Paying for Verified Blue Checkmarks Could Hurt Brands and Retailers

Twitter Paused Blue Subscriptions to Halt Fraud

After acquiring Twitter for $44 billion in 2022, Elon Musk publicized the idea of paying for the coveted blue checkmark, which was met with mixed reactions from the public.

This was one of many measures taken by the billionaire to restore the company to profitability. Meta also followed suit by allowing users on Facebook and Instagram to apply for the prestigious blue checkmark.

Almost a year later, Twitter not only fully launched the opportunity, but it also introduced a new label for verified accounts, making it harder to distinguish between those who were verified through the platform’s original process and those who paid for the verification badge. The newfound accessibility to the verification badge, which once conferred status and power, has sparked a debate on whether paying for verification will benefit or harm brands and retailers.

What the Blue Checkmark Stands For

Verified accounts on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook are considered authoritative sources and are marked with a blue checkmark. In the past, accounts were verified based on a set of criteria that these social platforms deemed necessary for a user to be considered influential or important.

With prestige and a newfound class, if you will, come some additional perks. Verification can be valuable for brands seeking credibility and trustworthiness.

“A verified social media account provides instant social proof and credibility when anyone looks up to you or your company online,” entrepreneur and author Neil Patel told Forbes in 2021. “Verification can also help with networking and push your company to your industry’s forefront as a trusted option.”

By obtaining the blue checkmark, a brand can increase its social media presence organically and protect itself from imposters.

Moreover, having the blue checkmark can increase a brand’s conversion rate. When consumers are deciding between a verified and unverified brand, they are more likely to select the verified option. This can make a significant impact on a brand’s success. Brand verification leads to  more meaningful connections with customers, greater brand visibility and awareness.

Nonetheless, the checkmark was labeled as a highly coveted asset that proved difficult to acquire, prompting some individuals to resort to desperate measures.

How the Blue Checkmark Ended up on the Black Market

An article published by Mashable in 2017 sheds light on the high value placed on Instagram verification. Aside from offering users prominent search result placement and exclusive features, the verification badge serves as a symbol of status. Mashable aptly described it as “Instagram’s velvet rope.”

The article also delved into Instagram’s role in creating the black market for verification. Unlike Facebook and Twitter, where users can submit a request for verification, Instagram has made the process exclusive and thus, somewhat elitist. Even influencers who have received press coverage and collaborated with major brands on sponsorship deals have reported difficulty in obtaining the coveted blue checkmark on Instagram. Verified and unverified individuals who have sold verification also attest to this.

At the time, dealers were charging between $1,500 to $7,000 for each verification request. As a result, social media platforms are gradually warming up to the idea of monetizing the verification process, particularly as these technology giants face challenges in meeting their quarterly revenue targets.

Why Paying Is a Problem for Brands and Retailers

While initially making the paying for the verification mark mainstream seems like a win-win for both social media giants and brands and retailers, it could lead to a deterioration of an asset that once provided prestige and notoriety.

The new Twitter policy, specifically, has raised concerns about the legitimacy of verified accounts as some Twitter users argued that allowing people to buy verification badges will diminish the value of the blue checkmark, making it harder to trust the authenticity of an account’s content. Twitter user John Scott-Railton said, “NEW: did they pay $8 or are they a legacy verified #bluecheckmark? Twitter’s new change means you don’t know. End of an era,” in a tweet.

Another viewpoint is that paying for verification can be a strategic decision for brands and retailers aiming to establish credibility and increase their followers. For some companies, the blue checkmark acts as a seal of approval, assuring potential customers that they are dealing with a legitimate business. In this sense, paying for verification may benefit smaller businesses or startups seeking recognition and credibility in a highly competitive market.

However, larger brands may not reap the same advantages, as they may have already established credibility and brand recognition. Furthermore, with such accessibility to the blue checkmark, paying for the blue checkmark could now create another new crowded market and an oversaturation of blue checkmarks.

The saturation of blue checkmarks may lead to doubts about authenticity, potentially resulting in decreased consumer trust and spending. And if consumers begin to undervalue the blue checkmark, it could negatively impact their purchasing decisions with brands and retailers that possess verified accounts. The possibility of this scenario could become a reality if Twitter, Facebook or Instagram does not enforce a rigorous verification process for those who pay for it. In the absence of strict criteria, it could become easier for fraudulent accounts to obtain the highly coveted verification.

Conversely, if consumers maintain their confidence in verified accounts, it could result in increased spending on products and services promoted by those accounts.

Ultimately, the impact of paid badges will depend on the enforcement of a rigorous verification process to maintain the authenticity and value of the blue checkmark.

For all PYMNTS retail coverage, subscribe to the daily Retail Newsletter.