Trump bans EPA employees from giving social media updates

[Norm dePlume]

An entire agency under a gag order, not related to national security. Is there any precedent for this?

Trump bans EPA employees from giving social media updates


President Trump has banned employees of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from giving social media updates and speaking with reporters, according to The Associated Press.

The EPA ban comes amid other reports of agency staff being restricted from interacting the members of the Congress or the general public.

BuzzFeed reported Tuesday that the Department of Agriculture instituted a similar ban, telling its employees not to distribute information about research papers or to post on Twitter under the agency's name. A Tuesday report in the Huffington Post said agency employees under the Department of Health and Human Services were told not to speak to public officials.

White House spokesman Sean Spicer declined to comment on the reports, saying that he wasn't familiar yet with the specific reported bans. But Spicer said it was natural for a new administration to reconsider agency operations.

[NIOSA]

On the face of this, it sounds like an over reach. I guess we'll find out if this will hold up.
If I am not mistaken, secret service is anther agency that are not allowed to speak to media & etc. A recent story about a SS agent is what brought this to my mind.

[phillygirl]

An entire agency under a gag order, not related to national security. Is there any precedent for this?

I heard a radio program (I think it was NPR, but I'm not sure, my niece messes with my stations all the time) yesterday about this. The speaker indicated that it's fairly standard for there to be a lockdown on information from the agencies until the new administration can get everyone on the same message.

[Lady Marva]

I heard a radio program (I think it was NPR, but I'm not sure, my niece messes with my stations all the time) yesterday about this. The speaker indicated that it's fairly standard for there to be a lockdown on information from the agencies until the new administration can get everyone on the same message.

Makes sense. Wonder if Obama did it too, but he got a pass.

[Gingersnap]

Don't know about the Feds but in Colorado, no State employees are allowed to use social media for work purposes unless whatever it is goes through the department or agency media liaison.

When private firms partner with (or dispute) the State, we would use social media to get our views out but there was always a lag when hearing from the State because of this process. It wasn't a problem but just the way business was done.

[80zephyr]

My wife works for the USDA. As of noon on inauguration day, the head of the Wisconsin department of the USDA was released, as is common practice when a new president from a different party comes in.

I suppose that since all these depts are now "rudderless", it would make sense to stop communications until new leaders are in place.

Mark

[Billy Jingo]

I heard a radio program (I think it was NPR, but I'm not sure, my niece messes with my stations all the time) yesterday about this. The speaker indicated that it's fairly standard for there to be a lockdown on information from the agencies until the new administration can get everyone on the same message.

It was probably NPR. I heard something similar.

[phillygirl]

It was probably NPR. I heard something similar.

I checked the station tonight. It was our local public radio, so I'm assuming that it was NPR when I was listening to it. I only knew it was an am station that I found on Friday when driving home from NY to listen to the inauguration. I had forgotten it was even inauguration day until I talked to my sister in law on the drive.

[Lanie]

An entire agency under a gag order, not related to national security. Is there any precedent for this?

I smell a supreme court case coming. This is in violation of freedom of speech and the press. This presidency is a disaster.

[Lanie]

Makes sense. Wonder if Obama did it too, but he got a pass.

If Obama did it and got a pass from the left (certainly not from the right), would that make this okay?

[Gingersnap]

Federal employees do not have 'free speech' rights at work. At work or while representing themselves as employees or if they are generally known to work for X Agency and discuss work-related matters, they have to abide by their Agency's policies concerning media and social networks.

If you work for Famous Footwear by day but you get on Instagram and bitch and whine about FF's inventory and how rotten management is, and they didn't even let you bring your dog to work - what would FF management think?

That you were exercising your First Amendment rights? No. They would think that you need to be fired.

Employment is a contract. You give up some things and get money.

[Billy Jingo]

There's some misdirection.

Who said anything about free speech? If there is any fear, it's the fear of stifling science and the truth in order to promote misinformation and lies. You can do that legally, you know. But good job answering a question no one asked.

[Billy Jingo]

Never mind. Lanie, of course.

[Frostbit]

We have a very good friend that works for BLM up here. She mostly does land use plans as well as resource evaluation. For the last 6 years or so she's been instructed to be sure all briefs, bulletins, and studies include specific impact related to climate change. I know this because when we were over her place for dinner right after the election she was very distressed because she thought the majority of her work of late would have to be re-written to exclude any references to climate change.

Federal agencies get their marching orders from above. Always has been but it's even worse now. I already told you about a friend that's high ranking in the USGS that had employees transferred from another federal agency and tasked with doing an impact study, they asked Mike, "What do you want the study to show"?

I would say climate change science is a big part of the gag order. Other wise why would the Badlands rouge tweets only cover one topic?

My BLM friend also recalled a similar "change of direction" about 6+ years ago.

This is standard operational procedure people.

[phillygirl]

There's some misdirection.

Who said anything about free speech? If there is any fear, it's the fear of stifling science and the truth in order to promote misinformation and lies. You can do that legally, you know. But good job answering a question no one asked.

I believe that fear is on both sides of the issue.

But back to the issue raised by Norm: "Is there any precedent for this?" The answer appears to be yes. Every 4-8 years there is a ban on FEDERAL AGENTS and AGENCIES from using their FEDERAL COMMUNICATION accounts until such time as the administration has firmed up its policy direction.

This is not about individuals not being able to go on Facebook as individuals. It's about telling the EPA employees to stifle the twitter.