Threads vs. X: Who Won the Presidential Debate on Social Media?
The 2024 presidential election is upon us, and with it, the inevitable debates that set the stage for heated discussions and political maneuvering. This year, however, the debates have a new battleground: the social media landscape. As the candidates clashed on stage, two of the most prominent platforms—X (formerly Twitter) and Meta’s Threads—were locked in their own duel for dominance. But who ultimately won the hearts and minds of users during this critical moment?
The answer, as with many things in the social media world, is complicated. While X previously reigned supreme as the go-to platform for real-time event coverage, Elon Musk’s controversial ownership has shifted the platform’s focus, leaving some users questioning its credibility and reliability. Threads, a relative newcomer, has presented itself as a more "intelligent" and "engaging" platform, positioning itself as a haven from the often toxic environment of X.
Numbers Tell a Tale, But Not the Whole Story
X currently boasts a larger user base, with Musk claiming 600 million monthly active users, roughly half of which are daily users. While Musk’s claims about user engagement may not be completely transparent, X still outpaces Threads, which has at least 150 million monthly active users. However, third-party data suggests Threads’ user numbers may be significantly higher than Meta’s public announcement.
These disparities in user base translate to a difference in the volume of content shared during the debate. X’s larger user base meant a flood of posts, reactions, and discussions, creating an undeniable sense of real-time energy. While Threads may not have the same volume, many users found the conversations to be more focused and engaging, free from the pervasive "trolls" that have plagued X.
Threads: A Haven for Intellect, or a Lack of Real-Time Engagement?
Many Threads users embraced the platform for its "electric" atmosphere, free from the negativity and misinformation often associated with X. The platform’s stronger community moderation seemed to have filtered out the most offensive content, allowing for a more civilized debate experience. One user, Matthew Facciani, summed up the sentiment: “Threads was a very useful social media platform to follow this presidential debate. My timeline was full of political discussion and real-time updates. I didn’t miss Twitter/X at all.”
However, Threads’ limitations as a real-time news platform surfaced during the debate. While X offered users a dedicated hashtag (#Debates2024) and various topic-specific tags, Threads’ lack of hashtags hampered discoverability. Users who did utilize tags often struggled to find the most relevant conversations, with discussions becoming fragmented across multiple tags instead of coalescing around a single dominant tag.
Threads’ "Trends" feature, designed to highlight trending topics, also lagged behind. While X users could easily find the most discussed topics related to the debate instantly, Threads’ "Trends" did not include the broader "Presidential Debate" topic until an hour after the debate commenced. It instead surfaced topics that emerged during the event, like the economy or age difference between the candidates, but only after the conversation had already started.
This delay in recognizing national conversations like the presidential debate isn’t a new issue for Threads. Earlier this year, Threads failed to instantly identify the New York/New Jersey earthquake as a trending topic, citing its focus on national conversations. However, this explanation seems less plausible for the debate, which arguably falls under the umbrella of national discourse.
X: Familiar Territory, But With a Twist
Despite growing concerns about X’s direction under Musk, the platform still held its own during the debate. The familiar format of hashtags, with its clear organization of topics, allowed users to easily find and participate in conversations relevant to the event. Beyond short-form posting, X’s support for longer-format content allowed for more nuanced and detailed discussions, with some users even crafting blog-style posts within the platform. Notably, tech investor Mark Cuban leveraged X’s format to offer a longer-form analysis of the debate.
However, X’s reputation has tarnished in recent months. Reports of increased far-right activity on the platform, along with suspensions of prominent journalists and political figures, have left many users feeling alienated. This sentiment was evident during the debate, as several high-profile users experienced account lockout issues, hindering their ability to engage in the conversation.
The Verdict: A Divided Landscape
The question of which platform truly "won" the presidential debate on social media remains a subject of debate. X’s sheer volume and familiar format offered a sense of real-time energy, though with a growing undercurrent of concern about its content moderation and platform neutrality. Threads’ emphasis on community and civility created a positive experience for many users, but its limitations in real-time news coverage and discoverability remain a hurdle.
Ultimately, the "winner" may not be determined by one platform alone, but by how each navigates the evolving social media landscape. X’s trajectory under Musk remains uncertain, while Threads’ success hinges on its ability to address its limitations and establish itself as a reliable and engaging alternative. As we move forward in the election cycle, the platforms’ performance will be closely scrutinized, and their ability to foster informed and constructive dialogue will be crucial for shaping the public discourse.
