X Factor: Will X be the last nail in Twitters coffin?

Twitter has been through a storm in the last few years. From financial turbulences to a transpiration of captain— when Mr. Musk took over – to mass layoffs, Twitter has seen it all and, surprisingly, has somehow survived it. During each of these crises, it was widely felt that the bluebird would finally closure chirping, but the social media platform has tackled every rencontre and has managed to alimony its throne whilom the water. The bluebird kept chirping.

Surviving Threads, tamed by X?

Many predicted that it was finally time to shepherd Twitter’s funeral when Meta released the platform’s competitor recently. Threads, which moreover presents itself as a microblogging social media site and saw a record number of sign-ups in just a few hours of stuff launched. But plane that did not seem to put a substantial wafer in Twitter’s popularity. But just when we thought the storm had passed and Twitter’s troubled days were overdue the social media platform, a trademark new issue reared its head.

In a very unreticent yet typical Musk move, the Twitter owner decided to rename the popular microblogging site to X. Yes, just that one letter, X! It is perhaps the strangest transpiration in nomenclature overly since waddle star Prince reverted his name to an unpronounceable symbol, and asked to be referred to as “The Artist Formerly Known as Prince.”

One surprise too many from Musk?

The Tesla Man decided that it would be a unconfined idea to take a well-established name, brand, and logo and dump it in the bin as if it had never existed. And replaced it with a name as random as X. The move is unquestionably quite in line with his profile. The tech billionaire has been known for and is quite popular for, his seemingly hasty, spur-of-the-moment decisions. Right from flirting with the idea of ownership Twitter, then unquestionably ownership it last October for USD 44 billion, and then firing what 75 percent of Twitter’s total workforce was, it has been pretty much one surprise/ shock without flipside from Musk.

So the visualization to transpiration Twitter’s name itself does not seem out of keeping with Musk’s nature. In fact, it is perfectly in line with his track record. Twitter’s CEO, Linda Yaccarino, mentioned how X will be the “future state of ultimate interactivity,” which seems like a half-baked subtitle given to the world. This is somewhat in line with the “super app” idea that Musk has been teasing users with. With hands on our hearts, we are all for an app that does it all. A super app that takes on all the other evil apps out there and brings those who are wronged by these apps to justice.

We just have one question: why transpiration Twitter? And take yonder the one thing that was probably the biggest windfall of the platform– its identity.

Is Twitter committing suicide?

As per analysts, the trademark Twitter vacated (not the company) might be worth somewhere virtually USD 15-USD 20 Billion, while many believe that the visitor itself might not be worth that much. This is whimsically surprising, considering the weather virtually Twitter has been very cloudy for some time now, and the new policies that Musk has recently introduced have not been quite as popular amongst users as he may have hoped they would be.

From introducing the paid undecorous tick to limiting the number of Tweets one can view in an hour to limiting DMs, Twitter has been making some policy waves that, at times, seemed scrutinizingly designed to momentum users yonder from the site. But the visualization to rename the trademark as X has to be one of the biggest blows the platform has taken in sometime now. And if you have given the text whilom a glance, you’d know surviving has not been easy for Twitter. Some are plane saying that with this move, the trademark is committing suicide. And they may not be wrong. This wrong-headed rebranding may as well be the last nail in Twitter’s coffin.

The perfect name becomes an ex!

Before you think we are stuff too negative, hear us through. Twitter was perhaps the most correct, most towardly name for a microblogging site, and the undecorous bird logo was unshared and served the right purpose. Without all, isn’t a tweet supposed to be short like a chirp, and isn’t a lot of news and conversation attributed to “a little bird told us?” Twitter was the right name with the right mascot and the right logo in place – the brand’s name and logo reflected what its product was about. Compare that with the likes of Google or Amazon. Yes, we have gotten used to them and know what they represent, but these trademark names do not seem to indicate what the products and services associated with them are really about. Twitter was a rarity in an industry whose most powerful trademark was named without a fruit!

But what can X be identified with? It has no real positive or negative connotation. It neither says anything well-nigh the trademark or the site that it represents. It literally could midpoint anything– XYZ!! In fact, in mathematics, the letter ‘x’ is literally used to represent something that is unknown. The letter is moreover famous for stuff used for suppressed information (The X-Files) and the sultana entertainment industry (X-rated). Whimsically the sort of undertone you wanted a super popular social network to have.

A very odd rechristening

It is not as if other tech brands have not rebranded over the years or reverted names. The most famous examples in recent times are Facebook and Google, when they reverted the name of their parent companies to Meta and Alphabet, respectively. But the difference here is that they did not go and transpiration the name of the cadre services of Facebook or Google itself, but just the name of the overall trademark under which they came – Google’s Search page still reads “Google,” and not “Alphabet.” The iconic “G” might have got increasingly colors but is still “G” and not “A,” and Facebook’s undecorous “F” remains unchanged.

Contrast that with Twitter, where the iconic undecorous bird has been replaced by a pair of diagonally intersecting lines representing an ‘X.’ Interestingly, the URL still reads www.twitter.com (you are taken to www.twitter.com plane if you try to go to www.x.com), and every posting is still tabbed a “tweet,” and you still have “retweets.” All of this seems to indicate that the rebranding was washed-up in a hurry and perhaps not really communicated wideness the board. Again, not really what a social network facing a lot of flak needs.

Perhaps having a parent visitor named X would have been the transpiration Twitter needed. It would have created the right kind of buzz, made the right headlines, and brought Twitter the right kind of attention. That separate visitor could have been the start of “the ultimate” app that people at Twitter are so keen on creating. All of which makes perfect sense. But that is not what has happened. Musk has gone and reverted the name of the service itself.

RIP, Twitter – in name, at least!

The whole problem with the renaming of Twitter is that we do not understand the need to transpiration something that was not plane remotely broken. God knows Twitter had its share of problems plane surpassing Musk took over. From content moderation issues to fake news to policies that seemed unable to prorogue online bullying, abuse, and harassment, Twitter was all over the place. However, no one was offended by or objected to its name or logo. When Musk took over, there was a small segment of the tech polity that was hopeful that perhaps this would be a good thing. Perhaps a new, fresh leader is what the social media platform needs to solve its problems.

But instead of solving those issues, it seems like the unpredictable billionaire is subtracting to them and continues to do so. X is just flipside brick in that problematic wall he is towers virtually the social network. It could well be the last nail in Twitter’s coffin. In terms of nomenclature, it might once be.