[slily]

They must have a very creative definition of "active user" because Zuckerberg gets 15-20k likes on his posts while I can scroll down X and find several posts a few hours old from random gimmick accounts with many times more. Taking that at face value to call Threads "the leader in its category" is comical.

[phillypham]

Instagram shows posts from Threads in the feed. I accidentally click on these all the time.

[nojs]

It actually shows half of the post followed by …, making you think that by clicking it you’ll see the rest. But then you get taken to the App Store to download Threads.

[slily]

That explains it, I'm not in that ecosystem but suspected it was something similar.

[SkyPuncher]

Likewise, I wouldn't be shocked if I'm counted as an daily active Instagram user, despite not having an account or using it directly. The "shorts" are embedded in FB and occasionally interesting.

Feels a bit misleading by FB

[ripper1138]

All things considered (Elon etc) I’d still be shocked if an advertiser was willing to spend >= on threads compared to X.

[jboy55]

It'll be CPM ad spend or maybe even conversion based, so, they can put a budget up and it'll be up to the traffic for the spend.

[threeseed]

It's the leader in its category based on DAUs - the standard metric.

And the audience on Threads is very different from X so engagement will not be all that comparable.

[rsynnott]

... Why would you expect Zuckerberg to get more likes than "random gimmick accounts", tho? Those, rather that rather boring billionaires, have traditionally been the major driver of engagement on Twitter, too.