Bill Clinton Thinks He Can Ban Twitter, Facebook & Live Blogging From Event [Updated]
from the yeah,-that's-not-going-to-work dept
A couple years ago, we were surprised by reports that former Vice President Al Gore had alerted attendees at an RSA conference where he was set to speak that no press were allowed, and that no one should report on what happened. It appears that his former boss, Bill Clinton, is doing something similar as PR handlers for his keynote at a Salesforce.com event have warned attendees not to report, tweet, Facebook or live blog during the event:"PLEASE NOTE: President Clinton's representatives have mandated that there be absolutely no reporting during his session. That includes live blogging, Tweeting, Facebook posting or use of any other social media. We understand the inconvenience this may present, but greatly appreciate your compliance. Thank you."It's difficult to think of a request that is more out of touch with what is happening in the world today. It's quite normal for people to communicate via such social media methods and shutting them off entirely (which won't actually work) just seems petty.
Update: And... the inevitable backing down. Clinton's people now claim that it was all a misunderstanding, and they simply said that the speech would not be open to the press. They claim that the PR agency misinterpreted that to mean no live blogging, tweeting or Facebooking, but they're actually fine with it. Of course, again it makes you wonder why you have such a "no press" policy in the first place...
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: bill clinton, journalism, live blogging, social media, twitter
Companies: facebook, salesforce.com, twitter
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Yeah...good luck with that
In this day and age, good luck with telling people to not post.
Then again, he's also "Slick Willy" so maybe this is a deliberate attempt at reverse psychology to get people to tweet, FB etc.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
What he wants is entirely irrelevant. If he asked for people not to take handwritten notes we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
this is probably about publicity rights or something along the lines of "those gosh darn people who can record what I say and make $$ off it" even if it doesn't always work that way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
So just because I can handle a heroine buzz well, it should be legalized? I mean, come on, I can handle my high, why can't you handle yours. You're clearly ruining my good time.
The law/rule isn't for the people who can handle it, clearly, it's for the people who can't. Just use some god-given logic and you might actually arrive at the right answer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
My point was that you can't use the explanation "It makes my experience worse" because the other person can say "It makes my experience better." Who decides whose experience should be catered to, and why?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I don't think he realizes what he is asking.
The entire place will be filled with bugs(cellphones). That is a f'ing nightmare to try and stop :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Common Courtesy
Do you know how much it cost for a ticket to go see Clinton ? he is one if not, THE most highly paid public speaker in the US.
Its not unusual to pay $10,000 to see him speak, as well as being the only president in modern times that was able to pull the US out of a deficit, for bush to blow..
So if you pay $10,000 to listen to a talk, you dont want to see the person next to you steaming that talk on the internet as well.
You did not pay that money to go to a public talk, you pay $10,000 its private.. you paid for that right.
And ofcourse Clinton can make any demands he likes before he talks, if they are not met he will not talk.. as is his right..
He has the right to talk to a group of paying people and not have that talk made public..
No one there has any copyright, or rights over his speech.. so its illegal for you to copy it..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Common Courtesy
The word "newsworthy" is obviously not in your vocabulary or you would know how horribly wrong you are.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Common Courtesy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Common Courtesy
Yes, actually, I have tried to give talks with people doing that. It's why I make my talks entertaining. I've found that it quickly stops them from punching buttons and gets them to watch.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Common Courtesy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Common Courtesy
That the common courtesy argument is stupid. The responsibility is on the *speaker* to be interesting enough to keep people from wanting to focus on social media. If they can't, it's a weak excuse to say "you can't use those tools while I'm boring you to death."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Common Courtesy
Make sure everyone is throughly interested and on the edge of their seats - I demand IT!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Common Courtesy
No, I haven't. I do talk to others that listen to me while texting, but it doesn't detract from the conversation.
Do you know how much it cost for a ticket to go see Clinton ? he is one if not, THE most highly paid public speaker in the US.
Its not unusual to pay $10,000 to see him speak, as well as being the only president in modern times that was able to pull the US out of a deficit, for bush to blow..
If he can command the price, go for it. I, for one, wouldn't go listen to him even if it were free. I had enough of him during the 8 years we had the misfortune of having him as president. He also didn't get us out of the deficit, you delta alpha. No president gets the US out of a deficit. It's congress that does that. Always has been, always will be. It was the 1994 reversal in congress of 40+ years of Liberal Democrat rule when the Conservatives finally got in that turned the deficit around. The president can merely recommend and try to persuade congress.
So if you pay $10,000 to listen to a talk, you dont want to see the person next to you steaming that talk on the internet as well.
How do you "steam" a talk? I know what you mean, so shut it. If I paid $10k to listen, I also paid 10k to do whatever the hell I want while I'm in there, including, but not limited to, streaming, blogging, tweeting, facebooking, texting or A/V-recording the speech. If he doesn't like it, too damn bad. He doesn't have to give the speech.
You did not pay that money to go to a public talk, you pay $10,000 its private.. you paid for that right.
Yep, I paid for that right. That right includes doing whatever I want while I'm there. See previous comment.
And of course Clinton can make any demands he likes before he talks, if they are not met he will not talk.. as is his right..
He has the right to talk to a group of paying people and not have that talk made public..
No one there has any copyright, or rights over his speech.. so its illegal for you to copy it..
Absolutely he can make demands, and if not met, he can refuse to talk. Refund, please. I go home with my money and he goes on the next fleecing and telling of lies.
I paid for the "copyright", I didn't pay to just license it. I, therefore, may do whatever I want with it. Just because I don't have a physical copy of it after I record his speech, doesn't mean I can't get one if I type it up later as I listen to it again (and Oh my God why would you want to??)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
HE does make a bit..
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8POP8F00&show_article=1
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
“President”??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: “President”??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
only 1 pres elect, many pres (ret), or Presidents (dec).
But you are not asked at school to name all the 'ex-presidents'.
You only have one commander in chief though, usually the president elect. but not necesarily..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Zombie President Washingon...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Zombie President Washingon...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Enough with this techie-elitist crap. The man is giving a speech and he requested that folks not tweet, stream or publish anything during his session. End of story.
You are not entitled to do whatever you want, wherever you want. And you sound like a whining child who just got their toy taken away.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Um. Sorry, but with over 500 million users on Facebook, I'd argue that we're past the "techie-elitist" stage.
The man is giving a speech and he requested that folks not tweet, stream or publish anything during his session. End of story.
I'm sorry, but if you think that's the "end of the story," then I have a serious problem with that. I don't expect anyone to simply bend over when someone requests it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
And I once again must reiterate the point that you sounds like a whining child whose toy was taken away.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
If the wishes don't make sense, why heed them? I believe in thinking for myself, but thanks for revealing that you prefer to let others think for you if you think they're "powerful."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
and i tis elitist to think that just because there are 500 million facebook users that somehow they have more rights than a normal person.. sorry they dont.. Just because your on the internet or facebook does not give you any elitist rights.
if you go into a supermarket, the terms and condition of entry are that you may have your bag's searched.
If you go into someone hourse there are implied terms of entry, if you go to a talk, if the person putting on that talk specifices certain terms of entry, he has every right to do so.
You have no right to go in violation to his terms of entry, even if you pay the money you have failed to meet your end of the contract..
ie, the contract is clinton will talk, if you do not use texting.. its a two way contract.. and the customer agrees with that contract when he pays his money.
There would be nothing stopping security from throwing out or charging someone who failed to meet their end of the contract..
Just because you are on facebook does not give you any special rights..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And you think that's ok?
and i tis elitist to think that just because there are 500 million facebook users that somehow they have more rights than a normal person.. sorry they dont.. Just because your on the internet or facebook does not give you any elitist rights.
This is not about "rights".
* A bunch of irrelevant content about rights snipped*
No one is arguing that he can't put these conditions on this. Just pointing out that it's stupid. You failed to suggest otherwise.
Just because you are on facebook does not give you any special rights..
Again, nor did anyone suggest otherwise.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You agree to that completely? So that afterwards, if somebody mentions a point in the lecture, you would boldly stop them before they went any further, and remind them they're not allowed?
Because, you know, you'd look, and sound, and be... a complete fucking dick. Not that there's anything wrong with YOU being a complete fucking dick. That's fine.
I'm not to keen though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Updated!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]