There have been persistent predictions of the downfall of Twitter, ever since Elon Musk took over Twitter and rebranded it to X. Meta’s Threads briefly saw a surge in sign-ups on launch, but this popularity never really translated into any kind of market dominance.

The re-election of Donald Trump in November’s U.S. presidential elections, however, could well be shaking up the social media landscape again. Musk’s prominent and polarising role in Trump’s campaign, coupled with a growing public sentiment that X has become too “toxic”, has seen a massive growth in signups for Bluesky, a rival platform that promises a more inclusive and tolerant community.

But what does this mean for non-profits on social media? Influential high-profile accounts like The Guardian have already abandoned X and made the switch to Bluesky, saying that X has become incompatible with their left-leaning, progressive values. Should your non-profit do the same?

As we’ll see, it’s not exactly an easy question to answer. Non-profits, of course, have always had to juggle their values and brand with the struggles of funding and increasing their reach. Ethics and positive impact can sometimes be at odds with each other, and the choice between Bluesky and X throws these conflicting aims into sharp relief.

In this article, we’ll look at the facts and data of this apparent migration to Bluesky, as well as the pros and cons to having a presence on each platform. We’ll then discuss how you can make the best decision for your non-profit’s social media strategy.

An X-odus? What the Data is Telling Us

There’s no denying the incredible recent uptake of Bluesky. Since the November 2024 U.S. election, it has nearly doubled its userbase, jumping from an estimated 13 million accounts in October to over 23 million by late November.

Anecdotally, many of these users are abandoning X entirely. But it’s hard to tell if the data backs this up, since X is somewhat reticent in publishing up-to-date statistics on its usage. Estimates in November 2024 put the figure of total users at about 600 million, which is roughly in line with figures of 630 million in 2023, and forecasts that it would lose about 5% of its over the next 12 months.

Still, with a userbase almost 30 times the size of Bluesky’s, even if all of the 10 million new signups had quit X completely, it would still only be less than 2% of X’s current population – a definite win for Bluesky, but not much of a concern for X, and more of a slight shift than a real exodus.

The Pros and Cons of Switching to Bluesky

So, while the data might not support the idea of a complete exodus, there are many reasons why you might consider a shift away from X.

The sudden increase in numbers for Bluesky definitely reflects a strong dissatisfaction with X’s direction, particularly in terms of content moderation and platform culture. And while X dwarfs Bluesky in user base, the smaller platform has attracted early adopters seeking a less toxic and more moderated environment, signalling an underlying trend that non-profits may want to monitor closely.

Audience Demographics

Although a diverse group of well-known accounts have made the switch – like older Hollywood celebrities, journalists, and activist groups – the statistics show that the average Bluesky new user is young (18-30) and based in the United States.

If this is exactly your target audience, then great! If it’s not, though, making a switch may also mean pivoting your outreach strategy, or result in less engagement than you might have hoped for.

• X: Global reach, diverse demographics, and a long-standing platform for trending topics and real-time discussions.
• Bluesky: A younger, predominantly U.S.-based audience, with a growing focus on community-driven engagement.

Bluesky may be ideal for non-profits targeting niche or progressive communities, while X remains a better option for organisations with a broader, international focus.

Community and Topics

One of the main draws of X was always that you could post about absolutely anything, and there would be an audience for it. While this is partly true of Bluesky as well, there’s no doubt that the key demographic, as well as the reasons for the shift to the platform, are largely politically aligned. This means the main topics of discussion, as well as those which get the most engagement, are focussed on liberal political views.

This is by no means a bad thing, especially since most non-profits and their social media accounts could broadly be classified as left-leaning and politically engaged. But if your non-profit has conservative or religious values at its core, or it deals with divisive or politically sensitive topics, it may give you pause for thought.

• Bluesky: Stricter moderation fosters a safer and more supportive environment, making it well-suited for educational campaigns, positive messaging, and community-building efforts.
   
• X: Despite increased reports of toxicity, its lack of strict moderation makes it an effective platform for addressing controversial issues and advocating systemic change.

Your choice will depend on whether your organisation’s messaging thrives in a collaborative or confrontational space, as well as the nature of its views and political tendencies.

Market Opportunities

Despite the influx of accounts, Bluesky remains, for the moment, largely uncharted territory for non-profits on social media. Like any smaller market, this is a double-edged sword: it affords non-profits an incredible opportunity to capture attention, but you also only have access to a reduced audience.

• Bluesky: Early adoption offers the chance to stand out in a less saturated market. With fewer non-profits actively using the platform, there’s less competition for attention.
• X: Saturation brings its own opportunities, including access to well-established communities and trends.

Brand Alignment

The association of X with Elon Musk and its perceived toxicity has caused some organisations to distance themselves. Bluesky, by contrast, aligns with values of inclusivity, transparency, and decentralisation. Non-profits need to evaluate whether their digital presence aligns better with a smaller, curated community or a vast but polarised one.

The Risks of Spreading Too Thin

If Bluesky sounds like an amazing opportunity for your non-profit, you’re no doubt already asking yourself the obvious question: Why can’t we just be on both Bluesky and X at the same time?

While it is possible in theory, it’s probably not the best idea. Managing multiple platforms can dilute a non-profit’s resources. For small teams, maintaining consistent (and high quality) engagement across X, Bluesky, and other platforms (like Instagram or LinkedIn) is, frankly, unsustainable.

While duplicating content across platforms seems like a simple solution, it neglects the hard work and nuances of building and maintaining distinct communities, each with its own engagement dynamics.

We’ve always recommended prioritising one or two platforms based on your organisation’s core goals and audience demographics (see our Social Media Strategy Guide for much more about this). For non-profits already struggling to maintain an active presence on X or Facebook, adding Bluesky could exacerbate resource constraints.

Making the Decision: Key Considerations for Non-profits

1. Audience Focus: Determine where your existing and potential supporters are most active. If Bluesky’s demographics overlap significantly with your target audience, it may warrant exploration.
2. Trial and Analysis: Run a pilot campaign on Bluesky to gauge its effectiveness compared to X. Analyse metrics such as engagement rates, audience growth, and donations.
3. Cost-Benefit Analysis: Weigh the time, staffing, and financial resources required to manage a Bluesky presence against the potential for expanded reach or improved brand perception.
4. Align with Mission: Ensure that the platforms you use support your organisation’s values. Bluesky’s emphasis on transparency and user empowerment might better align with the ethos of some non-profits.

A Balancing Act

Switching to Bluesky is not a one-size-fits-all solution. While the platform offers a promising alternative to X, especially for organisations seeking a supportive and decentralised environment, its current limitations—such as a smaller user base and geographic skew—cannot be ignored. For non-profits, the decision to embrace Bluesky should be informed by strategic goals, resource availability, and audience needs.

The social media landscape is changing all the time, and as ever, flexibility and adaptability remains key. By carefully considering where to focus your efforts, non-profits can ensure their social media strategy remains effective and aligned with their mission.