5 ms·

If he posts from the official POTUS account, I'd support that. Anything from his personal account shouldn't be treated any differently at all.

0x8BADF00D 6y ago
It will be, because of who he is. Anyone with large amounts of clout and following will not be subject to the same rules of the platform.
nrmitchi 6y ago
I completely agree with the theory here, however he is, and has been, treating personal accounts as "official" accounts for a while. Anything posted through those means should be maintained as a historical record. I agree with how Twitter handled it; they made it clear that it was in violation, hid it by default, however kept it. In my mind, I need to consider a situation as if the president tweets out something that _clearly_ violates ToS; such as something overtly racist, or a direct threat. As a 100% fake example: > "I am encouraging the Military to use live ammunition tonight in DC. Anyone out after curfew deserves to be shot on site!" The fact that this was by the president is 100% important, and needs to be available to be seen by anyone that wants to see it. Anything less is a huge safety risk, and in my opinion, if a platforms removes that content it constitutes gaslighting the public.
- nocturnial 6y ago
  If you want to maintain a historical record, shouldn't those tweets or whatever be archived using the presidential records act at the source? This way a private company doesn't decide or is responsible what gets archived/deleted/censored/annotated but it always gets archived using what worked for every document produced by a president for decades. I think you have a point of it being archived but I think you're wrong about who should archive it. At the moment the president tweets official policy (maybe debatable, but let's assume it is), so those tweets should fall under the presidential records act and be archived by the white house staff. Then it doesn't matter if they are later deleted by whatever social media company, or even if are censored or have a fact check attached to them. The original message is stored and kept. (well, at least in theory)

0x8BADF00D 6y ago

It will be, because of who he is. Anyone with large amounts of clout and following will not be subject to the same rules of the platform.

nrmitchi 6y ago

I completely agree with the theory here, however he is, and has been, treating personal accounts as "official" accounts for a while. Anything posted through those means should be maintained as a historical record. I agree with how Twitter handled it; they made it clear that it was in violation, hid it by default, however kept it. In my mind, I need to consider a situation as if the president tweets out something that _clearly_ violates ToS; such as something overtly racist, or a direct threat. As a 100% fake example: > "I am encouraging the Military to use live ammunition tonight in DC. Anyone out after curfew deserves to be shot on site!" The fact that this was by the president is 100% important, and needs to be available to be seen by anyone that wants to see it. Anything less is a huge safety risk, and in my opinion, if a platforms removes that content it constitutes gaslighting the public.

nocturnial 6y ago
If you want to maintain a historical record, shouldn't those tweets or whatever be archived using the presidential records act at the source? This way a private company doesn't decide or is responsible what gets archived/deleted/censored/annotated but it always gets archived using what worked for every document produced by a president for decades. I think you have a point of it being archived but I think you're wrong about who should archive it. At the moment the president tweets official policy (maybe debatable, but let's assume it is), so those tweets should fall under the presidential records act and be archived by the white house staff. Then it doesn't matter if they are later deleted by whatever social media company, or even if are censored or have a fact check attached to them. The original message is stored and kept. (well, at least in theory)