THIS
DOES NOT seem to be an uncommon notion. I have a Facebook friend who likes to
use his account to post political missives (usually along the lines of how
misunderstood Trump is) who recently declared that people can’t comment on his
page unless they “friend” him and how he reserves the right to delete anything
he considers irrelevant to his issues.
Personally,
I think that amounts to people putting way too much time and effort into their
social media accounts. Or perhaps they really believe they should be taken all
that seriously. Although I also understand that my friend probably has many
idiots who have nothing better to do than post obscenity-laced diatribes on his
site telling him how wrong he is!
I
have always had a rather loose attitude toward people responding to me when I
write something – largely because I have always realized that people have the
right to be wrong.
I
feel pity for those who don’t realize the innate sensibilities of the stances I
take when I write various commentaries. Either that, or I figure I already had
my say on an issue by writing the initial commentary.
WHEN
IT COMES to responses published on this site, the only things I delete are
those from people who insist on using profanity. I can handle the fact that 100
percent of the populace does not agree with me. I just don’t need to contribute
to the spread of obscene language.
Which
means I kind of feel sorry for those people who feel a need to control the
level of debate they are subjected to while taking actions that are meant to
provoke a reaction. What’s the fun in writing thoughtful commentary if all
you’re seeking is people who agree with you?
If
anything, I’m curious to see what becomes of the Twitter missives sent out by
Trump – which, by the way, was the focus of a Saturday Night Live sketch this
past weekend – once he gets access to the presidential account.
As
in the one now used by Barack Obama and his aides to send out messages to his
supporters. Will knowing that his thoughts will now be archived for posterity
cause Trump to tone down his level of nastiness?
OR
IS HE going to resist using the official presidential Twitter account and try
to use his own personal one; on the grounds that he wants more control over the
process.
Which
would be very similar to the line of logic that Hillary Clinton used as
secretary of state in insisting on having a personal Internet server to handle
the e-mail messages she sent instead of merely using the official federal
government amenities.
Ironic
if Trump wound insist on committing an act very similar in intent to the one
that he repeatedly claimed during the campaign that she deserved incarceration
for.
In
my own case, I have Facebook (www.facebook.com/gregory.tejeda) and Twitter (@tejeda_gregory)
accounts – although I don’t really do as much as many people do with either. I
see them as serving a self-promotional purpose – usually to make people aware
of the thoughts that are being published at this weblog. Which is why I let
people say what they want – I’m amazed they bothered to post at all.
IN
FACT, THE Twitter account has only been in existence for not quite two months,
and I have fewer than 20 people “following” me. Largely because I see the
medium as so limiting that it’s not worth much of my time.
Which
makes me wonder about what kind of public official have we, the people, truly
elected. A twit who Tweets? And one who thinks he can restrict with the whim of
a couple of computer keystrokes who is allowed to read his thoughts. Most of
which are insipid enough that I haven’t bothered to want to be among the
“millions” of people who follow his account.
I’d
like to think I have better things to do with my time and read him. I wish more
people felt the same way, and not just about Trump.
“Social”
media, by-and-large, is for use by people whose social skills are so lacking
that I doubt we’d ever want to encounter them in person.
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment