As expected, Meta's new Threads app has now become the fastest-growing app of all time.

The much-awaited Twitter alternative, which was launched a day earlier than expected on Wednesday last week, quickly rushed to 30 million sign-ups within 24 hours of release. It then rose to 50 million in just hours later then 70 million within less than two days.

And now, Threads has crossed the 100 million sign-up marker, making it the quickest app to 100 million members.
tracking Threads account numbers shown on Instagram pages, the app crossed the 100 million sign-up marker early Monday morning.

Threads' rapid growth beats out ChatGPT to take the fastest-growing app title, with the ChatGPT app reaching 100 million users in two months earlier this year. So it's beating it by quite a comfortable margin – though contextually, the situation is a lot different right now than it has been for many other apps, in terms of broad-ranging mobile adoption and data access, while Meta's also, of course, using the network effects of Instagram to both amplify and simply Threads sign-up.

It's also important to point out that 'sign-ups' and 'active users' are actually two different metrics. And while Threads has managed to have millions of people sign up, we have no idea at all yet just how engaged they are, nor how much time they are spending in the app.

But even getting them there in the first place is a big first step. And when you factor in that Twitter boasts 250 million daily actives, the fact that Threads has gotten as far as it has in such short order is actually encouraging to the app's potential as a challenger.

If that's what it actually is.

Interestingly, Instagram chief Adam Mosseri has noted that the discussion they’re looking to encourage in Threads is a little different to Twitter’s focus, in news and current events.
So, instead of using a now oft-used practice of courting journalists and news outlets, like Facebook has done in the past, Meta's looking to continue its gradual shift away from news and political discussion, to focus on more positive, human interaction and, seemingly, more light entertainment.

How does one do that, in an algorithmic sense?
This is going to be a very challenging problem to solve because, quite frankly, the most compelling stuff historically has been posts that elicit emotional response, and the emotions most likely to trigger virality are anger and joy. And while joy would ideally become the focus in that context, anger is easier to illicit – which is at least part of the reason why we’ve seen the media landscape become so divisive and partisan, as outlets look to generate more attention, and drive more traffic, by tapping into this element.

If you want to go viral, provoke a strong response. This, historically, has been the best way to drive social platform engagement.

So how does Meta counter this, and usher Threads users towards more positive interactions?

Mosseri hasn't given a roadmap, but he has said they're looking to amplify content that people are more likely to share with friends, rather than to share publicly, while he's also noted the platform 'won't discourage or down-rank news or politics' as such.

We won't court them the way we have in the past. If we are honest, we were probably too quick to promise too much to the industry on Facebook in the early 2010s, and it would be a mistake to repeat that.

Remember, of course, that Meta has had something of an on-again, off-again relationship with news publishers over the years: pushing them to build a Facebook following, then taking away their reach; urging them to make video a priority, then de-prioritizing video ranking; creating a separate News tab, then shutting it down.

Given its scale and reach, every one of Meta's decisions in this regard has the potential to have a big impact, and Mosseri says that the company now believes using that influence to its own end was a mistake, given the broader negative impacts that it's had on publishers, perception of Meta's business, negative user experience, etc.

The Cambridge Analytica scandal was a watershed in this sense, in relation to showing just how much impact Facebook can have on responses and indeed how Facebook, boasting data on billions of users, does exercise influence over political action. That likely prompted Zuck and Co. to take this element a bit more seriously, and since then Meta has gradually evolved its approach, to reduce the presence of politics within its main feeds, and realign engagement around entertainment.

Meta's perspective has also been changed by TikTok, which has shown that users are now less keen on hearing their friends and family but more interested in using the social platform as a discovery tool. Social sharing behaviors have evolved, where most friend and family discussion now occurs in private DM chat groups, rather than users publishing to the feed, which effectively turns social apps into entertainment feeders, with algorithms showing you more of what you may want to see from sources you don't already follow.

This is the new approach Mosseri is referring to here-that the news and politics no longer need to be a focus, because Meta does not benefit from that engagement in the same way that it can from highlighting the most entertaining content from across its apps.

News posts will still get viewed, and will still be a part of the larger conversation, but essentially, Meta no longer feels the need to make this a specific focus-things can live without people provoking each other with divisive political takes.

But again, it will be difficult to reduce the amplification of such, given the emotional drivers at play, though Mosseri seems confident that Meta has at least some solutions here.

Speaking of solutions, Mosseri has also pointed to some coming developments for the Threads app, which is still in its very early stages.

So, if you’re wondering:

Improved search is coming, beyond the current basic user search option
Threads will have active hashtags, which may or may not be necessary in a modern social app, given algorithmic matching and text ID. But they're coming anyway
Yes, there will be a separate following feed, so you don't have to sift through all those recommendations if you don't want to
Meta's still working on its decentralized elements, which will enable graph syncing and portability
It's also considering an auto-archive feature, so your profile doesn't age and gets tagged with all the worst memories of past, poorly thought out Threads posts
Mosseri sounds unexcited about implementing in-app DMs – I think it's because if it does, then Meta will want to route those into Messenger/WhatsApp/Instagram Direct. Meta's been trying to consolidate all of its messaging platforms into one place; adding another, standalone one makes little sense
According to Mosseri, all these components are in the development mode, but are still a warm-up warning that they will take time to develop. But since it is now the fastest-growing app ever, you can bet Meta is giving it its full focus while working to build on that early hype.

So, what does this mean for Twitter and how will Twitter react to the explosive growth of the new app?

Aside from litigation over potential violations of its IP, there is very little that can be done, other than hoping that its own network effects and approach prove more appealing to audience than the new app.

Twitter chief Elon Musk has taken a strong stand on free speech, and permitting more types of discussion in his app, which looks set to become a differentiator between the two, as Instagram sticks with Meta's broader approach to content moderation. Which also, incidentally ports over verification info from IG, which remains a valuable element in interpreting content in its apps.

Will users prefer the 'free and open' approach of Twitter, which will seemingly make news and politics a central focus, or will the more entertaining alignment of Threads, if it can get it right, win the race?

One thing I would note: many journalists, whom Musk has heaped unprecedented abuse on, are increasingly keen to stop posting to his app as a result of his attacks. Elon appears to think that disparaging the 'mainstream media', and blacklisting writers he disagrees with, is a path to a better information ecosystem within the Twittersphere - but he may have undervalued the benefit that these journalists actually bring to his app.

If they go, their audiences will follow, and that could fire a much more significant habitual shift.

Also worth noting - Mosseri has explained the situation in regards to being theoretically unable to delete the Threads app without deleting your IG account
So you can deactivate your Threads account, and Meta's looking to separate the two profile types in future.