3 ms·

What does the "Health Secretary" have to do with tech regulation? [edit: I would think the UK Health Secretary should be pretty specifically focused on the grow

by blunte 6y ago

What does the "Health Secretary" have to do with tech regulation? [edit: I would think the UK Health Secretary should be pretty specifically focused on the growing health crisis at home rather than interviewing on topics outside his current role.] In any case, regardless of who you are, if you violate the terms of service of platform, you can be terminated on that platform. The platform makes the rules, within the context of the legal systems with which it is governed by. When it comes to "free speech", that is a very tricky subject. More significantly, if even the local population cannot agree on whether certain speech should be allowed or not, then the government has no hope of regulating it either.

spzb 6y ago
> What does the "Health Secretary" have to do with tech regulation? Nothing in terms of his day job but he is known as a fan of technology (not a particularly well-informed one) so he’s likely to have an opinion on the matter. More to the point, though, the government usually nominate a minister to go round all the Sunday morning political TV shows and answer questions on whatever is in the news.
KineticLensman 6y ago
> What does the "Health Secretary" have to do with tech regulation? He was being interviewed on a general politics show >> Mr Hancock, a former culture secretary, told BBC One's Andrew Marr Show It's usual on these shows for the interviewer to treat the the politician as a representative of the wider government and to ask general questions as well as those about the politician's own area of responsibility.
eplanit 6y ago
On the basis of (mental) health concerns, one could conceivably and justifiably ban Twitter altogether.
DanBC 6y ago
> I would think the UK Health Secretary Minor nit, but he's not UK health secretary. Health is devolved so he only has responsibility for England.
Silhouette 6y ago
The UK Cabinet traditionally operates on the principle of collective responsibility. Once a position has been adopted, it is everyone's public position and everyone is responsible for it, even if they disagreed or argued for something else in private. If you're not OK with that, you're expected to resign from the Cabinet, and from time to time people do. A corollary of this is that when any Cabinet minister speaks publicly, they speak on behalf of the government, and they are expected to be able to respond to general media enquiries on matters outside their specific role. They may choose not to respond substantially or to refer the enquiry to a colleague more familiar with the details, and they very often do. If they don't, it is almost certain that they are expressing an agreed Cabinet position and they just happen to be the minister doing the media rounds that day.

by blunte 6y ago

spzb 6y ago

> What does the "Health Secretary" have to do with tech regulation? Nothing in terms of his day job but he is known as a fan of technology (not a particularly well-informed one) so he’s likely to have an opinion on the matter. More to the point, though, the government usually nominate a minister to go round all the Sunday morning political TV shows and answer questions on whatever is in the news.

KineticLensman 6y ago

> What does the "Health Secretary" have to do with tech regulation? He was being interviewed on a general politics show >> Mr Hancock, a former culture secretary, told BBC One's Andrew Marr Show It's usual on these shows for the interviewer to treat the the politician as a representative of the wider government and to ask general questions as well as those about the politician's own area of responsibility.

eplanit 6y ago

On the basis of (mental) health concerns, one could conceivably and justifiably ban Twitter altogether.

DanBC 6y ago

> I would think the UK Health Secretary Minor nit, but he's not UK health secretary. Health is devolved so he only has responsibility for England.

Silhouette 6y ago

The UK Cabinet traditionally operates on the principle of collective responsibility. Once a position has been adopted, it is everyone's public position and everyone is responsible for it, even if they disagreed or argued for something else in private. If you're not OK with that, you're expected to resign from the Cabinet, and from time to time people do. A corollary of this is that when any Cabinet minister speaks publicly, they speak on behalf of the government, and they are expected to be able to respond to general media enquiries on matters outside their specific role. They may choose not to respond substantially or to refer the enquiry to a colleague more familiar with the details, and they very often do. If they don't, it is almost certain that they are expressing an agreed Cabinet position and they just happen to be the minister doing the media rounds that day.