4 ms·

I think one of the key problems with twitter is the presence of constituted authorities interacting with the populace free from the formal mediation of official

I think one of the key problems with twitter is the presence of constituted authorities interacting with the populace free from the formal mediation of official channels. I am in Brazil and I bring as an example the disastrous presence of Bolsonaro in the social networks, directly instructing his followers, completely free from institutional constraints. In the case of Brazil, this was a major element of destabilization of public discourse. I am convinced that the presence of authorities on social media has to be regulated, and if I were to launch an alternative to Twitter I would consider [and look for ways to] build ethical safeguards [concerning public officials] into the system.

jpadkins 4y ago
This is an interesting point! Can you give more detail or examples of 'institutional constraints' moderating public officials interactions with the public (in the past)? Are there rules or policy written down about what can/cannot be said that the institution enforces that goes against what the public leader wanted?
- Vox_Leone 4y ago
  >> Are there rules or policy written down about what can/cannot be said that the institution enforces that goes against what the public leader wanted? Well, I can't give an answer from a legal point of view, because I'm looking for it myself. But in various instances of life we see the requirement of formality between authorities and the public. In fact, all public interaction with the state is formal. Here's a problem: the state has a set of international commitments, but the head of that state makes personal statements that go against the very official line of the government he leads [the case of Bolsonaro in Brazil]. Catalyzed by the dynamics of the network This quickly turns into another front of disinformation. The public is completely at the mercy of the machinations of the powerful entity. I don't think there is anything in the Republican rules that precludes proper legislation on this subject.

jpadkins 4y ago

This is an interesting point! Can you give more detail or examples of 'institutional constraints' moderating public officials interactions with the public (in the past)? Are there rules or policy written down about what can/cannot be said that the institution enforces that goes against what the public leader wanted?

Vox_Leone 4y ago
>> Are there rules or policy written down about what can/cannot be said that the institution enforces that goes against what the public leader wanted? Well, I can't give an answer from a legal point of view, because I'm looking for it myself. But in various instances of life we see the requirement of formality between authorities and the public. In fact, all public interaction with the state is formal. Here's a problem: the state has a set of international commitments, but the head of that state makes personal statements that go against the very official line of the government he leads [the case of Bolsonaro in Brazil]. Catalyzed by the dynamics of the network This quickly turns into another front of disinformation. The public is completely at the mercy of the machinations of the powerful entity. I don't think there is anything in the Republican rules that precludes proper legislation on this subject.