Rempelsputin: An Experiment In Political Thinskinnedness

Ra ra Rempelsputin
Lover of the Twitter Block
There was a cat with really thin skin…

When I was relatively new to Twitter there was a urban legend that I heard about on Canadian political Twitter about a politician who would block anyone for any reason. Michelle Rempel, a newish Calgary MP, and a frequent Conservative talking head on CTV and CBC was gaining quite the reputation for blocking anyone who publicly dissented or questioned her on Twitter.

Sure enough, after a particularity combative interview on CBC News, I decided to challenge Michelle Rempel on Twitter about some of her more questionable assertions. It wasn’t rude, there was no profanity, but sure enough I was blocked. To be honest, it was no real loss. Rempel was representative of the hive attacking philosophy of most CPC parliamentarians on Twitter.

I decided to see if this was an attempt to block out Liberal supporters or a wider phenomenon. What was it that set Michelle Rempel off? So, I started the Rempel experiment. Over the past year I contacted 15 people that I personally knew, who were Twitter users and not very political, or yet blocked by Michelle Rempel. I asked them one simple favour. To ask Michelle Rempel a fair immigration based question in a non-partisan manner, but also to challenge Conservative Party policy. No profanity, but a fair and tough question that all politicians should be able to answer.

Questions asked were, “While I agree that irregular immigration had increased, could we find a solution that didn’t require rhetoric” or variations of it, asked directly to Michelle Rempel via a reply to one of her Tweets. These questions were asked randomly over the past year. 10 of the 15 were blocked on the first question, another 3 on a second question. Afterwards I sent a direct message to 30 random people who I follow on Twitter asking them if they were blocked by Michelle Rempel. 24 were blocked, 7 of them blocked without ever having had a Twitter interaction with Rempel. Note: the Tweets were sent by non-anonymous accounts, or people with a public profile. Anonymity was promised. This wasn’t scientific or journalistic. This was a curiosity I indulged in.

So what do this tell us? That a Canadian politician who is paid collectively by Canadian taxpayers refuses to answer basic and fair questions posed by Canadians in a non-confrontational manner in a public forum.

Yes, I am aware that many politicians face abuse on Twitter, especially a female politician with a high profile. There are situations that blocking is not only fair, but a necessity. The level of blocking that Michelle Rempel engages in goes far beyond that. Are threats to your safety a good reason to block someone? Of course. Are attacks on your integrity? No. Having your integrity and policies questioned comes with being a politician. A politician being paid by taxpayers, while accessing social media on taxpayer funded equipment while tweeting political statements and news should not be able to block you without cause. That is inexcusable. It is even more inexcusable as a constituent.

Twitter is now an important tool for political communication, and as taxpayers, we have a right to access our elected representatives. When we are blocked by an parliamentarian on social media we lose access to important information such as when public consultations will be held, the roll out for new initiatives, policy announcements, and the ability to engage in a wider public debate.

Recently, three citizens of Ottawa sued Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson for blocking them on Twitter, arguing that by doing so he’s violating their charter rights. By blocking some residents, the lawsuit alleged, the mayor denied them information and the “ability to engage in debate concerning municipal issues using Twitter,” which the applicants argue is now a vital method of communication for public officials. Jim Watson relented and agreed to restore access to those citizens. It is time to test this nationally.

I would love to see a charter challenge lawsuit launched regarding federal politicians, or any elected representatives, blocking Canadian citizens on Twitter, especially without justification. Perhaps it is time for some rules surrounding social media conduct for parliamentarians and other elected officials. The threat of being blocked chills public debate in my opinion, especially when an elected official uses social media exclusively for partisan political purposes like Michelle Rempel does.

The very bedrock of Canadian democracy is representation and participation, and social media is now as important as having a constituency office and even more important than Question Period in the House of Commons. By excluding those with whom they disagree from public participation and access, they are violating the basic democratic rights of Canadians, even if those rights in the context of social media are yet unwritten. I firmly believe that politicians who block without cause on social media are participating in a new form of disenfranchisement.


One thought on “Rempelsputin: An Experiment In Political Thinskinnedness”

  1. I am one of those Canadians #BlockeByRempel without ever interacting with her in any way on Twitter. I suspect the CPC maintains a list of accounts that tweet things they don’t like, and MPs can decide whether or not to use it to block anyone who might be “problematic”, i.e. hold different views from them. I think the problem goes much farther than Michelle Rempel, but she is certainly one of the most enthusiastic blockers.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.