On Thu, Dec 22, 2022 at 7:46 AM SCP 2000 scp-2000.wikimedia@outlook.com wrote:
FYI, I asked WMF Communication Team about any plans of using Mastodon in future.
Here is their response [1] "The Digital Communications team has been researching Mastodon and considering our potential involvement with the platform in the future. At this time, we have no plans to create an account for the Foundation or Wikipedia. This is mainly because our observations show us that Mastodon is not yet reaching a large audience, which is one of the key objectives of our communications activity on social media. We will continue to monitor the situation and adjust our recommendations and practices to keep within our objectives."
This is a disappointing response, especially after the events earlier this month: the mass suspension of journalist accounts [1], the continued (!) suspension of left-wing voices on behalf of right-wing agitators [2], and the bizarre "promotion of alternative social platforms policy" [3] (which led to many more account suspensions and has since been rescinded). For more on the goings-on at Twitter, see https://twitterisgoinggreat.com/ (incidentally, made using a template built by Wikipedian Molly White).
These events, and Musk's capricious leadership, should be sufficient to make _any_ civil society organization begin to establish a presence elsewhere, and many have (primarily on Mastodon [4]). And Wikimedia Foundation is not any civil society organization; it is deeply grounded in the open source movement, same as Mastodon & friends.
It's true, Mastodon doesn't have the reach of Twitter and Facebook and maybe never will. But there are ~2.5M million active accounts now [5], and that includes many civil society organizations, journalists, news outlets, and of course Wikimedians.
While one purpose of social media engagement is "maximum reach", another one should be "be in touch with your own people". Additionally, organizations that _have_ invested in their presence on the fediverse have reported continually higher (both quantitative and qualitative) levels of interaction with their constituents, likely because promoted tweets and algorithms designed to highlight a few viral posts aren't getting in their way. Twitter metrics should be regarded with deep suspicion at this point, as many of your followers likely have already dramatically reduced their usage.
Here are some of the Wikimedia organizations with fediverse accounts Wikidata knows about:
https://w.wiki/6Aky (there are probably more - if so, please add them to Wikidata)
Here are some individual Wikimedians that Wikidata deems notable enough to have a record there:
https://w.wiki/6Am4 (there are many more, including quite a few current and former board and staff members of Wikimedia and its affiliates)
In addition to Wikimedia affiliates, like-minded organizations like the Internet Achive, Mozilla, EFF, the Tor Project, Fight for the Future (key allies from the SOPA battle), Global Voices, Open Knowledge Foundation, Open Rights Group, OpenStreetMap Foundation, and others have already set up shop there. These are just the nonprofits that Wikidata knows about:
There is an ethical imperative to realize this rare opportunity for civil society to take back control of how it engages with its constituents. And there are very practical reasons to (also!) be where many of your friends already are. Please meet the moment.
Warmly, Erik
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/December_15,_2022_Twitter_suspensions [2] https://theintercept.com/2022/11/29/elon-musk-twitter-andy-ngo-antifascist/ [3] https://web.archive.org/web/20221218173806/https://help.twitter.com/en/rules... [4] https://www.deweysquare.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/DSG-Snapshot-of-the-T... [5] https://absolutelymaybe.plos.org/2022/12/05/mastodon-growth-numbers-might-no...