Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Trump bans EPA employees from giving social media updates

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 312 posts

Re: Trump bans EPA employees from giving social media updates

#111

Post by ams6110 »

whyileft wrote: post #96
jquery wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right, Obama didn't do the "exact same thing." He literally auctioned off the posts, giving the ambassadorships to campaign contributors and bundlers ( https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-ambassador-nom... ). It's easy to find replacements if you don't care about qualifications and just reward your donor list, I guess. One of the ambassadors was so bad, staffers working for her requested transfers to…

You did not answer my question. I expect an answer. Why would you intentionally attempt to misinform your fellow citizens?

Your expectations aren't compelling on anyone else.

Re: Trump bans EPA employees from giving social media updates

#112

Post by [deleted] »

whyileft wrote: post #42
jquery wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The existing social media managers are openly hostile to the new boss, with irrelevant-to-their-organization tweets going out about the inauguration crowd-size? To your latter point regarding the fired ambassadors, it's the most scandalous thing since 2008, when Obama did the exact same thing - http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2008/12/obama-gives-poli...

1. The National Park Service hosted the event. Seems like it would make sense to post public information about the crowd size when there was a lot of public debate and misinformation about it. I understand your frustration thinking they would always look out for the president's best interest, but this was a pretty clear fact they were posting, not some kind of political opinion. 2. December 3, 2008. That's when that…

[deleted]

Re: Trump bans EPA employees from giving social media updates

#113

Post by beaner »

whyileft wrote: post #96
jquery wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right, Obama didn't do the "exact same thing." He literally auctioned off the posts, giving the ambassadorships to campaign contributors and bundlers ( https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-ambassador-nom... ). It's easy to find replacements if you don't care about qualifications and just reward your donor list, I guess. One of the ambassadors was so bad, staffers working for her requested transfers to…

You did not answer my question. I expect an answer. Why would you intentionally attempt to misinform your fellow citizens?

Honestly as a bystander to this conversation it seems like an easy enough mistake to make. The presidents did the same thing but at different times... Doesn't seem like a big deal. Doesn't nearly seem like enough evidence for "intentional attempt to misinform."

As someone who may be influenced by this discussion I am way more interested in why you think his point about nominating donors is not significant enough to discuss. Isn't that a sort of misinformation by non-acknowledgment?

Re: Trump bans EPA employees from giving social media updates

#114

Post by will_walker »

13of40 wrote: post #63
caseysoftware wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that they stopped giving estimates over 20 years ago: "For decades, the National Park Service provided official crowd estimates for gatherings on the National Mall but no longer does. The policy changed after the Million Man March in 1995, a gathering of black men meant to show renewed commitment to family and solidarity. The park service estimated 400,000 people attended the march, making it one of the larges…

I wonder if we've had mobile phone saturation long enough that they could measure attendance just by looking at cellular data.

At the Boston march, networks couldn't handle load - it was the first time I haven't had network access for hours in years. Maybe this wouldn't preclude the network registering my phone's requests (and our phones were reporting signal bars) but it's to be considered that our cellular infrastructure isn't built to handle massive protests at this scale.

Re: Trump bans EPA employees from giving social media updates

#115

Post by kenjackson »

xname2 wrote: post #89
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. He can't stop you from saying what you want to say. He can stop you from saying what you want to say on an official Federal government platform . For that matter, many employers can do that. I can say whatever I please, but not with my company name on it.

Exactly, can't believe so many people here lacking basic understanding of professionalism. You can't use office account to deliver your personal message.

Same people supporting Trump want Snowden to win the Nobel Prize.

Re: Trump bans EPA employees from giving social media updates

#116

Post by iainmerrick »

flukus wrote: post #58
kafkaesq wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The new management of the agencies want to review the social media policies. With the aim of installing Orwellian-style thought control practices† at every level, affecting every last publicity statement, blog post, and tweet. You forgot that part. † Based on what his press secretary (and other lackeys) attempted to have us believe about the size of the inaugural day crowds (and the millions of people who voted fraud…

If you want Orwellian you should start at corporations doing the same with private accounts, not with government departments. Hell, twitter and facebook themselves have become quite orwelian lately, banning wrongthought.

Corporations aren't democracies.

Re: Trump bans EPA employees from giving social media updates

#117

Post by philangist »

krapp wrote: post #36
FreakyT wrote: post #3

It's downright impressive how comic-book-evil this administration is. Next up, the white house will presumably be moved to a volcano base with overly large ventilation shafts.

They're not evil, they're "alternate good."

They're not wrong, they're alt right.

Re: Trump bans EPA employees from giving social media updates

#119

Post by linkregister »

whyileft wrote: post #42
jquery wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The existing social media managers are openly hostile to the new boss, with irrelevant-to-their-organization tweets going out about the inauguration crowd-size? To your latter point regarding the fired ambassadors, it's the most scandalous thing since 2008, when Obama did the exact same thing - http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2008/12/obama-gives-poli...

1. The National Park Service hosted the event. Seems like it would make sense to post public information about the crowd size when there was a lot of public debate and misinformation about it. I understand your frustration thinking they would always look out for the president's best interest, but this was a pretty clear fact they were posting, not some kind of political opinion. 2. December 3, 2008. That's when that…

Unless you have evidence of jquery's having been paid to post this, please don't make the accusation.

The number of true believers in various viewpoints, willing to lie in order to sway the audience vastly overwhelms the amount any organization's payroll could handle.

jquery, as many conservative and liberal commenters before him, believes that a lie to persuade someone for his noble cause is justified by its outcome. I disagree with this tactic vehemently, but it is used by many earnest believers.

Re: Trump bans EPA employees from giving social media updates

#120

Post by flukus »

iainmerrick wrote: post #116
flukus wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want Orwellian you should start at corporations doing the same with private accounts, not with government departments. Hell, twitter and facebook themselves have become quite orwelian lately, banning wrongthought.

Corporations aren't democracies.

Neither are government departments.
Post reply on HN