3 ms·
I'm always surprised that government officials and official whitehouse memos n such keep comments enabled. It's not like the president (besides Trump maybe lol)
by TheCaptain4815 3y ago
I'm always surprised that government officials and official whitehouse memos n such keep comments enabled. It's not like the president (besides Trump maybe lol) is gonna read the comments and respond, plus the value of those first replies is so ridiculously high, why on earth would you risk it. The point of twitter and facebook for political officials is get the message across, not create engaging content. It would also be nice if all 'fact checkers' from facebook, to twitters community notes would get permanently disabled for elected officials. Absolutely bonkers we let tech companies decide that stuff for us IMO.
- ejb999 3y agoI don't think most people posting on social media actually expect the politician/official to respond to a message - its more that it adds color, or perhaps another view, to the official message that is posted, so that others reading the original message can (perhaps) get another side - of course it can be - and certainly is - abused, but not sure blocking people is the right solution here - anymore than it would be to allow a government official to post an op-ed piece in a newspaper, and the forbid anyone who had a different opinion from responding either in another op-ed, or in a letter-to-the-editor.
- wombatpm 3y agoWhen a politician speaks in public the public can immediately respond to lies and falsehoods. Why should politicians be protected from feedback online? But I do agree that anonymous posts to politicians should eligible for blocking.