Mayor shouldn’t block followers on Twitter

Jim Watson’s account isn’t personal, says Erin Gee.

The internet can be a brutal place for everyone with an opinion to share. It’s particularly awful if you’re a woman, but it’s bad if you’re a public figure of any sort.

But what if you’re a politician? How do you deal with trolls? What are the rules distinguishing between official accounts and personal accounts?

Mayor Jim Watson uses Twitter to communicate his day-to-day activities, post photos from events, retweet compliments, and provide official updates. Twitter, it seems, is one of his main methods of communicating with the public. And herein lies the issue.

Unlike many politicians and public figures, Watson controls his own Twitter account. He communicates directly with constituents and on occasion, debates them. And sometimes, if the conversation gets heated, the mayor hits the “Block” button.

Watson isn’t the only politician known to “block” people. U.S. President Donald Trump used the button liberally in the past; it even landed him in hot water. The Knight First Amendment Institute sued the president for violating the First Amendment by blocking people on Twitter, with a federal judge ruling that Trump was indeed in violation. The judge determined that Trump’s Twitter account is a public forum, like a public park, and that people have the right to express their opinions to him and vice versa. The ruling noted, however, that while the president cannot block people, he can mute people — the equivalent of ignoring folks who yell at you in a public place.

On CBC recently, Watson defended his practice of blocking some people by saying that his account is personal (and that the City of Ottawa account is the official account of the city). He said he can therefore block people, including those who “question his integrity,” “call him names” and use “vulgar language.”

Except his account is not really a personal account.

The feed @JimWatsonOttawa tweets the mayor’s daily schedule, which includes city council meetings, stakeholder meetings, staff meetings and other events. There are tweets and photos of events attended in official capacities; tweets making announcements or official proclamations; and significant updates — such as when power was fully restored to Ottawa following the tornadoes (it’s worth noting that the City of Ottawa Twitter account never formally announced that power had been fully restored, despite the mayor saying that is the “official” account).

These are not the activities of “Private citizen Jim Watson”; they are the activities of a person acting in an official government capacity.

I know you’re thinking we should all have the right to support our own mental health, especially when dealing with abuse and trolls online. But by blocking people who disagree with him, Watson is silencing dissenting voices that may very well have valid concerns he should hear. As well, he prevents them access to the myriad announcements on his feed. This was evident during the recent tornadoes, when several people could not access his tweets for pertinent information.

There’s the counter-argument that many female politicians block people. However, the abuse male politicians face pales in comparison to that faced by women. Former premiers Kathleen Wynne and Christie Clark both faced death threats during their times in office. Are threats to your safety a good reason to block someone? Yes. Are attacks on your integrity? No. Having your integrity questioned comes with being a politician.

Following controversy over a recent municipal election debate where he touched a female opponent, Coun. Eli El-Chantiry briefly made his account private so that he would not see tweets from people not already following him (he has since made his account public again). This blackout was problematic, though, because El-Chantiry is not only a councillor, but chair of the Ottawa Police Services Board; his role is broader than that of the average councillor.

While Twitter has been around since 2006, we’re admittedly still trying to navigate how the platform can, and should, be used by politicians — especially those running the accounts themselves and choosing to use them to interact with the public. But a politician shouldn’t tout his “transparency” then deny access to his public, official communications. If the mayor truly wants a “personal” Twitter account, he should likely restrict it to tweeting photos of cats.