As many of us know, the combination of President Donald Trump and Twitter can be trouble, but over the weekend, he dragged the National Parks Service into it. After the agency (possibly accidentally) retweeted something uncomplimentary on Inauguration Day, the Parks Service was ordered to stop using all Twitter accounts after it apparently hurt the new president’s feelings. If that sounds bizarre, the story within the story gets even weirder.
First, the tweet in question.
Compare the crowds: 2009 inauguration at left, 2017 inauguration at right.#Inauguration pic.twitter.com/y7RhIR2nfC
— Binyamin Appelbaum (@BCAppelbaum) January 20, 2017
The New York Times’ Washington correspondent fired this one out as part of the conversation surrounding the turnout for the inauguration, which appeared pretty lackluster. Having it show up on the Parks account was a little bit strange, though the agency does report on events in and around federal property and offers information about news of note. What seems likely is that someone with access to the account sent a tweet meant for their personal account — it wouldn’t have been the first time.
The White House retaliated with a Twitter blackout — one that was quickly lifted, likely in response to outraged comments.
However, the issue raised two important and very distinct issues.
The first is how the government embraced the use of social media under President Obama, with a growing number of government agencies using social media for outreach, communication and education. Employees of the National Parks Service even use social media for something pretty critical: safety warnings. While there are lots of ways to find that information, if you’re used to seeing it on Twitter, you might assume that the absence of warnings means no outstanding precautions are listed — and you could have been wrong.
Cutting off the National Parks Service deprives the agency of opportunities to connect with the public, including a chance to offer vital safety information through yet another channel. And the agency, like many others, likes to have fun on social media too — a goofy post now and then makes light of the parks and their history and humanizes the agency for members of the public.
The American public deserves to have access to information from the government via every available means. In recent weeks, we’ve seen a series of attempts to constrict access, including legislation and official White House policy. That bodes poorly for a free and fair nation.
There’s another issue too, though, and that is the longstanding history of restrictions on speech from civil servants, including through government agencies. One reason for this restriction is the concern that government employees carry more weight, or could be perceived as speaking for their agencies. There’s also a worry that politics could interfere with function — if you arrived at a campsite and the ranger was wearing a pin advertising political views that differ from yours, for example, that might make you feel uncomfortable.
Under that policy, one could argue that the tweet in question was more than an informative message, but a political comment. It might be tough to prove either way, as one could argue that information about numbers of inauguration attendees is in the public interest, that the National Parks Service would have those numbers, and that a photo handily illustrates them in an accessible format. If the tweet was a political statement, removing it from the official count (as was done) and reprimanding the employees responsible might be reasonable, but they set a dangerous precedent.
When is a tweet just a tweet, and when could it be construed as political? That’s a question many government employees handling social media may be asking themselves in coming years as they consider whether information they’re providing for the public interest might be construed as a dig at the White House. Is talking about climate change going to become political speech? What about reporting statistics on civil rights violations? Or informing people about US-Russia relations?
Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn
Dear Truthout Community,
If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.
We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.
Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.
There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.
Last week, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?
It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.
We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.
We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.
Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment. We are presently looking for 231 new monthly donors in the next 2 days.
We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.
With love, rage, and solidarity,
Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy