How can publishers navigate the X-odus?
Katherine Single navigates the many social media options now available for the world of scholarly communications
For more than a decade, Twitter — now rebranded as X — was the preferred social media platform for many STM publishers, offering a cost-effective way to promote journals and engage with authors and readers. Despite its limitations, including a restrictive character limit, and the allure of vanity metrics like “views” over-inflating engagement, the platform remained an indispensable tool for real-time discussions within the academic community.
However, since Elon Musk’s takeover, X has become increasingly problematic. As a recent Reuter’s poll revealed, several UK universities have significantly scaled back activity on the platform, siting concerns over the proliferation of misinformation1. And, according to research published in PS: Political Science Politics, a significant number of academics are no longer actively using the platform2. If Twitter was once the lively conference coffee break of scholarly discussion, X is beginning to feel like a half-empty auditorium where fringe voices dominate the mic.
So, which platforms are academics migrating to, and how can scholarly publishers adapt?
Option 1: Mastodon – decentralised and daunting
When academics first started to leave X, Mastodon was often touted as the natural replacement. It’s decentralised, ad-free, and community-driven – which all sounds great in theory. In practice, it’s a bit like agreeing to play a board game, only to realise that you first need to assemble the board, write the rules, and convince enough people to play.
The platform’s instance-based structure — where users join different servers with varying moderation policies – creates both opportunities and obstacles. While some tech-savvy academic communities have successfully established thriving instances, there’s no single hub for scholarly discourse, making discoverability and engagement more difficult for publishers.
That said, if your audience is already active here, particularly in fields like computer science, Mastodon can be worth exploring. Just be prepared for a more fragmented experience, where building engagement may require extra effort in navigating and participating across multiple instances.
Option 2: LinkedIn – more than just an online CV
For years, LinkedIn was easily dismissed as little more than a digital CV with a side order of “thought leadership” — useful for job hunting but hardly a hub for academic discussion. That is rapidly changing.
Since Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter, LinkedIn has seen a surge in engagement from the academic community. In my experience leading the Marketing and Communications team at the Society for Endocrinology, one of the first noticeable shifts in our social media landscape post-Elon was LinkedIn’s exponential growth. Without any change to our content strategy, engagement on X stagnated while LinkedIn surged – suggesting that researchers were actively migrating their professional conversations here.
Academics are increasingly using LinkedIn to share their work, discuss industry trends, and connect with colleagues. The platform has also made research visibility easier, with features like the ability to embed papers directly into posts.
LinkedIn groups also offer dedicated spaces where researchers can connect, collaborate, and share insights, making them a powerful tool for publishers looking to maintain meaningful dialogue with the academic community.
Option 3: Facebook and Instagram – old but not obsolete
While Facebook and Instagram are often seen as platforms for personal updates, travel photos, and an endless scroll of avocado toast, they can still have a place in scholarly communications.
Many academics have built substantial followings on Instagram by translating complex data into visually appealing infographics, and demystifying their work with behind-the-scenes lab tours. According to the 2025 Sprout Social Index, 89% of Gen Z social media users are on Instagram3, so this platform provides an opportunity to engage emerging academics and early career researchers.
Meanwhile, Facebook – while no longer the place where the cool kids hang out – is still quietly thriving. At the Society for Endocrinology, we found that private Facebook groups became an effective tool for community-building. Our nurse members, for instance, used them to swap research, ask questions, and discuss ideas in a private setting.
Option 4: Threads – a work in progress
Threads burst onto the social media scene in 2023, positioning itself as a more positive and community-driven alternative to X. Initially criticised for lacking basic features, the platform has since introduced search, trending topics, and desktop access, making it a more viable option for real-time conversations.
For academic engagement, Threads presents a mixed bag. Its integration with Instagram provides access to a vast audience, but it lacks the research-focused networks that made X useful to scholars. While some academics experiment with sharing insights and publications, the platform’s informal, lifestyle-driven tone isn’t the most natural fit for academic discourse.
Threads may be a useful tool for researchers focused on personal branding and outreach beyond academia. However, for scholarly publishers looking for structured, research-driven discussions, its limitations likely outweigh its potential.
Option 5: Reddit – valuable insights, but tread carefully!
Reddit may not spring to mind as a scholarly platform, but its niche communities are rich with academic discussions. Subreddits like r/AskAcademia, r/Scholar, and other discipline-specific threads provide informal spaces for researchers to exchange ideas, ask questions, and share resources.
However, one of the key challenges for publishers is the lack of promotional tools. Some subreddits even enforce outright bans on promotion, so publishers hoping to flood these spaces with marketing messages will likely find themselves unwelcome.
That said, lurking can be valuable – by observing relevant subreddits, publishers can gain a deeper understanding of emerging trends and stay in tune with evolving academic conversations. It’s a chance to listen in on what’s top-of-mind for scholars.
Option 6: Bluesky – The heir to X’s throne?
When Bluesky first launched, with an invite-only model, it felt like an exclusive underground club. But in 2025, Bluesky has broken out of its niche and is rapidly becoming the go-to place for academic discourse.
What sets Bluesky apart is its familiar interface — essentially a stripped-down, pre-Musk Twitter. Unlike Mastodon, there’s no learning curve, and researchers, publishers and funding bodies are all setting up shop. If you’re not there yet, you probably will be soon.
That said, it’s important to keep expectations in check. While Bluesky’s user base is growing steadily, it remains a fraction of X’s overall reach. The platform has yet to achieve the critical mass needed to fully replace X’s role in academic discourse. If you shift all your social media content here, you risk missing a significant portion of your audience. For now, Bluesky is a promising addition to a publisher’s digital toolkit, but not a one-stop replacement.
So, what’s the plan?
The reality is, there’s no single replacement for X. Academic engagement has always been spread across various platforms, but now it’s more fragmented than ever. Scholarly publishers need a multi-channel approach tailored to different audiences. Here’s how to stay ahead.
- Diversify your social strategy – No single platform is perfect. Bluesky might be the closest thing to pre-Musk Twitter, and with a growing academic following, it’s definitely worth having a presence here; LinkedIn has become increasingly useful for networking and industry updates; Mastodon caters to the niche, tech-savvy crowd; and Facebook and Instagram still have value — Instagram for engaging younger researchers with visual content and Facebook for fostering specialist academic communities. You also might want to consider monitoring relevant academic communities on Reddit to identify emerging trends.
- Double down on email marketing – Social platforms come and go, but every good marketer in our industry knows that a strong email list is one of the most reliable ways to reach your audience. Invest in compelling newsletter content, personalised updates, and segmentation to ensure researchers receive relevant, timely information about your latest publications, calls for papers, and events.
- Experiment with video and multimedia – Consider using YouTube to highlight key findings or interview authors. Even TikTok’s short videos can also be used to break down key research insights or trends into digestible, shareable content. Researchers are busy – give them engaging, bite-sized content that fits into their busy lives.
X’s glory days may be over, but online communication between publishers and academics isn’t – it’s just moved to a new address. The publishers that thrive in this evolving landscape will be those who adapt, experiment, and embrace a multi-platform approach that fosters genuine engagement and connection within the academic community.
Katherine Single is a senior marketing professional with more than 15 years’ experience developing marketing strategies within the STM publishing and membership sectors, most recently serving as Head of Marketing and Communications at the Society for Endocrinology and Bioscientifica.