The Flight from X?

The debate around X (formerly Twitter) has been ongoing since Elon Musk acquired the social media platform in 2022, but in recent weeks—particularly following Donald Trump’s nomination of Musk to head the so-called Department of Government Efficiency—it has intensified.

Politicians, public authorities, and citizens are reportedly leaving X and moving to Bluesky. At least, that’s the picture painted by the media and by the surging user statistics on Bluesky. Across Denmark and beyond, the number of new users on the social platform has exploded, approaching levels in the U.S. that rival Meta/Facebook’s Threads, which was previously seen as a major competitor to X. In Denmark, politicians have been vocal in their criticism of developments on X, with some declaring they are moving their activity away from the platform.

So, what should companies, interest organizations, or NGOs do? Before diving into this, let’s take a closer look at the new player in the field.

What is Bluesky?

Bluesky is a social media platform designed as an evolution of Twitter; both in terms of how you interact and the user interface. This isn’t surprising, given that Bluesky originated as an internal R&D project at Twitter, led by Twitter founder and then-CEO Jack Dorsey. Initially, Bluesky aimed to create a decentralized standard for social media. However, when this goal clashed with Twitter’s commercial incentives as an ad-funded network, the project was spun off into a non-profit organization in 2021.

Despite the similarities, there are also notable differences between X and Bluesky—some of which may not be immediately apparent but are worth considering. Decentralization is fundamental to Bluesky, designed to prevent power from being concentrated in the hands of a single individual. In theory, various companies and operators can help run the network.

Bluesky has also tackled moderation challenges by allowing users to subscribe to moderation lists maintained by private organizations, enabling users to block accounts by subscribing to these lists. While this approach could improve moderation, it’s worth noting that misinformation often spreads faster than it can be fact-checked. X, for its part, offers “community notes”, where users can comment on and correct false claims. Contributions are rated for relevance by users who have previously disagreed to ensure balanced ratings. However, X has faced criticism for its atmosphere, bots, and misinformation. Whether Bluesky can provide a better moderation framework remains to be seen.

Bluesky has received praise for fostering a positive and constructive atmosphere, particularly among Danish commentators. The big question is whether this environment will endure or if we’re simply in a honeymoon phase right now.

Where Will the Debate Take Place?

This isn’t the first time a new social media platform has been predicted to take over after X. In the past, both Mastodon and Meta’s Threads were touted as potential successors, but neither truly succeeded. However, the surge of new Bluesky users in Denmark appears different. For instance, more Danish ministers and Members of Parliament (MPs) have created profiles on Bluesky than we have seen on Mastodon until this day. This raises several questions.

While switching platforms is relatively straightforward for private individuals, it’s much harder for organizations and businesses to determine when the tipping point has been reached. How long can one rely on X alone? When should activity span both platforms? And will we reach a point—if so, when—where an organization can abandon X entirely in favor of Bluesky or another platform?

These are questions our clients are asking, especially those working in public affairs and advocacy who want to engage directly with politicians. Below, we take a closer look at the recent activity of Danish MPs’ on X to understand whether they are truly moving away.

Danish MPs’ Activity on X

Based on media coverage and statements on X, it’s easy to get the impression that the political debate has already migrated away from the platform.

We have analyzed Danish MPs’ activity on X to understand recent trends. Below, we present three graphs comparing data on a weekly basis for autumn 2024 and 2023:

1. Total tweets by MPs.
2. Median number of tweets per MP.
3. Number of active MPs (defined as those tweeting, retweeting, or replying).

In September 2024, tweet volume was generally higher than in 2023, showing no signs of a waning debate. From week 40, with the Danish Parliament’s opening, both years show similar trends, including a significant dip during the autumn holiday in week 42. Activity then picks up, particularly in 2024, leading up to week 46 (November 11-17)—coinciding with the U.S. presidential election. However, it is during week 46 that the debate about X gained traction in Denmark, making this period of significant interest when it comes to Bluesky.

In weeks 47 and 48, there’s a noticeable dip in activity, even during high-profile events like the Green Tripartite Agreement and the national budget deal. While slight, the decline isn’t drastic compared to past fluctuations.

Looking at the median number of tweets per active MP, there’s no significant deviation, though activity has slightly dipped recently.

Looking at the number of MP's who are active in a given week, we might see the first sign of something interesting. The Autumn of 2024 has generally been a period, where members of Folketinget have been a bit more active than compared to the same period last year. But for weeks 47 and 48, we see a slight decrease in the number of active MP's, and the number is also a bit lower than the same weeks in 2023. 

In other words, we see small fluctuations, but the changes are not clear enough or the time period long enough to talk about actual trends or developments. 

Who is Leaving X?

Among Danish ministers, many have created Bluesky profiles and announced their move to varying degrees. For instance:

• Morten Bødskov announced a shift but continues cross-posting on both platforms.
• Magnus Heunicke has described a move to Bluesky, stating that “many others are moving the debate there.”

As of writing, 17 out of 25 ministers have Bluesky profiles, and 15 have been active. While many continue to cross-post, some—like Magnus Heunicke, Sophie Hæstorp Andersen, and Caroline Stage—have shifted most of their activity to Bluesky, although without deleting their X profiles.

Among Danish political parties, there’s also a pattern. Early adopters like Martin Lidegaard and Pia Olsen Dyhr—leaders of Radikale Venstre and SF, respectively—have led the way. Several MPs from these parties have either supplemented their X activity with Bluesky or moved entirely, such as Lisbeth Bech-Nielsen (SF), who closed her X profile already in August.

In contrast, politicians like Rasmus Jarlov have criticized X but stated intentions to remain while also creating a Bluesky profile. Others, like Morten Messerschmidt, have openly declared their loyalty to X.

How to Get Started on Bluesky?

For organizations accustomed to X, transitioning to Bluesky is relatively straightforward due to its similar format. Content can most likely often be reused across both platforms.

To help get new users started, Bluesky offers features like "starter packs," which provide curated lists of profiles to follow (e.g. Danish political profiles). Users can also subscribe to topic-specific feeds, such as those focused on #dkpol.

What Does This Mean for Organizations?

The data shows only a slight decline in X activity among MPs, but Bluesky’s momentum is significant. While the tipping point hasn’t yet been reached, organizations aiming to engage politicians might soon find it necessary to maintain a presence on both platforms.

At Ulobby, we’re monitoring these developments to better advise our clients and adapt our platform to new trends. We’ve already integrated Bluesky into our services and are committed to keeping you updated.

For more insights or suggestions on what we should explore next, feel free to reach out!