This is a clear sign. If you get thousands of responses on Twitter, and no interest whatsoever on your personal platform, your only value to those who used to engage is the spectacle you created in that other environment. Nobody cared about what Trump was saying - they only cared about the excitement in the responses.
Twenty year old blog technology with no social aspect (and fake upvote buttons) is hardly spectacular. It's not the game changer he promised.
I kept hearing about this blog he started, but had absolutely no idea where it lived. I think I once tried to Google it, but the results were all news articles about the blog and I didn’t care to try to look any further.
Bizarrely, the "blogs" are still preserved on the current website but have been transformed into press releases(?) under the News section[1] with each post titled "Statement by Donald J. Trump, 45th President of the United States of America".
I absolutely detest Trump and fully supported his removal from any and all platforms run by private companies much earlier than it happened, HOWEVER this is yet another indicator that our world runs through monopolies.
They're holding back everything, including shareholders. Break. Them. Up.
>HOWEVER this is yet another indicator that our world runs through monopolies.
It indicates nothing of the sort. His site was on the public web, freely accessible to anyone with a browser. It was being shared on social media. There were no "monopolies" holding him back, rather, he's no longer politically relevant, so his garbage content isn't worth covering, and his base has all but lost interest in him.
Possibly a bit more, but not much more. Certainly not the kind of attention they did prior.
Being President was the reason for his popularity, not being on Twitter. He was tweeting from a personal account that he had prior to running, which no one cared about until he got into office and decided to make it his primary means of communication with the public. His content on Twitter was no better than on his blog, but when your shitposting can start a riot or maybe a war, people have to care.
Yes, I do believe that, contrary to the narrative, Donald Trump no longer being President has more of an effect on his messaging power than his site not being hosted on one of the social media silos.
Building it is easy. Getting people to subscribe to it (creating an account, downloading an app, etc) is really, really, really hard. So is getting them to check it often enough to not forget about it.
Social networks are natural monopolies. You go where your friends already are. Once there, you tend to stay there, rather than going through the whole process again on some other site.
In this case he appears to have half-assed it. It's not impossible that his following was devoted enough to jump through those hoops. He'd have needed a catchy app and a constant stream of content to make it engaging. Maybe a whole Twitter clone ecosystem might have done it, but that comes with a ton of headaches. (Even the free-est speech platform doesn't like being overrun with spammers, for example.)
Instead, he seems to have counted on his notoriety to do all of the work, and that was surely not going to cut it.
But if he just creates a platform where he can post his short screeds and people can view, subscribe and interact, surely his followers would want to install an app for that? You don’t even need accounts if all you want is read and get notifications.
Perhaps his followers are less enthousiast than they appear on tv but surely installing an app has to be less of an effort than putting down a sign or joining a protest march, right?
That wouldn't explain cutting off the pre-show before the final act hits the stage. The blog failed, and any gap will just further himself from any potential audience.
Trump realizing what the rest of the blogosphere figured out a decade ago. The audience has been surrendered to Twitter and FB, and they aren't coming back.
36 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 84.7 ms ] threadTwenty year old blog technology with no social aspect (and fake upvote buttons) is hardly spectacular. It's not the game changer he promised.
[1]https://www.donaldjtrump.com/news
They're holding back everything, including shareholders. Break. Them. Up.
It indicates nothing of the sort. His site was on the public web, freely accessible to anyone with a browser. It was being shared on social media. There were no "monopolies" holding him back, rather, he's no longer politically relevant, so his garbage content isn't worth covering, and his base has all but lost interest in him.
Being President was the reason for his popularity, not being on Twitter. He was tweeting from a personal account that he had prior to running, which no one cared about until he got into office and decided to make it his primary means of communication with the public. His content on Twitter was no better than on his blog, but when your shitposting can start a riot or maybe a war, people have to care.
Yes, I do believe that, contrary to the narrative, Donald Trump no longer being President has more of an effect on his messaging power than his site not being hosted on one of the social media silos.
- Trump is still immensely popular, and in fact is the Republican party
- Pelosi failing to provide additional Capitol security on Jan. 6 caused the riot, not the other way around
- what you believe doesn't match reality.
Trump's blog was styled like Twitter, complete with a "like" icon on each post. The button was broken; clicking it didn't do anything.
https://twitter.com/errorsgalore/status/1389741353144365056
Social networks are natural monopolies. You go where your friends already are. Once there, you tend to stay there, rather than going through the whole process again on some other site.
In this case he appears to have half-assed it. It's not impossible that his following was devoted enough to jump through those hoops. He'd have needed a catchy app and a constant stream of content to make it engaging. Maybe a whole Twitter clone ecosystem might have done it, but that comes with a ton of headaches. (Even the free-est speech platform doesn't like being overrun with spammers, for example.)
Instead, he seems to have counted on his notoriety to do all of the work, and that was surely not going to cut it.
Perhaps his followers are less enthousiast than they appear on tv but surely installing an app has to be less of an effort than putting down a sign or joining a protest march, right?
Twitter allowed him to reach reporters who read, spread, and amplified whatever he tweeted.
I suppose Mike Lindell can help with that. He has recent relevant experience.
also, there was atleast one nation state deeply invested in keeping trump believing he was popular on twitter.
They can, but they're just not interested
I'd guess same is true of fans of every politician
Just moreso with trump
The medium is the message
You can't reproduce the hatred and clown show asthetic with long blobs of text
You need tv
Twitter
Anything inherently devoid of the possibility of meaningful conversation, thinking, thoughtfulness, etc.