Are shortened url in dm ( direct message) allowed?

directmessages
api

#1

Hey guys,

Around 2014 mid we had built a feature where our users could send Auto DMs containing a shortened URL. Twitter had asked us not to use shortened URLs in the DM so we removed them. Has the policy for this changed now? I can see many automatic DMs in my personal twitter inbox with users sending me shortened URLs from services like bit.ly and others.


#2

I see bit.ly shortened urls in my DMs too. Is there any official twitter stand on this?


#3

One of the key elements to respect in the Direct Message automation rules:

Misleading links: You may not send automated Tweets or Direct Messages containing links that are misleading, including links that maliciously or deceptively redirect through landing pages or ad pages before displaying the final content.

If your link shortening service is just that i.e. a redirect without a banner, ads or other framing then there should be no issue here. However, also keep in mind that the length of a Direct Message in text is up to 10,000 characters so broadly speaking there’s no reason to utilise a URL shortener here as there is no particular need to economise on the length of the text, and that will help to ensure that users are not mislead.

Also, be aware that all links posted on Twitter are automatically run through the t.co shortener so there’s no special benefit to adding another layer of shortening.

We reserve the right to review the use of our service at any time. If your app was previously reviewed by Twitter Platform Support then you should interact with the team via the appropriate form.


#4

Hey @AndyPiper, what if these bit.ly links are used to track clicks on these links. So that we can get an idea if recipients are clicking on links. Any official stand on this?


#5

Please use the platform support form I noted earlier to request assistance with a specific question of this kind as it relates to an individual application or use case. It sounds like the app in question was specifically reviewed for link shortening in the past, and it would not be appropriate to directly look into that in a public forum.