alt Hacker NewsI'm totally clueless, but aren't there rules requiring accessibility of public-facing government communications, to the extent that they shouldn't be allowed to use a gated platform when making official statements that are a matter of public interest?
Replies
Someone could certainly make a case in a lawsuit for an ADA violation. I bet if people organized, the city would listen before it got to that point
There are open meeting laws like the Brown Act but I think that only restricts relying on social media for deliberation. Not communication
There is also Lindke v. Freed (2024) which holds that public officials using social media can be sued under the First Amendment violations like blocking users or deleting comments.
I presume the post is referencing principal councils in England or Wales. They're powerful enough to make life difficult, but small enough to not get a lot of oversight. From what I've heard, it's like a government-backed HOA, and they're notorious for doing whatever they want, while not letting you do what you want.
No, and this policy goes back to publication in for-profit newspapers. Not an issue in the USA in general.
With a disclaimer that there's one zillion governmental entities on the planet overall, so its plausible that one requires no fee and no signup required.
Newspapers are still often required to be used for certain government publications and they cost money. TwitterX is free. I'm not clear what the controversy here is exactly.
It's not gated. You can read any non-adult post with a direct link. I'm seeing this perspective all over in here. As someone without an X account, I can only assume you all have X accounts to not know this!
It should be that way.
My tolerance for people posting to X without also posting to an open platform is over.
Public institutions especially.
There's zero excuse, none.