twitter blue tick

Trust but verify is a common adage often used to highlight the importance of confirming the information provided before it is assumed true. While the digital landscape is being increasingly contested, it is becoming equally difficult to determine the authenticity of the information which is available on digital platforms, particularly social media platforms.

Over the years, Twitter has emerged as one of the most trustworthy social media platforms due to the verified accounts of notable celebrities, politicians, governmental departments and multilateral organisations. Twitter’s ‘Blue Tick’ verification system allowed users to authenticate that the account actually belonged to the person/organisation claiming it. As a result, many governmental organisations safely used the platform to make important announcements for faster outreach to citizens. However, as per its new policy, Twitter has conditioned the blue verification mark to a USD 8 subscription.

In the last week, Twitter started removing the verification marks of its legacy verified accounts (those who acquired blue ticks before Elon Musk purchased the platform last year). Resultantly, even popular accounts such as Bill Gates, Pope Francis, and Cristiano Ronaldo were not spared and lost the authentication marks that distinguished them from their parody accounts. Strangely though, many ‘blue tickers’ still somehow have the mark even without subscribing to it.

The removal of Twitter’s verification mark creates fresh obstacles for the platform as it was a symbol of authenticity that distinguished genuine accounts from fraudulent ones. However, removing the verification mark from thousands of accounts while offering primary subscription services introduces several complications for the platform, particularly in combatting misinformation. The recent fake news coming from Sudan is a testament to this. A fake but verified twitter account of the ‘Rapid Support Forces’ – a paramilitary force fighting in Sudan – tweeted about the death of its leader, Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, otherwise known as ‘Hemedti’ during the combat.  As per Twitter’s own statistics, the tweet was seen by one million users. Surprisingly, the account claiming the death had a blue tick, whereas the actual account of the ‘Rapid Support Force’ was no longer verified. 

Similar events were witnessed in November 2022 when Elon Musk announced that anyone could get a blue verification mark via subscription. Scores of parody accounts popped up after individuals purchased the Twitter subscription and started propagating fake news, such as insulin being free from a verified account of Eli Lilly and Company (a pharmaceutical company). With just a nine-word tweet saying, ‘We are excited to announce that Insulin is now free’, Eli Lilly’s share price sank 4 per cent the next day after the fake tweet. Likewise, erroneous news of a coup d’état in Brazil was spread or a Tesla crashing into the World Trade Center by a parody verified account of Tesla itself. These incidents highlight the harm caused by the misuse of the verification mark.

While the blue tick has been reinstated for the legacy accounts with over one million followers, and government handles have been given a special verified feature, the problem remains on the table – thousands of organisations, including news organisations around the world, use Twitter to disseminate important information. Several of these accounts are considerably important even if they do not cross the one million target in terms of followers. While they may eventually opt for the blue badges/ticks, the issue of parody accounts remains a challenge. These accounts can easily purchase the subscription and use the verification badges to legitimise false information.

The removal of the verification mark, coupled with the subscription offer, can also erode users’ trust in the authenticity of the accounts they follow. Moreover, making verification a feature that anyone could avail by simply paying a fee also undermines the process itself. Hence, users may be less confident regarding the information available on the platform – something that may adversely impact user engagement. Conversely, while Twitter is often considered a rather elitist platform, only those who can afford to pay will be verified. This could create a two-tier system where some users are perceived to be more legitimate or trustworthy than others simply because they have a verification mark. Paid verification would also make it easier for scammers to deceive users by making fake accounts look more legitimate. This could lead to an increase in scams and other fraudulent activities on the platform.

Although Twitter’s recent policy change may seem minor, it holds significant importance and is likely to have further implications in the future. This change should serve as a reminder to internet users to exercise critical thinking when encountering questionable content on any digital platform. It is crucial to verify the source and accuracy of digital content before accepting it as true, as the reliability of information is becoming increasingly ambiguous over time, whether or not a traditional blue verification badge is present.

Shaza Arif is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad, Pakistan. The article was first published in Modern Diplomacy.She can be reached at: [email protected]


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The West: The History of an Idea

The world is witnessing the collapse of the Western order, if not the emergence of an alternative one. The idea of ‘West’ as against the rest is still at the root of contemporary understanding of world politics. Georgios Varouxakis, a remarkable voice on Modernity and Nationalism, has provided the historical origins and modern connotations attached with the idea of ‘West’. In his book ‘The West: The History of an Idea’, Varouxakis has argued that the West is not an eternal entity, rather it is a modern socio-political construct that emerged in the political philosophy of the early 19th century and evolved with the passage of time. The book provides an in-depth historical analysis of the idea to determine the roots of its modern interpretation.

Read More »

Space-Enabled Warfare in the 21st Century: Pathways for Developing States

Space has emerged as a distinct domain of warfare alongside land, sea, air, and cyber. Developed countries like the United States, Russia, and China possess offensive and support capabilities in space. In the shadowed expanse of Low Earth Orbit (LEO), where satellites operate like silent custodians, the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine transformed the nature of modern conflict. As Russian troops marched forward, the commercial satellites like Maxar and Planet, which are operated by Western firms, captured high-resolution imagery of Russian troops, providing real-time intelligence to Ukrainian commanders, unlike ever before.

Read More »

The US-Israel War on Iran: Objectives, Strategy, and Escalation Management

Zahra Niazi
‘States tend to overestimate themselves or the benefits and swiftness of war, and to underestimate their opponents’ capabilities, intentions, or the costs and duration of war.’ If anything, the 2026 war initiated by the United States and Israel against Iran shall be remembered in the annals of warfare among the most visible manifestations of this dynamic.
The war, immediately preceded by the January mass protests in Iran, did not represent a sudden rupture but rather the continuation of a 47-year-long confrontation and a more intense phase of the June 2025 war.
The US Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, defined the war’s objectives as being laser-focused: to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities and its security infrastructure, while ensuring that it could never develop nuclear weapons. Beyond these stated objectives, among the priorities on the continuum also lay the objective of regime change, with both President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu explicitly calling on the Iranian population to take over the government at the outset of the war.

Read More »