-
Loads of people use services to delete their tweets. I think @Velocio deletes any tweets older than 2 weeks. I can see why it makes sense if you tweet about anything other than day-to-day mundanity.
Twitter's TOS say that you should honour delete notifications for tweets, and plenty of archiving services have got in trouble, e.g. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jun/04/twitter-blocks-transparency-in-government-archive-politwoops-breaching-terms-service so I'm guessing she wants to prevent people from searching through all of her old tweets and gathering more evidence of how vile she is.
-
A few other papers in that building...
-
I do delete tweets older than 2 weeks.
I tell you what people forget to delete... likes.
Though I periodically purge those too.
My reasoning is that the interaction with Twitter is essentially with ephemeral discussion and conversation and that the value to me and others declines exponentially over time, and that of all communication the ephemeral is the least self-moderated. Thus the future holds the potential for the lowest value content, with least moderation applied, being able to haunt you out of context by being searchable and citeable.
I feel that it is reckless to not delete social content routinely given that history has already demonstrated the ability to hold people to account for their past, given shifting rules of acceptance in the future.
Most of this epiphany that I feel I had stems from an article about a Canadian drug researcher who took drugs that were legal at the time within the geography he was located, as part of his research. And yet years later this was discovered by US Border Control and he was permanently excluded from accessing the USA because of his admitted drug use. Which is a hell of a dystopian thing, and even before conversations about the Stasi arise, shows that it remains very possible today to be held accountable for perfectly legal things that you did in the past.
When one considers a lot of social issues, and how increasingly divisive they are, I actually think the greater harm can come from the outing and shaming of individuals based on flippantly made historical comments. I'd go so far as to even defend Katie Hopkins for that... even though she is a vile human.
-
From comments:
This article fudges the main point, which is that Hopkins published a
column attacking Jackie Teale only after the teacher had had the
temerity to criticise online an earlier piece by Hopkins about the
demo. Hopkins, who is utterly intolerant of criticism of or
disagreement with her own views, then wrote a vicious piece about
Teale, knowing perfectly well that the result would be a deluge of
hatred directed towards the teacher, as was indeed the case. This is
how the Mail and its columnists attempt to scare people out of
criticising them. Thank goodness for people with guts who are not
prepared to succumb to these bully-boy tactics. -
Hopkins having to sell her house (with full Hello-style photo spread to accompany the story) to pay her legal fees;
I did laugh.
-
Someone is quick to update the listing;
-
Fuck me, a million goes a long way in Exeter.
-
Magnificent news.
-
Alt-rumighymomauve
-
It's nearly February right?
-
I have seen this thread pop up a few times over the last few months and have wondered whether to admit to this in here or in the safety of the 'I confess..." thread.
A couple of years ago I had a dream where I killed Katie Hopkins. The dream was ridiculously graphic and certainly nsfw. It came to me just after the height of the news coverage of the Mediterranean migrant crisis, coinciding with Hopkins' worst comments.
Should I feel guilty? Should I see a psychiatrist? Should I shut up?
Greenbank
Well_is_it
Velocio
spindrift
andyp
Aroogah
JWestland
Howard
jaw
Stonehedge
Bullheart
crossedthread
deleted
Mr_Sworld
snottyotter
fly-
Post a reply
About
Katie Hopkins
Posted by
@Johnnyw
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2017/11/27/katie-hopkins-deletes-every-tweet-she-ever-posted-as-she-is-fired-by-mailonline/amp/