The Financial Times is shutting down their Mastodon instance (alphaville.club).

Their reason? Security, liability, and cost.

With all due respect, I believe they went about their instance the wrong way:

1. Keep your instance moderated, you're less likely liable
2. Keep your instance closed to registrations, you're more secure
2. Keep your instance light, it's inexpensive

Also: Financial Times' site runs in WordPress. Why not use WordPress as an instance?

https://www.ft.com/content/8d995a24-d77c-4208-a3a6-603d8788ebcd

Client Challenge

If Financial Times simply installed this plugin on their current website, they perhaps wouldn't feel the need to shut down their Fediverse instance.

https://wordpress.org/plugins/activitypub/

ActivityPub

Connect your site to the Open Social Web and let millions of users follow, share, and interact with your content from Mastodon, Pixelfed, and more.

WordPress.org

This is the problem with a "Mastodon is the Fediverse" narrative:

Mastodon can't be all things to all people.

It's certainly not a suitable tool for journalism.

The Press has unique demands, and therefore requires a unique featureset.

The Press doesn't need to run a social network.

But they do need to distribute their work.

The question: what kind of instance allows them to do this?

It's not necessarily Mastodon.

@atomicpoet if I were the Washington post I’d set up my own instance for journos and subscribers