{"id":2480,"date":"2024-09-20T13:38:23","date_gmt":"2024-09-20T18:38:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/capertongillett.com\/blog\/?p=2480"},"modified":"2024-11-19T16:45:44","modified_gmt":"2024-11-19T22:45:44","slug":"how-to-set-5-billion-in-brand-equity-on-freaking-fire","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/capertongillett.com\/blog\/how-to-set-5-billion-in-brand-equity-on-freaking-fire\/","title":{"rendered":"Twitter, X, and How to Set $5 Billion in Brand Equity On Freaking Fire"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

I\u2019ve never embraced the \u201cX\u201d branding as a <\/a>replacement<\/a> for \u201cTwitter.\u201d<\/a> Honestly, I\u2019ve never even really gotten into the \u201cX, formerly known as Twitter\u201d rap common to Actual For-Real journalists and commentators, because if over a year into the platform\u2019s rebranding, people haven\u2019t grasped that X was formerly known as Twitter, I\u2019m pretty sure that means it\u2019s still<\/em> known as Twitter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Amid their rebranding process, X-formerly-known-as-Twitter took its sweet time shifting from \u201ctweet,\u201d as a verb or noun, to the generic \u201cpost.\u201d (I do enjoy that the prompt text in the tweeting window has gained an exclamation point, because \u201cWhat is happening?!\u201d<\/em> is a pretty apt question these days.) And with that change in mind, author Noah Lugeons proposed a repurposing<\/a> of the abandoned branded term.<\/p>\n\n\n\n