In case you missed it – (did any fan miss it) Richard Armitage, in a highly unusual action, announced what it means when he deletes a tweet – which we all know he does serially. What it means is that he wants the conversation, and particularly the “analysis”of his deleted tweet to end. Basically Shut the F Up.
This was hard news for those of us who are frequently accused of over-analyzing @RCArmitage’s tweets and other writings.as well as for fans who now and then have a beef with him or other fans about his Twittering and untwittering. Not because the practice would cease ( see also) and be sure to check out the analysis and discussion in the comments,. Why it was hard news, as far as I’m concerned, is (1) I am one of those fans who needs to talk about, discuss and debate – to analyze – his writings, and (2) by his tweet, he’s telling fans that, for him, it’s not okay to do that.
And we know what happens when Richard Armitage tells his fans something’s not okay, or, on the other hand, directs us to do some affirmative act, or have some particular feeling – it causes a huge conflict and flame in the fandom. No doubt, some of us will be blamed for this latest deletion
This is not okay, and some fans have been expressing that view since he became vocal on Twitter.
Now, maybe he rethought his position and realized just how authoritarian he sounded in his tweet and wanted to take it back. I don’t think so – because the way to do that would’ve been to tweet some sort of clarification.
No. The only way to read his deletion, together with the deleted tweet, is that he wants to end the analysis and discourse about his desire to police the fandom.
This is not okay with me, and I particularly resent it when just a day or so ago, this fandom was in delirious joy over the final announcement about Love, Love, Love and a new audiobook.
I’ve been spending the day – days really, thinking about, researching and writing about how to enhance all lucky fans’ New York City experience using their carefully squirreled away funds, how to get tickets, get better tickets, go to the stage door, so we can see him – watch him perform, live out his dream. And now this.
Richard Armitage – even your sometimes critical fans are spending a lot of dough – in some cases thousands, to see you live out your dream in New York City.
Richard Armitage – You know – you have to know, that you can’t shut down a discussion by deleting a tweet – so why do it except to express extreme displeasure towards a segment of your fandom that frankly, NEVER BULLIES. We are not the bullies. You create the bullies and the unkind, uncivil Twitter behavior when you interfere.
31 thoughts on “@RCArmitage Tries to Shut it Down and Blame Will Follow.”
Reblogged this on Armitage Agonistes.
Well, and what took me aback was apparently he is to some degree monitoring our discourse. Maybe some like that idea. I’m not sure I do. And as much as some may believe he should have the final say about when to end a discussion, I don’t feel particularly obliged.
I have thought for a long time that he is aware of our discourse. How close he’s monitoring, I don’t know, but some incidents and timing just can’t be denied. Also possible that “his people” had some advice about today. It’s very tough to be a blogger/fan who thinks he may be reading her stuff, although sometimes I have the urge to tell him something directly – today was one such time. You, too, I read. Some will say I am over-analayzing or picking apart his every word – but his choice of the word “analysis” today – to me was an intentional choice, precisely because this over-analysis issue has come up so often.
Excuse me for interrupt your discussion. You may ban or block me if you want. I just found the views of RA’s latest response and delete a interesting topic in here.
I think it is somehow nice that he reads the comments from blogger/fan. It makes one realize that even though RA is a celebrity, he is not infallible to making erroneous judgements. I am actually glad he makes the choices that he does regardless if his critics like it or not.
Whether he deletes or keeps his tweets, I find it rather amusing that some of us jump to conclusions of why he does these things. It’s almost like a game to see whether or not he will deletes his tweets.
Regardless of his actions, I respect him a little more now than I did the same time last year. He made me realize that he can’t please everyone. I actually sympathize with him for trying to keep as many of his fans happy. I simply don’t care about if he acts out his frustrations or gets angry at anyone anymore. It’s none of my business.
Many times, the person on the other end of disagreement deserves it. Through his actions, I realize that he is just like anyone regular person and that he’s not perfect as so many will lead us to believe. I actually like him for that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
We agree on many of your points. I like it when he reads tweets, but I’m not happy if he reads blogs, for obvious reasons. I don’t write this blog for him. I write it for myself and fans like you. Still, I know I can’t prevent it if he does, and while I don’t communicate with him directly via Twitter, or indirectly on this blog, I like the idea that he’s trying to learn something about his fandom.
I certainly agree with you that he’s not perfect, and I’m glad of that. I like that he shows a human, personal side sometimes. Unfortunately, there are many fans who think he is perfect and they revere him. There are also fans who know he is imperfect and human, but insist on shutting down any fans who discuss and analyze those imperfections. The silencers.
When Richard Armitage expresses that frustration and anger you referred to, against fans who discuss and analyze his imperfections or questionable actions, The Silencers sometimes pile on the Discoursers in an ugly, public way – so antithetical to the goals of Cybersmile.
This is harmful to the fandom. He’s interfering with the fandom. He’s causing the very behavior he’s supposed to prevent as a Cybersmile ambassador. So, as you are a fan who is an active part of this fandom, I wonder why you think it is not your business?
I don’t agree that “many times” the person on the other side of the disagreement deserves “it” from Richard Armitage. First, I don’t think he’s responded to individual fans many times.
There is a large group of fans who accuse other fans over over-analyzing everything he does, says or writes. Sometimes analysis can be critical, The term over-analyze, analyze, analysis is a hot button in this fandom.
So, when Richard Armitage explains why he deletes, and says he deletes to end the conversation and the subsequent analysis, he is becoming one of The Silencers and the result is he incites The Silencers to pile on the Discoursers or critics. His use of the word “analysis” was, in my opinion, directed at fans like me and those I discuss with.
I am very critical of anyone, including Richard Armitage, who is using his power and apparent authority to shut down legitimate discussion, because it’s critical of him.I am especially critical of someone who does it, knowing that the result will be bad behavior by fans against fan.
LikeLiked by 1 person
When does a fan who disagrees with Armitage ever “deserve” a pile on that has the intent to shut her up? People could simply disagree with that fan, but that is not what happens. They try to shut her up.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m really struggling to accommodate this additional info at the moment. I’ve never been particularly concerned about what Richard Armitage thinks of me, but I’ve also never had the strong impression before that he was anti-intellectual. Yes, I’d gotten the message that he’s not intellectual and it’s not a trait he admires all the much, but I’d never gotten the vibe that he thought other people should not do it. There’s a certain irony to this insofar as (a) the discussion always used to be, back in the day, that it wasn’t okay to just admire Armitage’s appearance, one had to admire his creativity and mind and (b) so many fans describe him as “erudite” or “learned.”
I’m not worried so much about being blamed for the deletion (I am against deletions, if he were following my opinions, he’d never delete, ever) but it does signal that the Gospel of Friendship According to Richard Armitage has expanded a chapter, and now we will hear, every time we write anything detailed that someone doesn’t like, that Richard Armitage doesn’t want us to be doing it. It feels like he “took a side” in the fandom today and that is disturbing, insofar as I don’t believe any of the more “analytical” bloggers have ever started an initiative against the wave of inane, silly, ridiculous, nonsensical, illogical things that get said in the fandom every day. Maybe we should. I don’t like being seen as a snob, though, and I’ve always thought that apart from illegality there is no wrong way to be a fan.
If he’s going to police the fandom he’s going to need to hire someone to stand in for him at Roundabout. Hope he has a good understudy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah, that’s a big part of it to me – that those fans who like to dissect and analyze tend to be the same who are the least likely to bully, police, personally attack and in short, engage in the behavior that he finds uncivilized. To the contrary, most of us are vigilant in differentiating bullying from disagreement and try very hard to keep serious conversation at a higher level. I don’t want to toot too many horns, mine or others, but we, these fans I’m referring to, spend a lot of time contributing positively to knowledge, news, ideas, etc., that all fans benefit from. But it’s like some political positions- people have one issue deal breakers, and criticism of him ( and Cybersmile) seems to be that deal breaker.
I agree, that he took a side today, and it hurts that I’m on his wrong side – even if he doesn’t know this blog or who I am. It hurts because he’s chosen the wrong side. He’s standing up for actions that lead to bullying or bad behavior, he wants to shut down discussion on a higher plane, and he’s given ammunition to all those fans who like to attack. I want to believe he deleted the tweet because he thought better of it – but I don’t believe that. He knows better. He should have explained himself better. A second tweet. I wouldn’t have liked what he said, I don’t think, but it would have been better than this.
You know you’ll get flack for addressing his intellect. I never noticed that he was anti-intellectual except for his sense of humor. I’d need some examples.
I’m really bummed about this and I don’t know how he can fix it. I know I can’t.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I honestly feel like an idiot for enforcing a “no ad hominem” rule on my blog after this. What’s the point?
I may have expressed myself poorly — I meant to say that there were signs that he doesn’t admire smart people (sarcastic remark about Jodhi May, that radio interview about the Hobbit where he self-deprecates about this thickness), but not that he was opposed to smart people thinking about things.
It’s been a long day so I’m going to sleep before I make any big decisions. But I too feel like my euphoria about LLL has been deflated. I am responsible for how I feel, but how bizarre that he is the one to give the impetus.
Me too. And I missed my art class today because of this. (My choice – but I missed it anyway)
My God, my first thought when I started reading the post, was that he deleted his tweeter account .,. What a relief he didn’t .. I really don’t want to think about his recent ‘deleting’ tweet at the moment
Maybe we’d all be better off if he did delete his account, or used it only for promotion.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Possibly you are right. But as someone said he will not delete his tweeter account as he is a Cybersmile ambassador and I’m afraid the temptation not to use 200K audience to express the thoughts on the issues he cares about is too big, and he is a thinking guy.
I know. Perhaps he can use it more judiciously. Anyway, it’s practically a requirement for his profession. I was watching an interview with some actress who was bemoaning how she is forced by her producers or contract or something, to use twitter to promote.
Thought long and hard before commenting as I usually find you interesting and amusing. Bu this time not – for goodness sake have some empathy for someone who may be obliged to have an account and to update it regularly. This blog is nowhere near as exposed to scrutiny so can’t be compared. I find you self justifying for your actions and unforgiveable in yourreactions – so, don’t go to the play (after all, the other actors are not worthy of consideration) and stop following Riachard Armitage if you don’t like his comments. He has the right to make them and you are coming very close to bullying.
Trish, I am no where near bullying. Show me where I’m bullying . Inever said Richard Armitage has no right to make his comments. But I have the right to disagree with and/or discuss them. Many fans who believe that Richard Armitage is beyond reproach in anything he does, accuse those critics of bullying because they have no other reasonable argument to shut down criticism. I’m expressing a contrary opinion – that’t it.
I can have some empathy for Richard Armitage, as a person who has to update his Twitter for professional promotional reasons, because even as a lowly blogger, I feel an obligation to update and be visible, and sometimes I don’t feel like it. Of course, unlike Richard Armitage, this isn’t my job and I don’t get paid for it. Anyway, I have in no way compared myself or this blog to Richard Armitage. And any empathy I have for him is as a working person who has to carry out a work-related task he may not like. But not all his tweets are work-related.
You haven’t really addressed what you find objectionable and unforgivable or what you mean by self-justifying.
I haven’t done anything to you personally, so I don’t know why you find my reactions to someone else’s conduct unforgivable or unjustifiable. Or do you object to my writing about my reactions? That, I have a problem with. You’re asking me not to write my opinions because they’re critical of Richard Armitage. That’s pretty much what he did when he tweeted and deleted. here’s how it went – I, Richard Armitage, delete my tweets to end the conversation that my first tweet started and therefore, to end the analysis. ( read in – I know this won’t work because you already have the tweets saved) Meaning, I Richard Armitage, want my fans to stop this discussion and analysis. Then, he deleted that tweet ( he gave us a few hours to continue). If A = B and B=C, then A=C. By deleting the tweet that explained why he deletes tweets, I think he clearly sent a message: I want you to end the conversation and the analysis about my tweet telling you not to talk about certain things critical of me. a.Too bad if you think that it’s okay for him to use his power to try and shut down a discussion that’s analytical and critical of him for policing legitimate fan discussions. Anyway – he knew he couldn’t shut it down, but he could express his displeasure over it by sending the very signal he gave us earlier in the day. Do you think Richard Armitage didn’t know that his explanatory tweet would promote vigorous discussion, some of it critical? Do you think that by then deleting the tweet, he didn’t know, anticipate, encourage, more analysis over the meaning of the deletion and send a message: this is what I meant and this is what I want to stop -Conversation and analysis of my Twitter behavior?
Do you not have a problem with that. Apparently not. But I would know more if I knew exactly what reaction of mine is unforgivable.
I don’t know what you mean by “stop following” – do you mean on Twitter or as a fan? As a blogger, I find it my obligation to keep up with his tweets and I have a separate category for @RichardArmitage so fans can access his tweets. I can still be a fan if I don’t like his comments. I am a great admirer of his work and I want him to enjoy the most successful career possible. I think he’s a gorgeous, talented artist and I want to see and talk about all his work with my fellow fans. That’s a fan.
And that being the case, why in the hell shouldn’t I go to the play?
But you tell me how I was bullying and we can discuss just what bullying is and isn’t.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If I may, I do not think a person expressing their opinion about an issue is “bullying”. And Perry (Armitage Agonistes) simply laid out her thoughts and perceptions about what RA’s “untweets” meant to her.
People will naturally represent a variety of viewpoints on the world that they interact with–including RA and those who follow him. And we may each espouse and express our viewpoints and discuss them if we wish. And I find it enlightening as I reflect upon some of the perceptions of others that I come across.
Sometimes others’ opinions reshape my opinions, and sometimes not. And people with differing viewpoints that won’t seem to change anytime soon, simply need to agree to disagree. And we can all take a moment to breathe in and out. There is no right nor wrong of people’s viewpoints—merely differing perceptions of the world that we all live in.
Facts are a different matter. And the confusion between opinion/perception and facts might sometimes be the issue. For example, will RA star in film “Mid LIfe Crisis?” The fact at the moment is no, sadly. However, one could speculate and state an opinion that if that MLC film’s delays continue, maybe RA and Toby Stephens will become available again to star in MLC–TS also bowed out of MLC due to other time committments. RA in rockstar spandex pants, no shirt, with long rockstar hair, and gyrating on stage as he plays guitar? We live in hope!
I have to giggle, when I first saw RA’s explanation tweet about his “untweeting”, I thought, okay. That clears it up. Then I minxishly immediately wondered if I should cap it, lest it also become … ephemeral. Dashed if that didn’t happen–his “untweet”. Ha! Oh well. It doesn’t bother me that he
“untweets” this one or any of his message. His Twitter account, his choice. And I hope that he keeps his Twitter account.
Frankly, I don’t have time to see every single tweet that passes through my Twitter feed, so I have never seen the complaining tweets of RA or of his fans. Therefore in my mind, the complainers must be only a handful of individuals. Very “loud” and repetitive individuals, perhaps–but again, I have not seen such tweets.
Perhaps RA’s best option when he wants “to change the subject” is to do just that–with a new tweet, offering a tidbit about something else. People will eventually move on to other topics. We hope. And happily, the contentious trolls/complainers are few and far between.
LikeLiked by 1 person
There have been very few complaining tweets by RA. It is his twitter and his choice, but he still has to live with the consequences of his twitter choices. While you acknowledging that it’s fine with you that he deletes tweets, there must have been something in the original tweet that made you think to screencap it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Actually, I didn’t bother to screen cap his untweet explanation tweet. His mention wasn’t noteworthy to me beyond his quick explanation–and my “memory banks” storage capacity haven’t eroded that much over the years, for me to forget it. Though I am loving the “senior” priced meals these days. Ha!
I am more interested in capping pictures that RA shares–as well as, his quotes about his projects, and links touting his projects.
Undoubtedly, there are many fans like you who doesn’t care what he tweets.
Fans like me? If you mean my being interested in RA’s projects, appreciating that he is an exquisitely talented actor and storyteller, thinking he is devilishly handsome and charming, applauding his philanthropic spirit, and noting his willingness/courage to share his personal opinions in a forum like Twitter that can sometimes be combustible. Then thank you!
And I didn’t say that I “don’t care what he tweets”. I simply do not speculate about his “motives” for some of his tweets. If he provides insights or explanations, fine, then we know what he means.
Of course you’re a fan, but I don’t think we always know what he means when he provides explanations and insights for some of his tweets – hence the need for speculation and analysis if we care what he says.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Perhaps not a “need” for speculation, but people’s natural curiosity will win out. Ha!
And the “if we care what he says” phrase seems like you want to want to imply something–but I’m just speculating. Because in general as fans, I think we naturally “care what he says”–just to different degrees. No litmus test of who is a *real fan* or not is needed.
And besides, right now my efforts at rhetorical and other analytical skills are focused on other issues, that I don’t need to explain or justify myself to anyone about.
Here’s a thought, maybe RA doesn’t need to justify or explain himself either–unless he wants to.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nobody needs to do anything. I think the curiosity point is right on.
LikeLiked by 1 person
i don’t know what makes people think he meant any blogs, i didn’t read it at all like this. To me, who didn’t actually see any of it live as i don’t tend to read that much beyond the first page that appears on my feed and search out his tweets or some others in particular i took it as probably some tweets/replies to his that where questions the why of this or that of his tweets. He certainly will know that people don’t react just to him directly but will discuss where and how they please elsewhere among themselves. Nor do i imagine he would think he could avoid that, it would be as unavoidable as what papers write about his work or such, completely out of his control. To me he meant his own feed and a discussion he feels he started but doesn’t want to engage with any longer. I walk away from many discussions when i feel i no longer want to be part of it, for whatever reason. Maybe he saw people fighting amongst themselves or discussing on his feed where it sort of spirals out of control, as it usually does. No idea. I can see how especially if it goes beyond anything he ever meant with his tweet that could cause frustration/irritation/exasperation. I’ve i think bar 1,2 isolated jokes back or liked never engaged directly with his feed so i don’t take any of his to concern me. I really don’t think his reaction had anything to do with anything else beyond reactions directly to him that he saw. I still think he spends much less time there than any of us and only sees incidentals, ie the spikes and extremes of direct engagement and remains largely ignorant of the vast mass of normal reactions which are never directed at him and which generally ponder or consider his. I’ve always found the reactions to him to be mostly a minority and not the bigger majority of pondering, considering, moving on, etc. Shrugs, i read articles and consider his views but since i don’t engage with him on his timeline i don’t see how his reaction to his timeline or replies has anything to do with me. I don’t even think the deletion is always motivated by similar reasons, like mine isn’t either.
But i do think he’s gotten sucked into the stress of recent weeks and spent probably too much time on tw, it’s never healthy i think as it is far for normality and only amplifies reactions and it’s caused him to knee jerk and regret/delete. If anything i think he needs to read less and place less emphasis on every single reaction on tw he happens to stumble across as there are thousands of minds out there and he only reads reactions from a few my coincidence almost.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I don’t think he was just referring to Twitter replies when he said he wanted to shut down analysis. Very little analysis takes place on the Twitter feed. And as you say, he knows the discussion will continue off his feed and elsewhere. Even if it did, why would he want to shut down analysis and conversations that don’t violate good social media contact?
well, i might just disagree with others on this, i think he means his twitter feed alone and he probably does perceive it as ‘analyzing’ his meaning beyond what he really meant when people always reply why this and why not that and so on, it would very much depend on what he reads and i for one believe his statements are much more at face value than double entendres than other people seem to think. I for example have my own opinion on why he didn’t tweet about Turkey or why he gravitates towards some news or such. I see little in the way of actual conversations on twitter, mostly it is people shouting out their own views with no real interest for the view of others, he might feel something similar when he bumps into his own feed. I just don’t tweet about things i have complex or extended views on and i think some expressions of sympathy are platitudes that do nothing, so i don’t even say them. But i don’t mind others doing so, it’s mostly feelings people express on twitter in my opinion, not fully elaborated and digested through thoughts. If the latter would be the case i suspect we’d see a lot less tweets. As i’ve said before i am cautious about attaching deeper and complex meaning to 140 characters, when he wants to explain complex thoughts or meanings he does so in many more words. I for one can understand him wanting to bow out of a discussion especially if he just wanted to make a quick statement not debate something. He’s not actually stopping people debating, just not wanting to be part of it himself. I can understand feeling like that, especially the way people tend to ‘debate’ on twitter. Very likely he meant ‘interpreting things i didn’t actually mean to say’ or ‘questioning my every word’ but decided to go for a slightly less strong word and shorter but i get the feeling behind the words. I get the feeling of frustration when one just wants to say something plain but somehow people always wonder about 2nd thoughts, behinds, what did i not say by saying this, when what i meant is just what i wrote and nothing more nor less nor else, which is what i suspect is most often the case. When he means more he writes it down in more words. That’s it for me. I have no clue how i would deal with it, well i know 🙂 i don’t read what people say to him because when i used to just skim over it it drove me round the bend, for him it is relentless. I often open twitter and within seconds i often think ‘ffs!’ … his twitter days are nothing but ‘ffs’ shrugs. I think he needs a break and not read it for a while to chill down, sorry if this may offend some people for whom twitter means a lot, but for me it’s just not reality and it is good to get distance from it every so often to cool down before one can bear it again.
LikeLiked by 3 people
There’s a conflict between the argument that he means we’re misinterpreting what he meant, and “I meant what I wrote,” if the reader misinterprets his plain English factual statement, then he didn’t mean what he wrote. As to how people behavior on his twitter and twitter in general – I agree with you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I just think it is very difficult to be utterly clear on twitter in statements of any consequence. Or rather it is counter intuitive to the use of twitter. To be honest i don’t know which would be best or even which i would prefer. I don’t think he’s got the handle of it and he must know knee jerk reactions have consequences. Most times we end up regretting them, mainly because they affect people in ways beyond our controls and certainly beyond our intentions. (But this train of thought also means i am projecting onto him my own worries or experiences which lead to thinking over and much hesitation before speaking out publicly and a tendency to over explain for fear of misunderstanding and hurting others, hence why twitter is far from a preferred medium of communication for me). Back to the subject, he’s getting it probably in equal shares right and wrong, not because he says things other people don’t but because of the way people react and the waves it creates. I wouldn’t have chosen to say those things, because reactions were predictable. Does that mean i want him to think, consider before he writes every time? His posts about tweeting would suggest this approach as ‘good practice’… while prudent and maybe more considerate in practice it would mean the need to hold back and plan all communication. If i go by my own reactions, the longer i think the less i react, certainly o tw, same would go for face to face communication; planning and thinking through i think leads to much more silence and abstinence and worked over reaction presented in ways which are neutral and least controversial/offensive possible. It’s only natural i think. Especially if you ‘practice what you preach’.
It raises the questions of what does one do with ones twitter account when one is a public figure… i know from colleagues, journalists you inevitably end up having some personal reaction that ‘steps in it’ if you go the ‘personal’ way. The alternative is the ‘professional/work account’. For me as a reader those hold very little interest as they only tend to give information that is already in the public domain and which i can google myself if i’m interested. (As an aside it is something that has put me off significantly in the case of an actor here i otherwise respect professionally, but because i generally appreciate some level of social engagement, the clinical approach rubbed me the wrong way.. ie is your shiny public image too important for you to engage in reality?)
I don’t think there is a good in between .. if it has personal stuff it is invariable that, a personal account, if it is professional only it is dead boring. Of course one could do personal with platitudes… the way many public figures go, with irrelevant inserts of their pets, foods and gardens. Objectively that’s probably a bit like mine, i keep it intentionally at a level of distance that feels safe to me, mostly for professional reasons. Does it reflect the reality of my thoughts or the intensity of my reactions about things? Rarely/hardly.
Looks like he might try most of the time to do his at a level of distance but he sort of can’t control the distance and the not getting personal at all. I wonder if he only wanted it professionally, or was urged to do it and found himself getting personal beyond initial intentions? Feels a bit like it, but who knows… Certainly doesn’t feel planned LOL
As i’ve gone on for way too much, i essentially am conflicted myself about his conflict, i want him to be more professional about it because i thought of think it goes with his position in twitter but in reality it would likely make it much less interesting for me as controlled tweeting would share much less of his personality, which as a fan i am naturally curious about. Then there is the conflict of liking/or not some of the personality traits the personal aspect reveals 🙂 I’ve thought more than once recently,’ boy, you really meant moody when you said so’. On the other hand strangely, because my own moodiness is something that concerns me all the time and it’s impact i’ve had moments of relief noticing he sometimes is in less control than i am of my strops 😉 I still don’t want to be on the receiving end of his and i imagine people who like him loads can be very hurt by such reactions i am sorry for that.
Just glad i am not somebody who would advise him nor somebody in his position having to constantly strike that balance, i’d find it easier to give up twitter altogether tbh.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I see your conflict about how you wish he would be on twitter, and what thinking he must go through to decide to tweet something less than business related/promoted. I had no issue with his Brexit tweets, even though I thought he might have missed the mark a few times, because one could see, as a follower, that it affected him so strongly, and he wanted to be heard. Also, I don’t ( or recently didn’t) read replies to him except those that popped up on my own twitter account from people I follow. But I have read them lately, and what I found is that he rarely – just a handful of times -has interacted directly with a fan/tweep, and even more rarely has he said anything negative. In this instance though, his tweet was one sentence long. I can’t make any excuse for its troubling content, unless he wasn’t really thinking. And I believe that someone in his position should take the time to think it through before he tweets. This doesn’t mean that I can’t understand how he can sometimes just shoot off a reply – but this happens rarely, as I said.