3 ms·
And diplomatic channels including back channels are the gold standard for diplomatic and undiplomatic communications. Let’s not ruin a good thing by replacing t
by SllX 6y ago
And diplomatic channels including back channels are the gold standard for diplomatic and undiplomatic communications. Let’s not ruin a good thing by replacing them with Twitter.
- ardy42 6y ago> And diplomatic channels including back channels are the gold standard for diplomatic and undiplomatic communications. Let’s not ruin a good thing by replacing them with Twitter. To even confuse Twitter with a diplomatic channel is a bit mind-boggling. It's a PR/propaganda channel and sometimes a way to distribute informational notices to the public. That's it. Edit: Yep, we agree. I was just amplifying the point a bit :)
- SllX 6y agoWe are in agreement then. :)
- mc32 6y agoI get it. But also Twitter have positioned themselves as this kind of communication medium. So they position themselves as a broadcast medium for politicians, elites, journalists, etc. and then these people use it like that, but then Twitter wants to maintain a particular narrative. So, basically, you can have at it, but only what we allow you to say. If it comes to that, they will wither as users evaporate.
- SllX 6y agoThey mislead people for years about exactly what they are. I’m not complaining that they finally came to an epiphany that what they aspired to be was something that they could never truly be.