NGOs & Meda on Mastodon: a quantitative analysis for Germany

Mastodon is not growing – nor is it shrinking.

Author

Oliver Moldenhauer

Published

December 27, 2025

Mastodon in German NGOs and media: stable, no growth, no decline

Opening Question

Since Mastodon attracted a surge of attention in 2022 and 2023, people have been asking: Is Mastodon still growing, or was it just a short-lived hype?

In recent years, it has become increasingly clear how important an alternative to X/Twitter is for all those who do not support the policies of Musk & Co. Mastodon is often seen as a relevant alternative to commercial platforms. In this article, I will attempt to answer this question based on data – focusing on actual usage and interaction rather than vanity metrics such as the number of accounts (regardless of whether they are actually used).

For this evaluation, we have been scraping the relevant accounts on Twitter for some time now. From this, a daily updated dashboard is created, which shows the development, the most important accounts and the most important tweets of the last 4 weeks and the last year.

Results

Reactions to Toots from German NGOs

Last update: 2026-01-13.

Reactions to Toots from German media

Last update: 2026-01-13.

Mastodon remains stable

The overall picture for the entire observation period is clear:

  • No sustained growth in interactions
  • No significant decline
  • Instead: a relatively constant level of activity

This contradicts both the narrative of linear or even exponential growth and the thesis of a gradual decline in significance.

Mastodon has stabilised into a stable state, at least in this field of activity.

Methods

The analysis is based on a multi-stage approach. The aim was not to measure Mastodon as a whole, but to record the visible actions and reactions of and to relevant actors from German NGOs and media.

a) Selection of accounts

First, a list of individuals and organisations from German NGOs and media was compiled.

  • For the media sector, curated observation of active journalists served as the starting point (inspired, among other things, by regular overviews from tech and media journalism, e.g. around Heise).
  • For NGOs, central organisational accounts and prominent individuals were taken into account.

Important: The selection does not claim to be exhaustive, but attempts to capture the most important accounts. We are always open to new suggestions.

b) Collection of Trööts

All public Trööts were recorded for all selected accounts.

c) Recording of interactions

A central methodological problem with Mastodon is well known:

The total number of interactions (replies, boosts and favourites) is only fully visible on the respective home instance of an account.

In this evaluation, reactions are defined as follows:

  • Replies
  • Boosts (reblogs)
  • Favourites or likes

The total number of reactions is therefore calculated as follows:

Replies + boosts + favourites

For each account, the following was therefore done: - The respective home instance was identified - The number of reactions per Trööt was retrieved there

This step is time-consuming, but it significantly reduces systematic distortions.

d) Temporal assignment

The interactions were assigned to the date of the respective tweet.

This is not perfect methodologically, as interactions often take place with a time delay. However, it is the best available approximation for the question addressed in this article.

Classification

The results suggest that:

  • Mastodon is not a growth channel in the traditional sense for NGOs and media organisations.
  • At the same time, it is not a phase-out model.

Instead, Mastodon functions as: - a stable communication space - with limited but reliable attention - for specific target groups and discourses.

Those who use Mastodon do not reach ‘the public’ there, but rather a specific, relatively constant community.

Methodological limitations

This analysis naturally has its limitations:

  • No statements about private accounts or DMs
  • No extrapolation to ‘all Mastodon users’
  • Focus on interactions, not on reach potential

The selection of accounts is also not completely objective. We would be particularly grateful for feedback here. The complete list can be found in the Dashboard.

Conclusion

Mastodon is not growing – nor is it shrinking.

For German NGOs and media outlets, Mastodon is:

  • stable
  • relevant for certain actors
  • but no substitute for platforms with wide reach

Feedback, additions or references to missing accounts are expressly welcome: @OMoldenhauer@digitalcourage.social .