Chris Bittle – “Gen X’d” for a second time. I had to call him out for being disrespectful to Ms. Timea Galan, who graciously declined a Canada Flag sign with his name on it. In response to my post, Chris Bittle chose to stop the criticism by hiding behind his digital screen and blocking me from viewing his account. Honestly, I expected it to happen sooner. But rest assured, I will still be observing from afar, just as Chris Bittle does, watching and reading his posts and comments.
This brings me to a new discussion about Chris Bittle. He proudly boasts about blocking over “10,000 CONSTITUENTS” on Twitter, as he has no other achievements to celebrate as he is often embroiled in controversy and faces significant criticism. To manage the negative feedback of the “10,000 CONSTITUENTS” from his riding, he resorts to blocking them. It’s important to remember that Chris Bittle’s social media accounts are official public communications that relate to his roles as an elected official.
Social media platforms are essential tools for public representatives like Chris Bittle to communicate with their constituents. However, when he blocks such a large number of people, it raises concerns about constituents’ rights to access public information and engage with their elected representatives.
Chris Bittle’s decision to block “10,000 CONSTITUENTS” creates an echo chamber where he only hears from a select group of “yes-men” supporters. This behaviour mirrors that of Donald Trump, who surrounded himself with “yes-men” in his administration. Chris Bittle is well aware that his actions limit his exposure to diverse viewpoints and feedback, which are crucial for making informed decisions and understanding public sentiment, but he chooses to ignore this fact.
It is clear that Chris Bittle is avoiding criticism and dissenting opinions. In a democratic society like Canada, politicians are expected to engage with a wide range of constituents, including those who disagree with them. By blocking over “10,000 CONSTITUENTS,” Chris Bittle is clearly avoiding accountability and demonstrating an unwillingness to again engage in constructive dialogue.
Chris Bittle blocking not 10,000 people, but “10,000 CONSTITUENTS” in his riding undermines this fundamental aspect of democracy. It not only restricts these constituent’s ability to engage with their government representative but also diminishes transparency and accountability, which are essential components of public service. Chris Bittle needs to immediately unblock any constituents who may have been restricted. Constructive criticism and differing viewpoints are crucial for effective governance and the betterment of our community.
Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees EVERYONE the freedom of expression, which includes the right to criticize public officials. Chris Bittle blocking his constituents solely based on critical comments should be seen as an infringing on their rights, especially when his social media account is considered a public forum.
As I was unable to find any specific legal precedents directly addressing this exact scenario in Canada, the principles of freedom of expression and government transparency would likely be influential in any legal or regulatory review brought against Chris Bittle.