3 ms·

It was unprofessional to use it in the first place. Government officials and learning institutions don't belong on Twitter or other non-regulated, for-profit c

It was unprofessional to use it in the first place. Government officials and learning institutions don't belong on Twitter or other non-regulated, for-profit conduits.

seanhunter 4y ago
That kind of dismissive gatekeeping seems pretty strange. When people are trying to reach some target audience, they typically need to go where the audience is.
- cge 4y ago
  I think there's a distinction to be made between using Twitter as one form of conveying information to some target audiences, and using Twitter as the primary or even sole form of conveying that information. The latter is extremely problematic, and I think is often what people are thinking of when they complain about political, public sector, and academic use of Twitter. It does seem unacceptable, for example, that some public service providers (transport, municipalities, etc) do actually use Twitter as the only practical way to receive up to date information on service changes and outages, and that many politicians now seem to use it as both their primary means of political communication and the first place they post official letters and actions. Here, however, it just seems to have been another outreach mechanism for the university.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
im3w1l 4y ago
I sort of agree, and sort of not. The internet is still in its youth. It's understandable that governments and institutions use what is already there and working today, as opposed to holding out for something for better. But as the alternatives get better, they would ideally migrate away to some solution that a) gives them more autonomy, b) let's all people contact them. Twitter has a right to ban people, but government instiutions often don't have a such a right. They are for everyone - they are for murderers, they are for frauds, they are for thieves and they are even for people who insult Musk.
- sohkamyung 4y ago
  > But as the alternatives get better, they would ideally migrate away to some solution that a) gives them more autonomy, b) let's all people contact them The EU has already set up their own Mastodon Server [1] to do a) and maybe b) [1] https://social.network.europa.eu/ https://social.network.europa.eu/
idlehand 4y ago
Facebook is a walled garden, but Twitter is indexable and searchable. It has become a megaphone for celebrities, companies, individuals, and institutions.
- uxp100 4y ago
  Before the musk acquisition you could not use it without being logging in. I heard that changed slightly but haven’t checked. But that sounds like a walled garden…

It was unprofessional to use it in the first place. Government officials and learning institutions don't belong on Twitter or other non-regulated, for-profit conduits.

seanhunter 4y ago

That kind of dismissive gatekeeping seems pretty strange. When people are trying to reach some target audience, they typically need to go where the audience is.

cge 4y ago
I think there's a distinction to be made between using Twitter as one form of conveying information to some target audiences, and using Twitter as the primary or even sole form of conveying that information. The latter is extremely problematic, and I think is often what people are thinking of when they complain about political, public sector, and academic use of Twitter. It does seem unacceptable, for example, that some public service providers (transport, municipalities, etc) do actually use Twitter as the only practical way to receive up to date information on service changes and outages, and that many politicians now seem to use it as both their primary means of political communication and the first place they post official letters and actions. Here, however, it just seems to have been another outreach mechanism for the university.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

im3w1l 4y ago

I sort of agree, and sort of not. The internet is still in its youth. It's understandable that governments and institutions use what is already there and working today, as opposed to holding out for something for better. But as the alternatives get better, they would ideally migrate away to some solution that a) gives them more autonomy, b) let's all people contact them. Twitter has a right to ban people, but government instiutions often don't have a such a right. They are for everyone - they are for murderers, they are for frauds, they are for thieves and they are even for people who insult Musk.

sohkamyung 4y ago
> But as the alternatives get better, they would ideally migrate away to some solution that a) gives them more autonomy, b) let's all people contact them The EU has already set up their own Mastodon Server [1] to do a) and maybe b) [1] https://social.network.europa.eu/ https://social.network.europa.eu/

idlehand 4y ago

Facebook is a walled garden, but Twitter is indexable and searchable. It has become a megaphone for celebrities, companies, individuals, and institutions.

uxp100 4y ago
Before the musk acquisition you could not use it without being logging in. I heard that changed slightly but haven’t checked. But that sounds like a walled garden…