Threads one-year anniversary

When Meta launched its new app ‘Threads,’ the hype was that it would be a “Twitter killer.” That’s because Twitter’s new owner, Elon Musk, wasted no time rebranding it as X and turning it into a social media hellscape, which most users seemed desperate to escape.

In other words, Twitter was in its death throes. Threads was supposed to simply put it out of its misery. Today, it’s marking one-year anniversary, inviting an assessment of its performance and impact.

Spoiler Alert: Threads has not lived up to the hype. Frankly, it’s floundering, struggling to capture the essence of what makes social media platforms thrive.

Threads: too much about threading Meta than killing X

Meta made threading Threads seamlessly into Instagram a major marketing feature. To use Threads, you need an existing Instagram account.

Frankly, Meta seems like a club merely creating more activities for its existing members rather than attracting new ones. The flaw inherent in this strategy is that Instagram users are primarily interested in viewing pictures and videos, not engaging in often contentious debates on trending topics, which is the essence of X.

By focusing too much on that existing user base, Threads failed to appeal to a broader audience. This is particularly evident when comparing user numbers: X boasts 550 million monthly active users; Threads has 175 million. Turns out, X’s dumpster fire of “lively discussions” still beats Threads’ sterile echo chamber.

Absence of political content

Meta’s decision to limit political content is even more puzzling than its decision to limit Threads to Instagram users. After all, political discourse and current events are the bread and butter of social media engagement.

Competing with X without this feature is like showing up for a gunfight with a knife.

Meta’s excuse? It wants to avoid controversy and disinformation—X’s hallmarks. That, of course, is patently specious. After all, Meta has the cash and tech to fact-check and moderate. It’s just too cowered by its Cambridge Analytica fiasco to even try.

After all, X is a hate-filled troller’s paradise because Musk fired staff overseeing content moderation. By doing so, he removed all guardrails to uphold acceptable community standards.

What Threads needs to compete with X

At this point, far from killing X, Threads would be lucky just to compete with it. To do so, it must reverse its stance on political content. Meta should market Threads as a platform for civil and informed political discussions, emphasizing brand differentiation from X.

Here’s a wild idea: Threads should try platforming public debates at least as much as it does desensitizing videos that range from the prurient to the macabre. Doing so might appeal to users with more than two brain cells to rub together, distinguishing them from the zoo of keyboard warriors who troll X.

Threads can’t even convince CNN, Fox News, Biden, Modi, or the Kardashian-Jenner circus to join their snooze-fest. No wonder it’s bombing. These news organizations, politicians, and celebrities are the heavy hitters that give social media its pulse, the influencers who could drag millions of eyeballs to Threads overnight.

Without them, Threads is just a sad echo chamber of frustrated Instagram and disillusioned X users. To attract these influencers, Threads must provide an environment conducive to diverse and robust discussions, especially on politics.

Here’s a shocking concept for Threads: Pay people for quality content: revenue sharing, subscriptions – whatever. Open the wallet, and watch the influencers and their mindless followers come running. Money talks, bullshit walks.

Threads: a missed opportunity, but all is not lost

Threads had the potential to be the Twitter killer we all hoped for. And Musk seemed to be inviting the kill shot more than doing everything to blunt it.

Dodging politics has made it a colossal letdown. If Meta wants to play with the big boys, it needs to grow a pair, fix this mess, and create a platform where people actually want to talk.