MA
Ha, I agree, I wasn't saying tweet responses were a valid form of scrutiny or hold any merit, just that's that the about nearest you get to it !
A few one-sentence twitter messages with the odd angry-face emoji is hardly an effective method of scrutinising power.
It's very easy to dismiss tweets as irrelevant - and let's face it, they are. By large, they'll be unseen by most people anyway.
Proper scrutiny comes with considered reporting, transmitted to an audience base of significant size (ie mass media), not reactionary one-liners tweeted to a handful of sycophants.
It's the equivalent of saying you can hold power to account by having a chat down the pub.
It's very easy to dismiss tweets as irrelevant - and let's face it, they are. By large, they'll be unseen by most people anyway.
Proper scrutiny comes with considered reporting, transmitted to an audience base of significant size (ie mass media), not reactionary one-liners tweeted to a handful of sycophants.
It's the equivalent of saying you can hold power to account by having a chat down the pub.
Ha, I agree, I wasn't saying tweet responses were a valid form of scrutiny or hold any merit, just that's that the about nearest you get to it !