Remembering Post Ghost

Post Ghost, a website publishing deleted tweets from influential public figures, was recently informed by Twitter that its practices violated Twitter’s Developer Agreement and Policy. Post Ghost's aim was to provide transparency and hold public figures accountable for their tweets by maintaining a record of public statements made by celebrities, politicians and other public figures. With this in mind, Post Ghost only published tweets from verified users (who make up .05% of all Twitter users). In an open letter to Twitter, Post Ghost argued for the importance of their site in validating questionable deleted tweets and holding public figures responsible for their digital statements. In cases of discrepancy, dispute or controversy over tweets' existence and deletion, archives such as Post Ghost can be influential in resolving matters, or at least in making facts available.

In an analogous incident just over a year ago, Politwoops lost access to the Twitter developer API, despite having been in existence and in partnership with Twitter for three years. Politwoops is another site archiving deleted tweets, but while Post Ghost encompasses all verified users (primarily celebrities, politicians, and news sources), Politwoops focuses exclusively on politicians. A Twitter spokesperson stated that at the time, “preserving deleted Tweets violates [their] developer agreement. Honoring the expectation of user privacy for all accounts is a priority for [them], whether the user is anonymous or a member of Congress.” Following the Twitter-Politwoops split, the Sunlight Foundation released a Eulogy as many mourned the loss of the site’s tweet-feed.

However, just a few months after Twitter revoked Politiwhoops access, which prompted discussions of the value of sites like Politwoops, Twitter had a change of heart, and reinstated Politwoops’ access to the developer API. The site currently remains active, but Twitter has continued to threaten shutdowns.

Personally, I believe all public figures, regardless of political status, should be held equally responsible for public statements. As the current influence of celebrities grows (outreaching that of politicians in many scenarios) their opinions and statements increasingly persuade the general public. With modern-day fame comes great authority; celebrities need to take responsibility for their power and accountability for their actions. Why should Politwoops be allowed to exist while Post Ghost is not? Should celebrities be granted the freedom to tweet and delete without consequence while politicians aren't? I hope that Twitter reevaluates the importance of Post Ghost and reinstates their access to the developer API.

Paralleling the ongoing debate of users' right to be forgotten, Twitter and its users have debated the creation of an edit button for tweets. With the edit function, Twitter has an opportunity to encourage even greater transparency by public figures as well as everyday users. I propose an edit function that layers tweets: maintaining the original tweet as well as each edit (if there are multiple). Each edit is time-stamped, which allows news sources to reference the exact version of a tweet they intended to cite. Additionally, embedded links would link specifically to the referenced version of the tweet, but would contain additional links of more or less recently updated versions. By allowing users to edit their tweets, Twitter would discourage users from deleting tweets altogether. This would likely diminish the number of misspellings and consolidations posted on sites like Post Ghost and Twitter. And, without the dilution of innocuously deleted and reposted tweets, those same sites would become entirely comprised of controversial or otherwise necessary to remove tweets.

Many Twitter