Inman Connect New York offers the perfect mix of outside-the-box thinkers, cutting-edge leaders, and hard-working, successful agents. Join us January 24-26 for important content, education and networking opportunities to help you thrive in today’s changing marketplace. Register here.
A few weeks ago, a story about the downfall of Airbnb started circulating on TikTok.
The idea was that the short-term rental company was collapsing amid worsening economic conditions.
Inman reported on the story — which social media users dubbed the “Airnbust” — and found the truth was much more nuanced. But significantly, even the experts themselves pushed the idea of ”bust”., and they did it in one place: Twitter. This postponement eventually helped in news coverage of the topic.
The episode highlights how Twitter, at best, functions as a kind of public forum. Users can certainly find themselves in a bubble on the social network. But the platform has fewer walled gardens than Facebook and isn’t algorithmically curated like TikTok’s “About You” page. Over the years Twitter has consequently become a digital home for journalists, business leaders, analysts and other experts who want to speak directly to the public.
So why does this matter?
As anyone who has been watching the news will know, Elon Musk just bought Twitter for $44 billion. The acquisition came after months of shenanigans in which Musk backtracked on the deal, and it ended Thursday when the Tesla and Space X CEO showed up at Twitter headquarters holding a sink — a visual pun he later explained on Twitter that was meant to “let it sink in”.
Entering Twitter HQ – let it sink in! pic.twitter.com/D68z4K2wq7
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 26, 2022
Corporations change leaders all the time, but Musk is no ordinary executive. And his ascension to the top of Twitter has consequently caused Twitter users to clamor that it could jeopardize the site’s usefulness or role as a public forum. Musk is an avid Twitter user himself, and predictions about his eventual impact on Twitter are mixed. But as the Airbnb debate illustrates, Twitter happens to be where some of the most important debates about the housing industry take place. And if Musk rocks the platform, it could ultimately reshape the way the world understands real estate.
Shaking things up
Musk has spent years cultivating a public persona as a kind of celebrity disruptor, often using Twitter to do so. And he seems to be bringing that same ethic to Twitter. Shortly after moving into Twitter headquarters, for example, Musk fired Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal, Chief Financial Officer Ned Segal, and Chief Policy Officer Vijaya Gadde. On Monday, news broke that Musk had disbanded Twitter’s board of directors.
The moves came after Musk reportedly threatened to lay off up to 75 percent of Twitter’s staff before ultimately backing down from the idea — though significant cuts are apparently still in the works.
Sunday, eve also reported that Musk was planning a major change that would directly affect users: He wants to launch a paid subscription service that would cost about $20 a month and provide verification for users. The idea represents a seismic shift for Twitter, which has traditionally been free and offers verification — marked by a blue checkmark displayed next to a user’s name — for public figures such as celebrities and journalists.
More fundamentally, Musk has also framed his Twitter takeover as a move to preserve free speech. Critics have countered that such an orientation could jeopardize the platform’s moderation policies or result in the reinstatement of accounts that were banned for things like abuse or spreading misinformation. The most famous banned account belonged to former President Donald Trump, though he didn’t either neither does Musk have shown whether Trump will return.
Either way, the dismissals, vetting proposal and stated goals suggest the new Chief Twit, as Musk is calling himself, is wasting no time blasting Twitter’s business practices. And he apparently isn’t messing around; according to eveMusk told Twitter employees they have until Nov. 7 to make the new verification concept a reality or they’ll be fired.
The real estate debate
The “Airbnbbust” situation isn’t the only time debates about critical housing issues have taken place on Twitter. Case in point: Redfin CEO Glenn Kelman is a frequent Twitter user and has repeatedly used the platform to discuss racial discrimination in housing. Attention to the topic exploded in 2019 thanks to reports of racial discrimination among agents in Long Island, New York, and then again in 2020 following protests over the killing of George Floyd.
Kelman took to Twitter to directly address the issue, writing in 2019 that “we all have agents who are biased” and urging industry members to “establish a zero tolerance policy for discrimination.”
This can happen in any mediation. We all have biased agents, whether the agents realize it or not. If you’re an agent, send this search to *every* agent in your company. Highlight the main findings. Establish a zero tolerance policy for discrimination.
— Glenn Kelman (@glennkelman) November 19, 2019
In fact, Kelman has used Twitter to talk about race, discrimination and real estate even before the industry’s highest-profile incidents, and it was in part through Twitter that Kelman has made this one of the defining causes he’s focused on while leading Redfin.
Kelman isn’t the only industry professional using Twitter to discuss big issues in housing. Daryl Fairweather AND Taylor Marreconomists working at Redfin discuss the market and in some cases offer a measured voice against some of the more alarming pop culture in the housing market.
Other Leaders from Zillow’s Rich Barton at Side’s Guy Gal are also regular Twitter users.
Among agents, most of the real estate debate takes place elsewhere. Facebook groups such as Inman Coast to Coast and Lab Coat Agents boast thousands of members and routinely have robust discussions about how to handle day-to-day tasks. It’s kind of rare for those kinds of conversations to spread on Twitter.
But Twitter is still the site of choice for high-level executives like Kelman and Barton — both of whom have been vetted from the street — to communicate directly with the public. Professional economists rarely join broker groups on Facebook, leaving Twitter as the best place to see their insights instantly. Analysts like Lane can and do post on other platforms, such as LinkedIn, but Twitter allows their comments to spread more easily across industries and disciplines, potentially amplifying their voices and shaping the larger conversation.
In the short term, all of this is likely to remain the same. Take, for example, it was still housing market tweet information since Monday afternoon. For all the gnashing of teeth during Musk’s takeover, the average user experience hadn’t changed much.
But over time, if Twitter begins to follow Myspace’s trajectory—that is, its gradual decline to the point of irrelevance—it’s hard to imagine another platform offering the same kind of access to executives, economists, journalists, and others. In other words, discussions about some of the most pressing issues in real estate may simply move offline or into digital walled gardens, where fewer people will reach and have a harder time changing real-world circumstances. for good.
If Twitter goes down, I’m fine with that. I’ve never tried to be the best on Twitter.
— Daryl Fairweather (@FairweatherPhD) October 30, 2022
Is the future uncertain?
The past few days have seen a flurry of comments on Musk’s takeover on Twitter. For example, The Atlantic Journalist Charlie Warzel recently wrote in his newsletter how Musk could “kill Twitter.” Warzel’s opinion was that Musk could “bring the platform to its knees” with incompetent management.
However, not everyone was so doom and gloom. Slate argued on Monday that Musk was unlikely to “open the Nazi floodgates on Twitter,” and journalist Josh Barro wrote Friday in his newsletter that Musk may actually be retooling Twitter’s biases to more closely match the general public. .
The point here is that there are essentially two outcomes that people predict. The first — and this is what many current Twitter users are talking about — is that Musk changes the platform so radically that it destroys it.
The second scenario, articulated by Barro and several others, sees a gentler and potentially beneficial change that could make Twitter more accessible to everyday users.
However, it is completely unclear what Musk will do. On Monday for example, he posted a poll asking if people wanted him to bring back Vine, a now-defunct social network that Twitter bought in 2012 and then shut down in 2016. Given how long it’s been since Vine shut down and the fact that TikTok occupies a place similarly now, it’s hard to read Musk’s question as serious — though Axios reported that Twitter engineers were looking at Vine’s code on Monday.
Either way, the comment points out that it’s hard to sort out which of Musk’s comments are serious, which are trolling, and which might be both. Is the vine idea a joke? Maybe. Does that mean it won’t happen? Not necessarily. When Musk is in charge, reality and jokes are not mutually exclusive, as in the case of his consumer-oriented flamethrower.
The upshot is that only time will tell what Musk will do, though Chief Twit himself has hinted that it’s going to be a wild and unpredictable ride.
“Twitter will form a content moderation council with very different perspectives,” he posted on Twitter last week, ago adding just a few hours later that “comedy is now legal on twitter”.
Email Jim Dalrymple II
