Talk:Social media

Archives

---

1

Couldn't Wikimedia take the lead when it comes to social media decentralization

I just noticed that the Wikimedia Foundation profile on Mastodon is very inactive compared to X profile. Taking into account a recent example, where more than 20 million users had to flee from X due to its criminal practices, wouldn't it make sense and be used as an opportunity to reach the audience that is migrating to the Fediverse?

The Wikimedia Foundation seems to be aligned with some core ideas related to decentralization (e.g. chapters and user groups), not to mention its long-standing voice in the open source world and against disinformation, which seems to be an important goal o X and its owner? @Everton137 Tom (talk) 13:56, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

+1 Kaffeeringe (talk) 14:20, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Everton137. Thanks for your question!

The official Mastodon account for the Wikimedia Foundation, as well as the Mastodon instance, is managed by the Wikimedia Foundation’s Product & Technology Department, while X/Twitter is maintained by the Communications Department, so you’re right in noting the cadence may not be the same. We are working with them to figure out the right pace of posting, and understand the flag around activity. As mentioned in the “About” section, the instance is “primarily used as a space for people to connect and talk about tech related topics”.

With our social media work, we try to meet people where they are. This means that we are always exploring and monitoring these social media platforms to evaluate our presence in different channels, including on Twitter/X. Despite the recent changes, there are still many Wikimedia volunteers that maintain a presence there. This is why we are active as well: to respond to volunteer needs and amplify movement messages, and to help our goal of creating awareness of the free knowledge movement. Thank you! LPasqual (WMF) (talk) 15:38, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

P. S. someone just pointed out this page Wikis World, which is connected to my question. --Tom (talk) 14:19, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes @wikipedia@wikis.world is the account that everyone follows (currently about 24K followers). It's run by a team of community volunteers. It's really surprising that it isn't even mentioned on this page. Nosferattus (talk) 00:48, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

This page is about the social media accounts run by Wikimedia Foundation, rather than the volunteer community. SCP-2000 03:08, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

If that's true, the page should be titled WMF social media. Nosferattus (talk) 16:21, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Just to build on this, I don't know which group is responsible for the Bluesky accounts for Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation, but neither are currently active as the platform recently passed 15 million accounts and is already well on its way to 20 million. It would be great to see these accounts become active. These accounts could also switch to using custom domains in order to be a bit more official looking. – OdinintheNorth (talk) 20:08, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

I just posted a question about that at Talk:Microblogging handles § Domain for Bluesky (wasn't sure where the best venue was). ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email · w:en) 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @OdinintheNorth, thanks for your suggestions. We are experimenting with publishing content on other platforms, including TikTok, Bluesky, and Threads, to follow our overall social media strategy of meeting our audiences where they are. At this stage, these experiments will help us determine whether any of these channels should be incorporated into our daily content output in the future. Thank you! LPasqual (WMF) (talk) 11:54, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

We should experiment also with 4chan. They are in the same mood and there's lot of people there. Theklan (talk) 15:52, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Would the SAL bot meet guidelines for hosting on Wikimedia.Social?

Stashbot's @wikimedia_sal@botsin.space account needs to be replaced by 2024-12-15 due to the planned shutdown of botsin.space. The bot makes an unlisted post for each Server Admin Log (SAL) generated for the Wikimedia production network. This looks to be a volume of 200-400 posts per day based on some random spot checking. The bot has not historically had auto deletion setup, but I think it would be reasonable to set a 6-12 month retention limit for it with exceptions for pinned posts.

I would be happy to talk more with anyone on the wikimedia.social side of things who is interested in learning more about the bot or the audience for SAL messages. -- BDavis (WMF) (talk) 16:23, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

@OOnifade-WMF I see you were the person who created the Wikimedia.Social page which includes a link to this talk page as the contact for anyone needing assistance with the project. Would you happen to know who I should ping to get a decision on my question of migrating the SAL fediverse feed to the instance? -- BDavis (WMF) (talk) 23:04, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @BDavis (WMF) please reach out to @DTankersley (WMF). Thank you! OOnifade-WMF (talk) 09:32, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Mischief managed. https://wikimedia.social/@sal will be the bot's next home. Thanks @DTankersley (WMF) and @OOnifade-WMF. -- BDavis (WMF) (talk) 17:04, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

WMF should switch from X to Blue Sky or Mastodon

FYI, please see my proposal here. Thank you. Nosferattus (talk) 07:12, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Nosferattus, thanks for your suggestion and for sharing your concerns. We are constantly evaluating our presence on all social media channels – more lately on Twitter, as you can imagine, due to the most recent events. We are aware of the many brands and publishers leaving the platform entirely in the last few weeks. We are engaged in conversations with experts and other nonprofit organizations to determine our next steps regarding our accounts on Twitter. Many variables factor into this consideration, including our community still being present on the platform. We will ensure our ultimate decision is clear. Thank you! LPasqual (WMF) (talk) 19:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi @LPasqual (WMF). What is the status on this conversation? At this stage, a timeline for taking a decision seems necessary. It's not like the problem would be new! The WMF is feeding a platform which is openly hostile to journalism and the Wikimedia movement. A significant part of the community has already taken its responsibility and migrated to Mastodon, part of it, years ago! What is exactly stopping you to be active on Mastodon from January 2025? Kelson (talk) 19:19, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello @LPasqual (WMF), I, too, would like to hear an update on this topic.

A couple of sidenotes, however: Mastodon is one of the ActivityPub protocols; it has several hundred million active users - more than 75% of which are via Bluesky & Threads. Bluesky is a proprietary protocol, with some benefits, and all Bluesky users can receive Mastodon postings; contrariwise very few Mastodon and no Threads users receive BlueSky. Threads is a propretary implementation of ActivityPub, and Meta's project has chosen to deliberately obfuscate and limit access to the wider fediverse, but all Threads users *can* receive Mastodon postings. Therefore I would encourage the Foundation to use the most-accessible protocol - mastodon - which does not require running a Mastodon server (there are very simple implementations, even embedding within a webpage.) - Amgine/^{meta wikt wnews blog wmf-blog goog news} 19:47, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

I've been tracking migrations away from X to alternative microblogging platforms for some time now. Wikimedia organizations and projects that have already suspended their presence on X include Wikimedia Germany, Switzerland, Netherlands, and Austria, and the Kiwix project. Creative Commons suspended their account last month.

Given Wikimedia's commitment to equity and inclusion, it's worth noting that many organizations that promote equity and inclusion and fight against hate have long left X. That includes the Trevor Project (suicide prevention for LGBTQ+ young folks), GLSEN (anti-bullying organization), Belong To (Irish LGBT Youth organization), the Center for Countering Digital Hate, the German federal anti-disrimination office, and many local or regional LGBTQ+ organizations and clubs.

The reasons are always the same: since Musk has taken over the platform, he has weaponized it to promote his personal and political agenda. In practice, Musk is advancing authoritarian, far-right governments that are willing to align themselves with his commercial interests. This strategy is dependent on entirely separating people from any kind of fact-based thinking, and to advance fear and hatred through decontextualized scapegoating. That fear and hatred can then be politicized.

This approach has now succeeded in the US, and in combination with his vast personal wealth, Musk is advancing the same strategy in the UK, Germany, and other countries. His attacks on Wikimedia, a platform still grounded in facts, must be seen in light of this strategy. It's no coincidence that many of his attacks focus on former Wikimedia ED Katherine Maher, who now heads up NPR, another remaining US institution that still exists in a somewhat fact-based reality. (Incidentally, NPR is no longer on X.)

Arguments to remain on the platform because other Wikimedia-associated people and organizations still are there must be viewed as circular. Social media benefits from a network effect; Wikimedia Foundation remaining on the platform is keeping other people there. Instead, in my view, Wikimedia Foundation should treat Bluesky and Mastodon as its primary microblogging destinations, and make its decision and recommendations known within the Wikimedia movement.--Eloquence (talk) 21:13, 25 December 2024 (UTC)