It was interesting to see the progression of “tweets” that surrounded the Mississippi initiative that would declare, according to the Mississippi Constitution, that life begins at the moment of fertilization.
If this amendment were passed, it is clear that it would have major implications for subsequent abortion laws. Furthermore, it seems like this type of legislation would open many doors for the type of issues that the government can regulate.
This being said, there were heated tweets from both sides. Before the night of the election, it seemed that most comments were being made by people who opposed the initiative. This makes sense, considering that issues usually provoke the most reaction from opponents.
On the night of the election, it seemed that most of the comments were objective, just stating the fact that the initiative did not pass. This stream of tweets appeared for the most part more coherent than some of the others I had observed in previous days.
After the election, there were many tweets from elated individuals who did not want the initiative to pass, and others, who had supported the initiative, tweeted to the effect that they will not give up.
Watching an aspect of the election unfold via twitter offered an interesting perspective. It is not that common to see such a live stream of opinions about a current topic. It differed from watching the news because different opinions could be seen, without any need for objectivity or censorship. This creates a different understanding of issues: It is not just about the prospects and the results, but also about how common people feel about them and react.
No comments:
Post a Comment