Life in the Shop Window

By now most of us are familiar with the case in which Governor Larry Hogan was cited for blocking constituents on his social media accounts. If not, you can learn more here. Something I read online yesterday got me to thinking.

What about candidates? Are candidates obliged to allow continued trolling by bad actors on their social media platforms? By law they are not. But of course there is a judgement call between those who are expressing opposing points of view, even vehemently, and those who would be labeled as trolls and bad actors. That’s why candidates have social media teams. How much do you leave up? How much do you engage? What crosses the line?

Once the candidate is elected, how does that social media policy evolve? Perhaps it was focused primarily on selling; now it needs to be about communication and interaction. Our elected official wants to be hard at work, sleeves rolled up, doing the things that create good policy. But someone else, or a group of someones, are tasked with informing the public, responding to constituent inquiries, and keeping a watchful eye over situations on social media that may need further attention.

Social media then moves from selling a product to providing good constituent service. I would argue that clear communication and responsiveness to constituent needs are also the best “selling”  towards re-election, whether on social media or not. These are pillars of public service which existed long before Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram. Social media is new, connecting with the public is not.

Oh. Now here’s another conundrum. What responsibility does an elected official have in dealing with anonymous social media accounts? I would argue that legally, there is none. If you do not vote as, say, “Colonel Gateway”, the owner of that social media account cannot claim to be a constituent of whatever public servant represents the Columbia Gateway area. It’s just dirty pool to hide behind an alias while slinging zingers and then claim ill treatment from someone who is required to attach their face, identity, and opinions to everything they do. (Truth In advertising: our esteemed Col Gateway has nothing to do with this story, I’m just using him as a well-known local example of an anonymous account.)

There’s quite a bit to navigate when moving from a political campaign to public service. Social media is only a part of that. But it’s right there in the shop window, so to speak, for passers-by to gawk at.

Gosh, I’m glad I’m only a lowly blogger.