Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Twitter Blocks API Access For Sites Monitoring Politicians' Deleted Tweets

Posted by Soulskill on from the off-the-record dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Politwoops is/was a site that monitored the Twitter feeds of politicians and posted any tweets that those politicians later deleted. On May 15, Twitter suspended API access for the U.S. version of Politwoops, and now they've blocked access to the versions of Politwoops running in 30 other countries. Twitter has also blocked access for similar site Diplotwoops, which focused on deleted tweets from diplomats and embassies. Twitter said, "'Imagine how nerve-racking – terrifying, even – tweeting would be if it was immutable and irrevocable? No one user is more deserving of that ability than another. Indeed, deleting a tweet is an expression of the user's voice." Arjan El Fassed, director of the Open State Foundation, which developed Politwoops, disagrees: "What politicians say in public should be available to anyone. This is not about typos but it is a unique insight on how messages from elected politicians can change without notice."

7 of 114 comments (clear)

  1. Finally! by fey000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If there is one thing politicians need less of, it's personal responsibility.

    Imagine a world where politicians could be judged not only by what they say in front of the reporters, but also by their actions and behaviour outside of PR-dictated statements. Sounds horrible, right? It's a good thing Twitter has stepped in to make sure that doesn't happen.

    1. Re:Finally! by known_coward_69 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      a lot of these are tweeted by interns because the actual politicians are working. no reason to jump on someone for saying the wrong thing on a slow news day

    2. Re:Finally! by Jhon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "a lot of these are tweeted by interns" ... "no reason to jump on someone for saying the wrong thing on a slow news day"

      I disagree. Shouldn't a politician also be judged by the quality of people they appoint and how they respond to inept and irresponsible actions by them?

    3. Re:Finally! by cdrudge · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Perhaps the politicians shouldn't rely on interns to be their voice then.

    4. Re:Finally! by Jhon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't trust most voters. I believe them to be blissfully ignorant.

      If I could "make @&^% happen" I would force a simple test for people wishing to cast a ballot.

      Something like: "Who is your current city assemblyman?". Even make it multiple choice. If you can't answer, you cant vote for your districts assemblyman. Same for all other offices state and federal. *

      Also, don't include a list of what each "Prop" is pro or con. Just a question: "Which is Prop 205?" -- and you select from a multiple choice (the actual text of the prop) -- if you get it right, you get to vote yes/no on it.

      Voting should not be easy. It should be hard. Get rid of "mail in voting" for all except those who are really out of the country or home/hospital bound. It'll weed out those who really don't give a crap. I believe it would have the added effect of limiting influence of "money" on campaigns since only those who have really taken the time to learn who their representatives are and/or local propositions are will be likely to cast a ballot.

      * allow for some exceptions -- say for "new to district" folks.

    5. Re:Finally! by Jhon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      'Don't forget the 2nd question, "are you white?"'

      Cute -- and people usually go there. You might make the argument that my suggestion for props might be a "literacy" test and perhaps you are right. Again, if you can't read the documentation on props how can you cast an informed vote? With regards to your representative -- you just need to recognize a name. There's no difference NOW going in other than if you can't recognize the name on the screen/ballot NOW, how would someone illiterate cast a vote? And any other jim-crow crap doesn't really apply to my suggestion.

      How is asking who your Representative currently is targeting anyone's race? Or even education level? The only group it targets are those who aren't interested enough to be familiar with what their representatives are doing or what props they are voting for/against. I think this is a general 'good'.

      Seriously? How can you expect democracy to work when people randomly "check boxes"? The only people who should vote are those that care enough to be familiar with what their government is doing. Otherwise, just roll dice.

  2. Own what you say by sjbe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Twitter said, "'Imagine how nerve-racking – terrifying, even – tweeting would be if it was immutable and irrevocable?

    And why shouldn't it be terrifying? If you don't mean it then don't say it. If you said something stupid or embarrassing then explain it but own what you said. They SHOULD be careful about what they say in public just like when they say something to a TV camera or a reporter. I've said things on the internet that in hindsight I could have said better but the fact is that I said it and I have to own it.