both ways,” trying to impose “punishing damages” on CCDH but without having to clear the high bar of a defamation suit. So you are spreading misinformation

The Washington Post called it a defamation suit:

Washington Post (Feb 28, 2024): " CCDH seeks dismissal of X’s defamation case under Calif.’s anti-SLAPP law..."

Musk tried to bully and beat down free speech

This "free speech" was both false and intended to defame X. CCDH claimed they chose "100 random tweets" as any ordinary user might experience, but instead used a special advertiser account to manipulate the tweets chosen, in order to their false claims about "hate speech proliferating on Twitter".

CCDH -- a shadowy group funded by anonymous "philanthropic groups" they refuse to reveal -- didn't even attempt to deny their claims were fraudulent. Their defense was essentially no more than "hey, we're the media, so we can say what we wish, true or not."

This activist judge's "logic" in his ruling is absurd: he claims that X's focusing on the harm done by CCDH's claims proves the case is "about free speech". However, he's forgotten the entire basis of a civil suit is to recover damages -- no damages, no claim. Had X *not* pointed out this harm, the judge could have rightfully thrown out the case.

In using an advertiser account in this manner, and also by using a third-party data scraping tool, CCDH unquestionably violated X's terms of service -- a legal and binding contract between them and X. When you break a contract and damage the other party by doing so, the law applies to you. That is-- unless you're a far-Left organization sued in a San Francisco court, presided over by the little brother of one of the most Leftist judges in US history.

Finally, I'll note the irony of a group that had devoted its entire existence to shutting down free speech under the guise of "combating misinformation" itself using a free speech law to protect its own brand of misinformation.

 

[kiwigraeme]

The Washington Post called it a defamation suit:

Washington Post (Feb 28, 2024): " CCDH seeks dismissal of X’s defamation case under Calif.’s anti-SLAPP law..."


This "free speech" was both false and intended to defame X. CCDH claimed they chose "100 random tweets" as any ordinary user might experience, but instead used a special advertiser account to manipulate the tweets chosen, in order to their false claims about "hate speech proliferating on Twitter".

CCDH -- a shadowy group funded by anonymous "philanthropic groups" they refuse to reveal -- didn't even attempt to deny their claims were fraudulent. Their defense was essentially no more than "hey, we're the media, so we can say what we wish, true or not."

The judge's "logic" in his ruling is transparently absurd, as he claims that X's focusing on the harm done by CCDH's claims proves the case is "about free speech". However, this activist judge has forgotten the entire basis of a civil suit is to recover damages -- if you don't show damages, you have no claim. And CCDH's false claims indisputably led to significant damages. Had X *not* raised those claims, the judge could have rightfully thrown out the case.

In using an advertiser account in this manner, and also by using a third-party data scraping tool, CCDH unquestionably violated X's terms of service -- a legal and binding contract between them and X. When you break a contract and damage the other party by doing so, the law applies to you. That is-- unless you're a far-Left organization being sued in a San Francisco court, presided over by the little brother of one of the most Leftist judges in US history.

let's just leave it there , the scraping tool - you mean public tweets oh dear how sad
As I said Musk can appeal , so let's see if he does .
As for damages - You wonder why only fake pills and penis enlargement companies want to be associated with Alex Jones etc . You see the adverts on Fox around their most extreme presenters - sad as
You think Alex Jones is not hate , he knew perfectly well that school shooting was real - he said as much in court - he just wanted to make money off his stupid listeners . Elon loves him

Musk still a whiny baby snowflake , can't handle criticism .
You imagine M/S or Google getting this whiny and all teared up

Freedom of speech in the west has a lot of protections . Barbaric countries like China and Russia don't give AF . Cracks me up MAGA people praising Putin etc . Yet they live their lives in fear - of non-binary people , immigrants , excess govt control. Tying owning an assault rifle in China or Russia or criticising Putain or Winnie

 

[Endymio]

You think Alex Jones is not hate , he knew perfectly well that school shooting was real

You think CCDH is not hate, they knew perfectly well their tweets were not "random", nor representative of Twitter.

Musk still a whiny baby snowflake , can't handle criticism .

Free speech has never encompassed intentional lies to damage someone's reputation.

Cracks me up MAGA people praising Putin etc .

Is that why Joe Biden dropped Trump's sanctions on Russia, gave Putin back his gas pipeline to Europe, then went on live national TV and green-lighted a "minor incursion" by Russia into Ukraine?

 

[Uncle Al]

I hope he fails soon, he has been nothing but bad news for the social media universe .....

 

[lonetac]

Its great how musk wanted X so he could make it free speech friendly and then proceeded to censor everything he doesnt like.

Classic.

 

[Phatso]

Was on X for a while... Pictures of dead kids, parents wailing... that stuff affects you... and not in a good way. To think our children had front row access to that unmoderated horror is terrifying to consider.

THAT is what needs to be moderated...our kids nor people in general need to see the horrors that Hamas did to the Israelis...nor should people be posting pictures of war...war is hell and the ones that start a war need to be eliminated...especially when it's a terrorist attack that kills over 1200 innocent people...those pictures have no place in a normal society...except to try and cause hatred toward the country that is finally trying to eradicate the threat...