The Bluesky social media platform has more than 27 million users.Credit: Peter Kováč/Alay
Seventy percent of Nature readers who responded to a Online survey use the Bluesky social network, which works a bit like X (formerly Twitter) and whose popularity has exploded in recent months, especially since the November US elections.
Although the survey is not statistically representative of Nature readers or the scientific community as a whole, it echoes Recent craze for Bluesky Among researchers and Disillusionment with X. Out of approximately 5,300 readers who answered a question on X, 53 % said they used X before but that they left it (see “Massive Exodus”).
Source: L. Balduf and others. Pre -impression on Arxiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2501.11605 (2025)
“Bluesky is much better for science. There is much less toxicity, disinformation and distractions, “wrote a respondent. “My flow is almost entirely made up of scientists and I actually receive updates to research that is relevant and timely,” wrote another.
Bluesky now has more than 27 million users and is generally similar in terms of features and user experience in X, which has long been an essential platform allowing scientists to discuss and disseminate their work. X fell into disgrace with some after entrepreneur Elon Musk bought the tool in October 2022.
In Nature‘, 55 % of those questioned at the question “Why are you using Bluesky?” “Said that it was a mixture of three activities related to research: connect with other scientists, keep abreast of other research or researchers and promote their own research (see” Online connections »).
Source: L. Balduf and others. Pre -impression on Arxiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2501.11605 (2025)
In total, nearly 6,000 readers responded to Nature survey, which took place from January 14 to 17, 2025. We have requested answers on the Nature website, on social networks and in Briefing NatureAn electronic newsletter. Of the nearly 5,000 people interviewed who answered a question about their work, 85 % – or 3,970 – said they were active scientists. A similar number answered a question about their field of studies: 38 % declared working in biological sciences, 11 % in computer science or information sciences, 9 % in physical sciences and 9 % in environmental sciences. The responses came from scientists from 84 countries or regions, most of them from the United States (33 %), followed by the United Kingdom (15 %) and Germany (12 %).
Positive waves
Thousands of people interviewed have written expressively about how they think that Bluesky compares to X. “Bluesky has compared very well so far. More civil and informed conversations, ”wrote one of them. Other positive terms used by those questioned to compare the platform to X include more pleasant, more united, more user -friendly, more kind, more collegial, edifying, more peaceful and safer.
The feeling of security is particularly precious for researchers who teach or lead teams. “I feel that I can recommend it to students and trainees. I can’t do that for X, it’s not a safe learning space, ”wrote a person interviewed.
Some have written that Bluesky is a better forum than X to discuss science, because the debate is more measured and more targeted, with less hostility. “I find it much less antagonistic science,” said a respondent.
But with less stormy debates and fewer users than X, some find Bluesky boring. This could change if he continues to attract new users at a sustained pace (see “Bluesky growth”). “I was rather asleep until November 2024. Now, there seems to be enough critical mass of researchers in my field to find new research and establish links again,” wrote a person interviewed.
Source: L. Balduf and others. Pre -impression on Arxiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2501.11605 (2025)
Fewer fascists?
Other points in favor of Bluesky noted by respondents to the survey include the perception that there is fewer “Nazis” on the platform than on X, and less racism; that it is not detained or considered to be influenced by Musk; and that he does not host advertisements.
X could not be contacted to comment on these criticisms before the publication of this article.
Not all Nature Readers love Bluesky. A criticism that emerged in the responses to the investigation says it is a leftist echo room. “Bluesky is full of crazy people who will threaten you with violence if you do not agree with the liberal story,” said a respondent.