News Oil & Gas

Department blames bad language for tweet censorship

[ad_1]

The Department of Industry, Science and Resources (DISER) says it turned off comments on a problematic tweet about oil and gas exploration that copped flak last week, because of “offensive language”.

An online call by DISER’s resources team for submissions to contribute feedback to the government’s 2023 Petroleum Acreage Release policy back-fired last week, attracting a barrage of angry Twitter comments about Australia’s contribution to climate change. 

The department politely ignored a series of questions put to it by The Mandarin about the challenge of engaging the public on complex policy issues on social media. 

But a spokesperson did confirm comments were switched off one day after the tweet was posted on 18 August because some of the negative public responses breached DISER’s social media policy.

“The comments function for that channel was disabled because some comments breached the department’s social media policy around offensive language,” the spokesperson said.

According to DISER’s social media guidelines, comments will be switched off on a relevant post if responses may be inciting hatred; abusing, harassing or threatening others; are using insulting, provocative hateful, obscene or offensive language; and/or failing to respect others and their opinions. 

“Do you have an Australian offshore location you want #AusGov to consider for oil and gas exploration as part of the 2023 Petroleum Acreage Release? Nominate before 1 September,” the tweet, tagging GeoScience Australia, read.

A picture asset featuring an offshore oil exploration vessel was included in the tweet, with a simple text overlay reading: “Have your say. 2023 Offshore Petroleum Acreage Release. Nominations close 1 September.”

The public responses to the post ranged from sarcastic to defiant. A number of Twitter users implied the public servants working at DISER were complicit in what would be “ecocide” on Earth, and that the suggestion of offshore oil and gas exploration was “ghoulish and crazy” given the government’s role as a steward of the environment. 

Some commenters made more vicious, personal attacks against APS employees.

According to PR expert Dr Collette Snowden, the fundamental problem with DISER’s tweet was that it appeared to be “fishing” for submissions — or even encouraging them. While this was an unremarkable objective for an ordinary government stakeholder engagement process, she observed that the nature of the policy subject matter and the federal government’s current environmental agenda sat in stark contrast.

“At a time when the government’s objective to reduce carbon emissions has just been passed, after years of political contestation, it has been read by many people as contradictory, and counter to newly declared policy on carbon emissions and the environment,” Snowden said.

“It is framed as soliciting or encouraging applications — that’s what seems to be the source of irritation. This post is an example where a more formal tone and style could have diluted some of the hostility,” she added.

The senior lecturer in public relations at the University of South Australia went on to suggest the social media team for Resources should have been able to foresee what reaction the offshore gas and oil exploration call would have attracted on Twitter.

Given the communication chain in government departments, Dr Snowden said in this case a public servant could have drawn attention to the program to the senior management who, through the ministerial liaison staff. could have had a discussion with the relevant government ministers to find out if the program was continuing, or would continue in its current form.

“Communication on social media, as in any media, should reflect the organisation and not just conform to what is considered fashionable style,” Snowden said. 

“Even if the [program was going to continue as planned], [ministerial liaison staff’ would have done the job of bringing it to the attention of the government. That is: ‘Do you think we should still be promoting this program given the new legislation? If so, how should it be communicated?’.

“The task of communication — using any media platform — should always be open to discussion and to changes in practice. As a major channel of communication, and an agenda setting one, the role of social media in government entities is and should be constantly evaluated,” she added.


READ MORE:

The department post that launched 58 comments and 280 retweets



[ad_2]

Source link