The Xification of Twitter | The Seattle Times

I’ve (well-managed) arthritis and take ache reducers day-after-day. I usually purchase generic acetaminophen; however many individuals nonetheless purchase brand-name Tylenol, regardless that it prices far more.

There’s a long-running debate amongst economists about why individuals are keen to pay a premium for identify manufacturers. Some emphasize ignorance — one influential examine discovered that well being professionals are extra doubtless than the general public at massive to purchase generic painkillers, as a result of they understand that they’re simply as efficient as identify manufacturers. Others counsel that there could also be a rational calculation concerned: The standard of identify manufacturers could also be extra dependable, as a result of the homeowners of those manufacturers have a popularity to protect. It doesn’t must be either-or; the story behind the model premium might rely on the product.

What’s clear is that model names that for no matter purpose encourage buyer loyalty have actual worth to the corporate that owns them and shouldn’t be modified casually.

So what the heck does Elon Musk, the proprietor of TAFKAT — the app previously often known as Twitter — assume he’s doing, altering the platform’s identify to X, with a brand new brand many individuals, myself included, discover troubling?

It’s vital to differentiate between company rebranding — altering the official identify of an organization — and altering the names of the corporate’s merchandise. Google renamed itself Alphabet, presumably to convey to traders its aspiration to be greater than a search engine, however the search engine itself remains to be named Google. Philip Morris renamed itself Altria, presumably partly to decrease its perceived affiliation with lung most cancers, however its clients nonetheless smoke Marlboros.

Altering product names is extra problematic, as a result of it dangers dropping buyer loyalty, so it tends to occur solely when there’s an actual drawback with the prevailing identify. It was undoubtedly a good suggestion to alter the identify of Bib-Label Lithiated Lemon-Lime Soda to 7UP. It’s really outstanding that it took PepsiCo so lengthy to comprehend that in an America that has modified (for the higher), the Aunt Jemima model identify needed to go. However absent such good causes, wise companies hold the model names their clients hold shopping for.

So what was incorrect with Twitter as a model identify? Nothing, so far as I can inform. It was pleasant sounding and a bit humorous, and resonated with the function of the platform as a spot for folks to chatter about quite a lot of topics. The Twitter brand was additionally fantastic — distinctive, immediately recognizable and with none apparent damaging connotations.

However Musk has nonetheless ditched all of that in favor of X, a harsh-sounding identify with no relationship to what the platform does.

Moreover, the brand new brand — a barely embellished model of the letter X — is problematic in a number of methods. It most likely can’t be trademarked, as a result of it’s kind of indistinguishable from a lowercase x in an present font. Many TAFKAT customers say that they’re embarrassed by the emblem, which makes them really feel as in the event that they’re visiting a porn web site. My response was a bit totally different. To me, and I’m certain others, the brand new brand has the vibes of an authoritarian political image, just like the Z emblem of Russians invading Ukraine — or another historic symbols I’m certain you may consider.

Trendy companies usually give quite a lot of thought to selecting model names and logos. So what was Musk considering together with his renaming of TAFKAT? It’s actually onerous to see any enterprise rationale for junking a superbly good model identification and changing it with a reputation and brand virtually everybody finds off-putting.

Effectively, every thing we all know means that he principally wasn’t considering. For some purpose he has at all times had a factor in regards to the letter X — his rocket firm is SpaceX and he tried to get PayPal to rename itself X.com (and was ousted as CEO instantly afterward, maybe as a result of his colleagues thought it gave the impression of, sure, a porn web site). And that terrible brand didn’t undergo the standard design course of (Twitter’s fowl brand advanced over seven years). It was casually outsourced — he requested his followers to counsel symbols and selected one he favored.

However then, Musk’s sudden change of brand name identify and image, with no clear rationale, suits the sample of every thing else he’s achieved at TAFKAT.

He clearly suffers from a extreme case of Tech Bro Syndrome, that bizarre mixture of hubris and conspiracy theorizing so prevalent in his social set. He accused Twitter of censoring conservatives, ignoring the fact that in a MAGA-ridden nation any try to restrict the unfold of harmful misinformation will hit the precise more durable than the left. He bought Twitter within the perception that his private brilliance might simply make the corporate worthwhile, no want for onerous serious about enterprise technique.

And he’s been flailing wildly ever since.

Will the Xification of Twitter lastly be a flail too far? Social networks are usually particularly sturdy as a result of — like worldwide currencies — they profit from self-reinforcement: Individuals use them as a result of different folks use them. It would take many unhealthy choices to push TAFKAT to the tipping level the place folks abandon it for an additional platform.

However Musk is engaged on it.