[Lnc-business] Social Media Links on LNC page on lp.org
Caryn Ann Harlos
caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
Wed Aug 29 21:18:32 EDT 2018
I think we are looking at this very much in a Luddite fashion. Social
media has surpassed email or phone for many segments of the population.
Not listing doesn't make it not exist. Listing it doesn't endorse it any
more than listing our phone number endorses everything we might say on that
telephone or having a picture endorses everything we might do if we are
seen in public. It is a piece of personally identifying contact
information in the current year.
If listing the contact medium of someone's choice (Trent literally did not
use email) is using Party resources then we had all better scrub our
signature lines of anything not on the website including social media and
caucus affiliations. Obviously I don't think we should, but that is where
the logic goes.
People will find us on social media no matter what - having social media
contacts on the contact page keeps us looking current and not like stodgy
politicians.
As far as Arvin, listing it or not listing it is not going to make a
difference on conduct unbecoming, and it could always have been yanked, and
THAT would have been a positive statement that we do not approve rather
than the nothing we did other than a censure after a long bit of time.
We talk about micromanagement. This is micromanagement.
And I will gather the info and give to the ED but I don't think it is
within on LNC member's control to tell the ED he cannot post until we
discuss unless that LNC member asks the Chair to make such a directive or
get a duly sponsored motion. I will leave all that to the discretion of
the ED and the Chair.
Already any page that has our title in the page we cannot promote internal
candidates, caucuses, or solicit non-FEC funds and hopefully have a more
formal tone. It would be completely reasonable of the ED to say that any
listed social media has to be to an "official" page/account which is what I
was asking for rather than a "personal" page/account.
I think requiring that the link for to an official/public figure profile
and a disclaimer more than satisfies this and I would suggest that the
ED/Chair consider that as a potential limiter.
On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 4:40 PM Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via
Lnc-business <lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> So let's discuss. Questions I'll put forth to everyone facilitate
> discussion.
>
> If you are concerned about social media links...
>
> Are all platforms equally a concern or are some less problematic than
> others?
>
> Does a disclaimer make you feel more comfortable with this as a
> possibility?
>
> Are their specific and hopefully simple rules you'd want the ED to use in
> determining when appropriate to add or remove such links?
>
> Regardless of social media links on the website or not, social media
> controversies are bound to happen and cause more grief than we’d like.
> Should we have a formal or informal protocol on how we manage such
> situations as usually managing the spread of such situations can be time
> sensitive.
>
> Alex Merced
> Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
>
> Alex Merced
> Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
>
> > On Aug 29, 2018, at 6:04 PM, Elizabeth Van Horn <
> elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org> wrote:
> >
> > Alex,
> >
> > Alicia beat me to it with the example of our former Vice-Chair.
> >
> > I doubt anyone would have wanted to have links from the national LP page
> to his profile, yet that's the kind of thing we open ourselves to if we're
> linking to social media profiles.
> >
> > All sorts of stuff ends up on social media profiles that isn't
> representative of the national LP's position, not necessarily from LNC
> members, but other content, comments, and opinions. How does the LP and
> LNC distance from that? Do we have a disclaimer? "The opinions reflected
> here may not be those of the LP and LNC"? Something like that. How do we
> as a body ensure that profiles and/or pages reflect our platform and
> stance? Or, do we say, "Oh, gee, that's from an LNC member, and there's a
> link from our national website to that, but that's not what we hold as our
> values"?
> >
> > Since there was no formal motion, and it's within the executive
> director's discretion, unless the LNC says otherwise, I want this to be
> discussed before a decision is made. We're entrusted with the reputation of
> the LP through our various mediums. If we want our own social media to
> better reflect our LP principals so much that we have an 'Advertising &
> Publication Review Committee' dedicated for that purpose, why would we want
> to link to various profiles and pages with which there's no control?
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Elizabeth Van Horn
> >
> >> On 2018-08-29 16:52, Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via Lnc-business
> wrote:
> >> Agreed with Richard that this doesn't seem very controversial to me
> >> and we should aim to allow those who would want to be more accessible
> >> to membership the ability to do so.
> >> Although, to provide the distance that is a reasonable concern from
> >> social media statements a visible disclaimer on the page saying LNC
> >> member social media reflects only the opinion of the member and does
> >> not speak for the LNC or the LP as a whole. Such a disclaimer should
> >> help strike the balance in this situation.
> >> While I agree that candidates should be front and center I do think it
> >> would be good for intraparty morale if some LNC members were more
> >> visible and accessible as many are. So, I agree with Richard that
> >> those who want their info can make it available and those that don't,
> >> don't. I also understand Alicias concern and think that could be fixed
> >> with a basic disclaimer.
> >> Alex Merced
> >> Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
> >
>
>
--
* In Liberty,*
*Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary *- Caryn.Ann.
Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org> or Secretary at LP.org.
*Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee* - LPedia at LP.org
Call me at 561.523.2250 and follow my public figure page at
facebook.com/pinkflameofliberty/
=========================================================================
Peaceful Commerce With All Nations * Non-interventionism * Re-Legalize All
Drugs * End Government Intrusion In The Bedroom * Repeal All Gun Laws *
Abolish All Taxation * Sound, Free-market Money * Abolish The Fed * End
Corporate & Individual Welfare * Abolish The IRS and Repeal the Income Tax
* Privatize Transportation Infrastructure * Free-market Emergency Services
* Open Migration * Transfer Government Schools To The Private Sector *
Eliminate Regulation *
*VOTE LIBERTARIAN * 800-ELECT-US or http://www.LP.org <http://www.lp.org/>*
=========================================================================
-------------- next part --------------
I think we are looking at this very much in a Luddite fashion. Social
media has surpassed email or phone for many segments of the
population. Not listing doesn't make it not exist. Listing it doesn't
endorse it any more than listing our phone number endorses everything
we might say on that telephone or having a picture endorses everything
we might do if we are seen in public. It is a piece of personally
identifying contact information in the current year.
If listing the contact medium of someone's choice (Trent literally did
not use email) is using Party resources then we had all better scrub
our signature lines of anything not on the website including social
media and caucus affiliations. Obviously I don't think we should, but
that is where the logic goes.
People will find us on social media no matter what - having social
media contacts on the contact page keeps us looking current and not
like stodgy politicians.
As far as Arvin, listing it or not listing it is not going to make a
difference on conduct unbecoming, and it could always have been yanked,
and THAT would have been a positive statement that we do not approve
rather than the nothing we did other than a censure after a long bit of
time.
We talk about micromanagement. This is micromanagement.
And I will gather the info and give to the ED but I don't think it is
within on LNC member's control to tell the ED he cannot post until we
discuss unless that LNC member asks the Chair to make such a directive
or get a duly sponsored motion. I will leave all that to the
discretion of the ED and the Chair.
Already any page that has our title in the page we cannot promote
internal candidates, caucuses, or solicit non-FEC funds and hopefully
have a more formal tone. It would be completely reasonable of the ED
to say that any listed social media has to be to an "official"
page/account which is what I was asking for rather than a "personal"
page/account.
I think requiring that the link for to an official/public figure
profile and a disclaimer more than satisfies this and I would suggest
that the ED/Chair consider that as a potential limiter.
On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 4:40 PM Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via
Lnc-business <[1]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
So let's discuss. Questions I'll put forth to everyone facilitate
discussion.
If you are concerned about social media links...
Are all platforms equally a concern or are some less problematic
than others?
Does a disclaimer make you feel more comfortable with this as a
possibility?
Are their specific and hopefully simple rules you'd want the ED to
use in determining when appropriate to add or remove such links?
Regardless of social media links on the website or not, social media
controversies are bound to happen and cause more grief than we’d
like. Should we have a formal or informal protocol on how we manage
such situations as usually managing the spread of such situations
can be time sensitive.
Alex Merced
Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
Alex Merced
Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
> On Aug 29, 2018, at 6:04 PM, Elizabeth Van Horn
<[2]elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org> wrote:
>
> Alex,
>
> Alicia beat me to it with the example of our former Vice-Chair.
>
> I doubt anyone would have wanted to have links from the national
LP page to his profile, yet that's the kind of thing we open
ourselves to if we're linking to social media profiles.
>
> All sorts of stuff ends up on social media profiles that isn't
representative of the national LP's position, not necessarily from
LNC members, but other content, comments, and opinions. How does
the LP and LNC distance from that? Do we have a disclaimer? "The
opinions reflected here may not be those of the LP and LNC"?
Something like that. How do we as a body ensure that profiles
and/or pages reflect our platform and stance? Or, do we say, "Oh,
gee, that's from an LNC member, and there's a link from our national
website to that, but that's not what we hold as our values"?
>
> Since there was no formal motion, and it's within the executive
director's discretion, unless the LNC says otherwise, I want this to
be discussed before a decision is made. We're entrusted with the
reputation of the LP through our various mediums. If we want our
own social media to better reflect our LP principals so much that we
have an 'Advertising & Publication Review Committee' dedicated for
that purpose, why would we want to link to various profiles and
pages with which there's no control?
>
>
> ---
> Elizabeth Van Horn
>
>> On 2018-08-29 16:52, Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via
Lnc-business wrote:
>> Agreed with Richard that this doesn't seem very controversial to
me
>> and we should aim to allow those who would want to be more
accessible
>> to membership the ability to do so.
>> Although, to provide the distance that is a reasonable concern
from
>> social media statements a visible disclaimer on the page saying
LNC
>> member social media reflects only the opinion of the member and
does
>> not speak for the LNC or the LP as a whole. Such a disclaimer
should
>> help strike the balance in this situation.
>> While I agree that candidates should be front and center I do
think it
>> would be good for intraparty morale if some LNC members were more
>> visible and accessible as many are. So, I agree with Richard that
>> those who want their info can make it available and those that
don't,
>> don't. I also understand Alicias concern and think that could be
fixed
>> with a basic disclaimer.
>> Alex Merced
>> Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
>
--
In Liberty,
[uc?id=1DeRjq-L8dvRZabgEG94VkkUvjoHatcfP&export=download]
Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee
Secretary - [3]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.
Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
Call me at 561.523.2250 and follow my public figure page
at [4]facebook.com/pinkflameofliberty/
=======================================================================
==
Peaceful Commerce With All Nations * Non-interventionism * Re-Legalize
All Drugs * End Government Intrusion In The Bedroom * Repeal All Gun
Laws * Abolish All Taxation * Sound, Free-market Money * Abolish The
Fed * End Corporate & Individual Welfare * Abolish The IRS and Repeal
the Income Tax * Privatize Transportation Infrastructure * Free-market
Emergency Services * Open Migration * Transfer Government Schools To
The Private Sector * Eliminate Regulation *
VOTE LIBERTARIAN * 800-ELECT-US or [5]http://www.LP.org
=======================================================================
==
References
1. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
2. mailto:elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
3. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
4. http://facebook.com/pinkflameofliberty/
5. http://www.lp.org/
More information about the Lnc-business
mailing list