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.

Comments

Teacher Gifts

Today is the last day of school before the Winter Break. It’s a good time to remember the far-reaching nature of our public school system. You may not have children. You may have sent your children to independent schools. It matters not. You will be impacted one way or another. Yesterday I read a long thread on Facebook about several waves of illness in the schools right now. There’s influenza A and norovirus, I believe. And of course there’s COVID. Apparently in some individual schools the rate of illness is high enough for school admin to notify parents. When I was little the acceptable holiday gift for a teacher was one of those lovely floral handkerchief squares. (I don’t know what it was for male teachers. They were rare in my elementary years.) These days the range of teacher gifts is wider and I have fond memories of Target gift cards which I have written about before. I think it’s safe to say that giving one’s teacher Influenza, norovirus, or COVID is not the ideal holiday...

F ³: We Are Not Entitled

A college student went missing. His family and friends were distraught. The community was encouraged to be on the lookout and spread the word. Days passed. They must have been agonizing days for those who cared about the missing student. Thoughts that foul play had been involved cannot have been far from their thoughts. Then, at last, the student was found. Alive. The news was shared with the public. So. Much. Relief. A family had been reunited with their child. Even though we know that life is complicated, I think it is okay to accept this as a happy ending and leave it at that. But the world of social media says no. For every expression of joy at the news came questions and even judgement. It became clear to me that some folks felt entitled to an explanation. They wanted the backstory. It’s as though they felt that, by enlisting the help of the public on social media, the authorities now owed them all the details. Television dramas often weave curr...

Separate and Unequal

Remember “Separate but equal”? Remember how that really meant that Black schools languished in broken-down buildings without adequate heat or toilet facilities, with cast-off, ragged learning materials, underfunded and largely ignored? The Supreme Court struck that down in 1954. The evidence was clear that separate was not equal. Plessy v Ferguson had led to - - no, endorsed - - deeply unequal schooling and opportunities. We tend to think of Brown v Board as being purely about racial integration. It was not. It was about the logical consequences of segregation. And they were not, not, not equal. The ruling in 1954 didn’t transform public education for non-whites into a land of milk and honey by any means. But it articulated some essential truths in a way that made including everyone a legal precedent which could be relied upon and built upon. It was better than what came before it but it rested upon unsteady ground. It did not necessarily change the hearts or minds ...

Village Green/Town²

Search This Blog