• 05.25.10 Responds to Twitter’s Ban on Third-Party Ads: Claims They’re Not Affected

Following Twitter’s shocking yet confusing ban on third-party advertising, startups have been considering their options.’s official response? “We’re still cool.”


In the meantime, one in-stream advertiser, IZEA, has responded already. But the biggest names, and TweetUp, remained silent until just now, when the former issued a brief statement., which lets advertisers essentially rent highly read tweets (you’ll see, say, a McDonald’s ad tweeted by Kim Kardashian) one at a time, insists they’re not affected by the ban. The statement:


“Since inception, has, and still is operating under Twitter’s approved guidelines and terms of service for advertising on its platform. We look forward to continuing to create long term value for our advertisers and publishers, both of whom are key constituents in the stream ecosystem.”

So essentially, is claiming that they won’t be affected by the new ban, which for all we know at the moment might be true. We’ve got to assume they’ve cleared that statement with Twitter–they waited a day, so they must have made sure their response is factually accurate.

It’s awfully hard to tell exactly what Twitter’s banning: Banner ads in third party apps like Twitterific and TweetDeck aren’t affected, and now claims paid tweets aren’t, either. We’ll continue talking with other third-party advertisers to see who exactly is left out in the cold.

Dan Nosowitz, the author of this post, can be followed on Twitter, corresponded with via email, and stalked in San Francisco (no link for that one–you’ll have to do the legwork yourself).

About the author

Dan Nosowitz is a freelance writer and editor who has written for Popular Science, The Awl, Gizmodo, Fast Company, BuzzFeed, and elsewhere. He holds an undergraduate degree from McGill University and currently lives in Brooklyn, because he has a beard and glasses and that's the law.