Welcome to Vox Political! Today is : December 23, 2024
Another underhanded attempt at censorship by the DWP falls flat on its face. This one was particularly evil as this government department apparently tried to mislead Twitter into believing it owned the username @UKJCP.
So let’s all show the DWP what we think of this behaviour. Follow @UKJCP on Twitter, retweet its best tweets and tell all your friends to do the same!
Bringing you the latest news and insights, every day!
All original material created for this site is © Mike Sivier. Posts may be shared, provided full credit is given to Mike Sivier and Vox Political, along with a link back to this site. Using any of my writing for a commercial purpose is not allowed without my express permission. Excerpts and links, including paraphrasing, may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Mike Sivier and Vox Political with appropriate and specific direction to the original content. Unless otherwise credited, all content is the site author’s. The right of Mike Sivier to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
I couldn’t believe the sh** who did the censoring is called the “brand manager”. How much money does this a**ehole get paid while decent people work caring for the sick and elderly for peanuts?
Good question – and one that I have already (unintentionally) echoed, before I found your comment, in a response to someone else.
“Twitter in application of common sense shocker”. This outcome adds useful nuance to the way you shared this story earlier in the week: although foolish civil servants may have the intent to stifle criticism, the risk of actual censorship seems encouragingly low.
Well, maybe – but only if people actually stand up and oppose the repressive government act.
I think you’re overstating the role of people in standing up against the government. Here, a silly civil servant applied to Twitter for an account to be brought down and Twitter used its own procedure to reach the right decision, including a short period of down time and asking the account holder to respond to the complaint. So actually the checks and balances have worked out rather well, and no hysteria is required. I don’t disagree that censorship in almost all its forms is undesirable, but I’m also not a fan of stuff written based on truisms.
The trouble with that is, we don’t know what would have happened if people HADN’T stood up in opposition. Personally, I would rather err on the cautious side and make sure my opposition was clear.
We can definitely agree about the silly civil servant, though – Jon Woodcock, ‘brand manager’ at the DWP. I wonder what pay grade is attached to that job title…
[…] Reblogged from the void: @Twitter says: "Thanks for your cooperation. […]
[…] Another underhanded attempt at censorship by the DWP falls flat on its face. This one was particularly evil as this government department apparently tried to mislead Twitter into believing it owned… […]