Twitter’s New Coke Moment

Last night, for no discernible reason  that even the savviest tech watchers can think of (okay fine, an illogical reason involving block retaliations), Twitter announced a change to their blocking policy that would allow blocked users to view and even interact with the tweets of those who had previously frozen them out.

While the blocker would not be able to see the tweets of the blockee, the change was essentially turning the block feature into more of a mute button rather than a tinted window. One user compared the change to a home security system that allowed intruders into your house, but put a blindfold over your eyes so you wouldn’t know they were there. Once the word spread, petitions went around immediately and the Twitterati could be seen flipping out all over the stream and around the blogosphere.

Upon learning of the new blocking functionality and witnessing the outrage, I had a hunch that this change in policy wouldn’t last long.


Turns out 90 days would be more like 90 minutes.

Within a couple of hours of the original announcement, Twitter said “forget it” and changed the policy back to how it was.

This about-face was in direct response to the uproar amongst their users. As both a shareholder and a user of the service, I believe they did the right thing. The other alternative – to dig in their heels defensively or to stall for time and measure what effect, if any, this would have on engagement, would have probably been a disaster. I’m glad that management was quick to respond to what their customers wanted; social media firms need to be social entities first and foremost, and that means empathy with the consumer of the service.

timenewcoke-copyThere is precedenct for this sort of thing – a consumer brand quickly realizing and correcting a strategic snafu.

On April 23rd, 1985, a press conference was convened at Lincoln Center in New York City to announce one of the most sacrilegious business decisions ever made by a consumer brand. The original formula for Coca-Cola, then approaching its 100th anniversary, was being tossed out in favor of a newer, sweeter, “bolder” beverage in order to counteract the market share gains of the rival soft drink maker PepsiCo. The assembled press, under the influence of Pepsi’s marketing people and their own distrust, did not share the executives’ enthusiasm although Wall Street bid up the stock initially.

But the public reaction as a different story. Within a week, awareness of the change was said to be over 80% and the backlash was more incendiary than any seen before or since in the annals of American corporate history. The company received over 400,000 written letters about the change that ranged from despondency to outright threats. Even those who admitted to liking the taste of New Coke were furious over the betrayal and the sense that something elemental in their lives was being tampered with.

Within less than 90 days, the Coca-Cola corporation capitulated. By June 11th, the company had jump-started full production of the original formula, rebranding it as Coca-Cola Classic (a marketing triumph every bit as historic as the epic fail that led to it). Customers forgave them and by the end of that year, Coke Classic was outselling both New Coke (which would eventually die of neglect) and Pepsi, which had been eating steadily into Coke’s share of the soft drink business for almost forty years.

The average Twitter user is probably waking up this morning and reading about what had happened, but there’s been zero discernible effect on their lives. Had Twitter allowed the backlash to grow in intensity overnight, this morning’s news cycle would have been filled with Facebook-style handwringing over “privacy” concerns and online security (an oxymoron, but shhhh, don’t tell anyone).

I believe that Twitter’s response was the right one and that the company has learned a great deal about their “customers” in the process. Coca-Cola was nearing one hundred years old when it made the fateful decision to mess with the building blocks of its core product, Twitter is less than ten.

Cut ’em some slack.

Twitter’s official announcement below:

Reverting the changes to block functionality (Twitter)



This content, which contains security-related opinions and/or information, is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon in any manner as professional advice, or an endorsement of any practices, products or services. There can be no guarantees or assurances that the views expressed here will be applicable for any particular facts or circumstances, and should not be relied upon in any manner. You should consult your own advisers as to legal, business, tax, and other related matters concerning any investment.

The commentary in this “post” (including any related blog, podcasts, videos, and social media) reflects the personal opinions, viewpoints, and analyses of the Ritholtz Wealth Management employees providing such comments, and should not be regarded the views of Ritholtz Wealth Management LLC. or its respective affiliates or as a description of advisory services provided by Ritholtz Wealth Management or performance returns of any Ritholtz Wealth Management Investments client.

References to any securities or digital assets, or performance data, are for illustrative purposes only and do not constitute an investment recommendation or offer to provide investment advisory services. Charts and graphs provided within are for informational purposes solely and should not be relied upon when making any investment decision. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The content speaks only as of the date indicated. Any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects, and/or opinions expressed in these materials are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by others.

Wealthcast Media, an affiliate of Ritholtz Wealth Management, receives payment from various entities for advertisements in affiliated podcasts, blogs and emails. Inclusion of such advertisements does not constitute or imply endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation thereof, or any affiliation therewith, by the Content Creator or by Ritholtz Wealth Management or any of its employees. Investments in securities involve the risk of loss. For additional advertisement disclaimers see here:

Please see disclosures here.

What's been said:

Discussions found on the web
  1. Eat Verts commented on Sep 22

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More on to that Topic: […]

  2. bitcoin evolution review commented on Sep 24

    … [Trackback]

    […] There you will find 83147 additional Information on that Topic: […]

  3. bitcoin era login commented on Sep 30

    … [Trackback]

    […] Information to that Topic: […]

  4. agile devops commented on Nov 05

    … [Trackback]

    […] Find More on that Topic: […]

  5. Buy weed online commented on Nov 21

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More Info here to that Topic: […]

  6. custom wig units commented on Nov 28

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More Information here on that Topic: […]

  7. what is intelligent automation commented on Nov 28

    … [Trackback]

    […] Information to that Topic: […]

  8. Sexy video commented on Dec 28

    … [Trackback]

    […] Info to that Topic: […]

  9. replica watches commented on Dec 29

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More on on that Topic: […]

  10. cbd for anxiety you can smoke commented on Jan 02

    … [Trackback]

    […] Info on that Topic: […]

  11. Regression Testing Services commented on Jan 18

    … [Trackback]

    […] Find More Information here to that Topic: […]

  12. judi slot online commented on Jan 25

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More on to that Topic: […]