from the politics-as-usual dept
Last month, I posted how cool it was that Republican Congressman John Culberson was
really using Twitter to communicate with people. It was a great use of the technology. However, today he's been using Twitter to ignite a totally misguided partisan war, pretending (falsely) that Democrats are trying to prevent him from using Twitter. First, he announced on Twitter that
"the Dems are trying to censor Congressmen's ability to use Twitter" claiming that
"They want to require prior approval of all posts to any public social media/internet/www site by any member of Congress!!!" Fascinating, and troubling, if true, but it's not actually true.
The
actual issue is one that we discussed a few months back.
Existing House rules actually forbid members of Congress from posting "official communications" on other sites. This was first noticed by a first-term Congressman who was
worried that posting videos on YouTube violated this rule. Other Congressional Reps told him to not worry about it as
everyone ignored that rule, and no one would get in trouble for using various social media sites such as YouTube. However, that Congressman pushed forward, and eventually got Congress to act. Of course, rather than fixing the real problem (preventing Reps from posting on social media sites), they simply asked YouTube to allow Reps to post videos in a "non-commercial manner." YouTube agreed, and that was that.
However, the
existing rules still stood. Culberson's complaint stems for a
letter (pdf) sent by Democratic Rep. Michael Capuano, suggesting that the rules actually be changed to be loosened to deal with this situation and make it
easier to post content on various social media sites. Culberson, however, bizarrely claims that this is the Democrats trying to limit what he can say on Twitter. But that's actually not at all what the letter states. The problem isn't this letter, but the
existing rules that are already in place. In fact, based on the letter, it would appear that this would make it
possible for Congressional Reps to Twitter, so long as their bio made it clear they were Reps.
A bunch of people tried to understand this, and even I
asked him to clarify why the problem was with this new letter, as opposed to the existing rules. His
response did not address the question at all -- but rather was the
identical response he
sent to
dozens of people who questioned his claims. He notes that based on the letter, each Twitter message must meet "existing content rules and regulations." Indeed, but the problem is
that's already true based on those
existing content rules and regulations. The problem isn't this new effort, but those existing rules and regulations, which mean that his existing Twitter messages violated the rules.
It's really disappointing to see someone who had embraced the technology use it to try to whip up Twitter users into a frenzy, while misleading them to do so -- and then not using the tools to respond to actual criticisms. The problem here is that the existing rules for Reps is problematic. It's not this new effort to loosen the rules, other than in the fact that the loosening of the rules might not go far enough. That's not, as Culberson claims, an attempt to censor him on Twitter, but simply an attempt to loosen the rules with a focus on YouTube and (most likely) with an ignorance of the fact that Twitter even exists.
Filed Under: house rules, john culberson, official communications, politics, twitter
Companies: congress, twitter