4 ms·
> I don't see why this is so controversial. It seems like the proper way to do a background check in the current era. Because it's not normal to perform extens
by new299 7y ago
> I don't see why this is so controversial. It seems like the proper way to do a background check in the current era.
Because it's not normal to perform extensive background checks for people visiting your country? I'd think it pretty weird it they wanted to interview my family, friends, employer, previous employer.
> The worry seems to stem from a general distrust of ICE and the current administration rather than this actual technique.
No... I mean I find the actual technique offensive. They can find public profiles associated with my name by googling me. Why do you need to provide them information about which handles are associated with me? If it's because otherwise they might mismatch profiles <-> individuals, perhaps they just shouldn't be using this information to profile people?
- ferzul 7y agohe was coming to live in the US as a student, not just visit. It is offensive in this case because it wasn't anything he did that lost him the visa, just social media connections said. More generally, I know that my social media is important to my wife's visa in a completely different country, and the government may interview our friends and family. (I view it as offensive, invasive; but it does normal that the government would indeed interrogate perhaps excessively immigrants, even temporary ones)
- masonic 7y agoit wasn't anything he did that lost him the visa You don't know that, nor does the NYT, not does the Crimson. None of these reporters saw any of the social media activity firsthand, nor do they claim to in the articles. My guess is that he "liked" text or image(s) that for some reason raised concern.
- new299 7y agoIn the first case mentioned in the article. They request social media identifiers I believe for all visitors now.