Twittering Is Not A Partisan Issue
I’m one of the few people around who isn’t totally entranced with Twitter. Back when I had one blog, maybe I would’ve had the stamina and creativity to Twitter, but these days, I find myself using FriendFeed.com to keep track of everyone I know who Twitters and comment if I feel the need. Anyway, if you’ve fallen prone to the sucker attacks asserting that Congress is seeking to censor online information, please visit Congressman Michael Capuano’s statement on the subject. It clears a few things up. Here’s a portion:
First, the ONLY item we seek to address is LOOSENING existing rules to allow Members to post videos as a first step toward making the rules meet our constituents’ expectations regarding how they communicate with us in the 21st century. This was completely ignored during the years that Republicans controlled Congress while the internet grew exponentially. It is currently against House rules to post video on any site with commercial or political advertising or to use taxpayer-funded resources to post outside of the House.gov domain.
We are not currently seeking to address anything other than video — not blog postings, online chats or any other written form of communication anywhere on the internet. Any assertion to the contrary is a lie. Perhaps the people spreading those lies should take some time to actually read the letter I wrote, which is attached below.
Our only concern is commercialization — not imposing limits on free speech. It is amazing to me that Republicans think they can obscure the issue with this completely false assertion.
Apparently the Republicans spreading these lies would rather operate without rules and open the House to commercialism. Maybe they don’t care if an official video appears next to a political advertisement for Barack Obama or John McCain, creating the appearance of an endorsement. And I guess they don’t care if constituents clicking on their videos will be treated to commercials for anything you can imagine, from the latest Hollywood blockbuster to Viagra. Certainly, advertisements are a reality in today’s world and most people can distinguish. However, it is also a reality that Members of Congress who use taxpayer money to communicate with constituents should be held to the highest possible standard of independence — and the appearance of independence.
Our approach allows the American public to have full access to information from Members while ensuring that taxpayer dollars do not support commercial or political advertising on the web. Certainly, there may be other means to achieve that goal and I am open to that discussion. What I am not open to is the intentional distortion of deliberative discussions for the sole purpose of scaring some segment of the public.
NO ONE is suggesting changes to the rules regarding content of messages or what Members can post and any assertion to the contrary is inaccurate.
Similar Posts:
- Should Journalists Vote?
- Tom Delay: Make My Day Punk Democrats
- Do Nothing Incumbents, Be Very Afraid
Enjoy this post? Leave a comment below or subscribe to my feed. You also can sign up for email delivery by clicking here.
Trackbacks & Pingbacks
Comments
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Ears can be a-twitter. To wit:
http://www.cafepress.com/cp/moredetails.aspx?showBleed=false&ProductNo=283381148&colorNo=0&pr=F
LOL!!!!!! Ha! Ha!… Ha!
ah, i knew there was something i really like about Myrna - you don’t twitter! neither do i! who has _time_ to twitter? yet another social bookmarking/chat mutation, with an insipid name, to boot. why would i want to “twitter,” when i can write? that’s for the birds, literally. the ones who wake me up at precisely 5:30 a.m. every morning. twittering sounds okay when the birds do it. but i was not born to twitter.
to be honest about it, i don’t really _care_ what people i know are doing all freakin’ day long. do you? if i did, i’d turn on any one of four chat programs i have that are always turned off. why are they off? because i can’t get anything done when they’re turned on! people will sit there and message me all day long, despite me telling them that i’m working…you really pushed a button with me on this one, grin.
ditto for…web cams, shudder. do i _really_ want people to know what i look like when i’m caffeine-less or i just dribbled ice cream down the front of my t-shirt? nope.
voip? no. cell phone? nope. don’t necessarily want people to be able to reach me every second of every day. just call me a luddite or a hermit, i guess.
as for the rest of your post, well i kinda sorta usually assume that Republicans are lying. that’s what they do best. you know, the endless “spin.”
I didn’t even know it existed until I saw A. Damon
reference it today. Checked it out and found out you
need a cell phone, which I’ve never had.
Isn’t there the possibility of weird abuse? Harassment
and stuff??
Nah, don’t NEED a cell phone—its just easier to twitter all day long if you have one.