|
|
Post by annabella on Feb 21, 2017 21:31:15 GMT
I know the ACLU is flush with cash now, but aren't there more important things to litigate? This seems absurd. Celebrities are always blocking rude people from commenting on their Instagram page. Maybe the Governor's office didn't want his comments full of hatred and obscenities for other people to have to read. What are your thoughts on this? Story"Aides to Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan (R) have started to unblock people from his Facebook page after criticism over his office deleting negative comments and banning critics, and a threat of legal action from the American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland. The organization wrote to Hogan’s office on Friday to demand a review of all 450 people banned from posting on the governor’s popular social media page. The ACLU also wanted apologies and restoration of posting privileges to seven clients the group says were unjustly banned. “While the ACLU should be focusing on much more important activities than monitoring the governor’s Facebook page, we appreciated them identifying a handful of individuals — out of the over 1 million weekly viewers of the page — that may have been inadvertently denied access,” said Amelia Chasse, a spokeswoman for Hogan. “We will continue to remove any and all profane, violent, racist, and political spam commentary from the Facebook page, and encourage robust, on-topic discussion.” Over the weekend, Hogan pushed back online against commenters who criticized him for censoring dissenting comments. “I do not block constituents who disagree with me, that whole narrative is simply false,” he posted on Saturday." |
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Feb 21, 2017 21:34:53 GMT
it makes sense to me, especially after reading this, from the article:
"The ACLU’s letter said the removal of posts violated a state social media policy urging managers to refrain from taking down antagonistic comments, as well as constitutional free-speech protections.
“The purpose of social media is to have this exchange of ideas,” said Deborah Jeon, legal director for the ACLU of Maryland. “Once that type of a forum is established by the government and the governor, it’s not permissible to say, ‘If you agree with me, you are allowed to post. And if you don’t, there’s no place for you here.’ ”
-----------------------------------------------
In my opinion, if he chooses to have a social media presence as a way of communicating with his constituents, then he has to deal with the consequences- i.e., negative comments, etc. If something doesn't meet Facebook's TOU, they can take it down- not him. Blocking [some] people from posting seems a bit like 'blocking' some of his constituents from the same access that other people get to him.
|
|
|
|
Post by ilikepink on Feb 21, 2017 21:45:28 GMT
Free speech is free speech. While I understand that comments with foul language or threats need to be dealt with, just disagreeing with an official is permitted in this country. Actions that prevent the freedoms that the constitution and bill of rights gives us, need to be fought against.
Or did something change that I was not aware of?
|
|
casii
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,475 
|
Post by casii on Feb 21, 2017 21:50:50 GMT
There have been a LOT of people banned since MD residents wanted to hear Hogan speak out about the ban. On the whole, they were respectful, so yeah, I'm good with folks being unblocked and being heard.
|
|
|
|
Post by compwalla on Feb 21, 2017 22:00:00 GMT
Free speech means a government cannot muzzle a person. He *is* government so the first amendment applies. Too bad, so sad.
|
|
|
|
Post by peasapie on Feb 21, 2017 22:04:31 GMT
To be clear, am I understanding that he had a social media page as a public figure but would block anyone who said anything negative? So that it looked like he had all positive support?
If that is the case, I think he should of course be allowed to do that on a personal page, but to do so on a public figure page is not right. Sort of like silencing the press who don't like you. I think it's part of your job to have to listen to everyone's opinions. (And I say this as a former public school teacher, LOL)
|
|
|
|
Post by jemmls4 on Feb 21, 2017 23:57:48 GMT
What everyone else said.
|
|
|
|
Post by cade387 on Feb 22, 2017 0:14:15 GMT
Well considering my Congressman:
1) refuses to meet with constituents, even during weeks like this one where he is supposed to in district
2) refuses to answer phones
3) finally held a telecon town hall but only let a handful of people in who were vetted first
I can't say I agree with the Mayor. How are we supposed to talk to our elected officials?
|
|
|
|
Post by shescrafty on Feb 22, 2017 0:45:13 GMT
I am in MD. it is a traditionally democrat leaning state. I had felt previously that Hogan had been doing a good job, but lately am growing concerned about his feelings toward charter schools and what seems to be anti-public school decisions. Many people here are upset with Hogan for not speaking out against the Muslim ban. He did say previously that he didn't vote for trump, but since the win he has been quiet about how he feels with trump's actions so far.
When many on his FB page began calling for his commentary the FB page stopped taking comments from dissenters. It did not make those who are democrats feel that he was going to be open to his constituents.
|
|
rodeomom
Pearl Clutcher
Refupee # 380 "I don't have to run fast, I just have to run faster than you."
Posts: 3,663
Location: Chickasaw Nation, Oklahoma
Jun 25, 2014 23:34:38 GMT
|
Post by rodeomom on Feb 22, 2017 1:39:45 GMT
Well considering my Congressman: 1) refuses to meet with constituents, even during weeks like this one where he is supposed to in district 2) refuses to answer phones 3) finally held a telecon town hall but only let a handful of people in who were vetted first I can't say I agree with the Mayor. How are we supposed to talk to our elected officials? Do you live in Oklahoma? |
|
mlgallegos
Junior Member
Posts: 80
|
Post by mlgallegos on Feb 22, 2017 2:09:21 GMT
Well considering my Congressman: 1) refuses to meet with constituents, even during weeks like this one where he is supposed to in district 2) refuses to answer phones 3) finally held a telecon town hall but only let a handful of people in who were vetted first I can't say I agree with the Mayor. How are we supposed to talk to our elected officials? Sounds like my Congressman, but he didn't even bother with a telecon town hall. What part of public service are these people not getting? |
|
|
|
Post by cade387 on Feb 22, 2017 2:18:48 GMT
Well considering my Congressman: 1) refuses to meet with constituents, even during weeks like this one where he is supposed to in district 2) refuses to answer phones 3) finally held a telecon town hall but only let a handful of people in who were vetted first I can't say I agree with the Mayor. How are we supposed to talk to our elected officials? Do you live in Oklahoma? Michigan 11th District |
|
|
|
Post by maryland on Feb 22, 2017 2:20:09 GMT
I am in MD. it is a traditionally democrat leaning state. I had felt previously that Hogan had been doing a good job, but lately am growing concerned about his feelings toward charter schools and what seems to be anti-public school decisions. Many people here are upset with Hogan for not speaking out against the Muslim ban. He did say previously that he didn't vote for trump, but since the win he has been quiet about how he feels with trump's actions so far. When many on his FB page began calling for his commentary the FB page stopped taking comments from dissenters. It did not make those who are democrats feel that he was going to be open to his constituents. I was pretty surprised that Hogan won in Maryland. (I am from Maryland, but live in Pgh.). |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 10, 2024 6:27:40 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2017 3:34:54 GMT
Remember back in 2009-10 Town Halls when the Tea Party rampaged the offices of Dems? The Dems just took it. I don't think they realized that shutting down input was an option. Good thing the GOP has taught them there's no need to listen to your constituents.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 10, 2024 6:27:40 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2017 3:37:43 GMT
Well considering my Congressman: 1) refuses to meet with constituents, even during weeks like this one where he is supposed to in district 2) refuses to answer phones 3) finally held a telecon town hall but only let a handful of people in who were vetted first I can't say I agree with the Mayor. How are we supposed to talk to our elected officials? Fred Upton? |
|
|
|
Post by iamkristinl16 on Feb 22, 2017 3:49:19 GMT
I can see why someone would want to block people, given the comments that I have seen on news articles and such. But, blocking or deleting comments that just express disagreement with what the representative's POV is, is not ok. They need to remember that they are working for all of us. And not just those who voted for them. An elected official blocking posts is much different than a celebrity who has a social media account as a private citizen.
|
|
|
|
Post by lovetodigi on Feb 22, 2017 3:51:34 GMT
He works for the people. They should be able to comment on his page if they desire to. Free speech and all.
|
|
|
|
Post by iamkristinl16 on Feb 22, 2017 4:00:24 GMT
I am planning to go to a town hall here tomorrow night, but just saw an article saying that he was going to cancel it if there are protestors that "disrupt" the meeting. Being disruptive includes chanting or yelling. So, based on the coverage I just saw of town halls in Iowa and other states, it will probably just be cancelled. Boo!
I get that these town halls could be difficult for them. But honestly, it is their job to listen to people. People can't get through by phone or email, and if they don't have the town halls, what else is there? Would they rather that people camp out by their office?
|
|
|
|
Post by Anna*Banana on Feb 22, 2017 4:07:23 GMT
There have been a LOT of people banned since MD residents wanted to hear Hogan speak out about the ban. On the whole, they were respectful, so yeah, I'm good with folks being unblocked and being heard. I didn't think a lot of stuff I read on his page was respectful discourse. I stopped following his page because the people were crazy nasty and rude. They'd just post random ugly stuff that had nothing to do with anything except how they hated him. Those don't add to any constructive discourse. |
|
|
|
Post by gmcwife1 on Feb 22, 2017 4:40:44 GMT
There have been a LOT of people banned since MD residents wanted to hear Hogan speak out about the ban. On the whole, they were respectful, so yeah, I'm good with folks being unblocked and being heard. I didn't think a lot of stuff I read on his page was respectful discourse. I stopped following his page because the people were crazy nasty and rude. They'd just post random ugly stuff that had nothing to do with anything except how they hated him. Those don't add to any constructive discourse. I was just wondering if that Milo guy was posting or one of the blocked would the rules still be the same. No on wants to hear his ugliness, would he have to. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 10, 2024 6:27:40 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2017 13:55:29 GMT
I am planning to go to a town hall here tomorrow night, but just saw an article saying that he was going to cancel it if there are protestors that "disrupt" the meeting. Being disruptive includes chanting or yelling. So, based on the coverage I just saw of town halls in Iowa and other states, it will probably just be cancelled. Boo! I get that these town halls could be difficult for them. But honestly, it is their job to listen to people. People can't get through by phone or email, and if they don't have the town halls, what else is there? Would they rather that people camp out by their office? They were difficult in 09-10 when the Tea Party ginned up all the outrage at Obamacare. Dems went anyway. Too many GOP are a bunch of whiny babies who talk tough but always want the way smoothed out before them. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 10, 2024 6:27:40 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2017 13:59:17 GMT
I didn't think a lot of stuff I read on his page was respectful discourse. I stopped following his page because the people were crazy nasty and rude. They'd just post random ugly stuff that had nothing to do with anything except how they hated him. Those don't add to any constructive discourse. I was just wondering if that Milo guy was posting or one of the blocked would the rules still be the same. No on wants to hear his ugliness, would he have to. Yes the rules would be the same if "the Milo guy" was posting to his rep and not using profanity to threats. Here's the deal - government doesn't get to censor - that is what 1A is all about. As a governor he is literally a representative of the government on his official FB page. So he doesn't get to censor opposing views unless they are profane (which "the Milo guy's might be given what he believes) or threatening. ps - You'll note "the Milo guy" lost his private deals - Breitbart job, book deal, speaking gig. However, he is not in prison because 1A says he has the right to speak his vile views w/o being imprisoned. |
|
|
|
Post by annabella on Feb 23, 2017 3:19:22 GMT
|
|
