![\"\"](\"http:\/\/thelehighacresgazette.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/04\/DanSinclairinfrontofElections-300x203.jpg\" "\\"DanSinclairinfrontofElections\\"")
April 26 I received a call from Dave Elias at NBC\u20102, who seemed to not understand how the social media site, Twitter, works.<\/p>\nWritten by Dan Sinclair Candidate for Lee County Supervisor of Elections in 2016<\/p>\n
April 26 I received a call from Dave Elias at NBC\u20102, who seemed to not understand how the social media site, Twitter, works.<\/p>\n
He claimed they were running a story on porn on Twitter, and wanted to give me some free press. Running for office, the more free press I can get, the less I need to spend getting my name and message out to people. As usual, he claimed they would run the story with or without my input. So, I went down to the station and spoke to him.<\/p>\n
Dave proceeded to tell me that he found links to porn on MY Twitter feed. I knew this was impossible as only MY Tweets come up on MY Twitter feed. The only way people would see links from OTHER people\u2019s pages would be if I ReTweeted from someone else\u2019s page. I do not ReTweet pages I do not know, and am pretty sure I have only retweeted once, ever. The account was opened about two months ago. So, I knew he was lying. There was no porn on my page.<\/p>\n
The whole idea was ridiculous. Not only do I have no interest in the stuff, this is a campaign account! Maybe Dave does not know what a link is. A link means you can click on it, and be taken to that destination. Dave was talking about clicking links that took you AWAY from my page to a list of OTHER people\u2019s pages, THEN clicking on a link taking you to THAT person\u2019s page, and THEN clicking on links ON that person\u2019s page, taking you to porn. Surely he knows a link has one destination? I am sure someone could find porn on Twitter using that method to so that from just about ANYONE\u2019s page, including Dave\u2019s.<\/p>\n
I tried to explain to Dave that there were no links to porn. At first, I thought he was a little thick. I realized after the story ran, he did not care. He was manufacturing a fake story, in an attempt to smear my name.<\/p>\n
During the interview, I asked him for this list of links he claimed existed. He had none. During his own story, he changed the numbers from almost a dozen, to dozens. More importantly, he ran a headline that said he found porn on my Twitter feed (page), knowing this was not the case<\/p>\n
Dave preyed on people who do not understand either technology or social media, such as my opponents. \u00a0He clearly told at least one of them, and another unsuspecting target, that I said I did not understand Twitter. The interesting thing was he had not interviewed me yet! Dave made this up!<\/p>\n
Additionally, Mr. Elias showed the interviewees OTHER people\u2019s Twitter feeds and claimed they were MY feed. One person he interviewed, Cornell Bunting, called me upset that night and told me Elias lied to him. Dave told Cornell the Twitter feeds were mine, even though Dave knew they were from other people\u2019s pages. Once Dave finally told Cornell the anonymous person he was referring to was me, Cornell pointed out the Twitter feeds he was shown were not my feed. When he questioned Dave about it, Dave walked away as Cornell was still speaking to him. Bunting was also told that I was a porn addict.\u00a0 \u00a0Cornell was so upset he had been lied to, he came to my house the next morning and made a video with me. The video outed Dave for lying \u2010 on the air, and to Cornell.<\/p>\n
When I interviewed with Dave, he kept pushing for me to now say things he had lied about earlier in the day. He was hoping to make these lies true. \u00a0When he did not get the answers he wanted, he chose to make them up. Dave repeated his claim on the air that I said I did not understand Twitter, knowing I felt HE was the person who did not understand Twitter. He once again claimed that there was porn or links to porn on my Twitter feed, knowing this was also not true.<\/p>\n
Almost 100% of the people who responded to the post on NBC\u20102\u2019s Facebook page, commented either that it was a smear piece, or that Dave did not understand even the basics of how Twitter works. Dave was bashed by Twitter experts. NBC\u20102 did not come off well.<\/p>\n
When I challenged Dave for lying on air, he responded by posting the full interview, which only backed my arguments.<\/p>\n
I challenge him to provide proof that he has EVER seen even ONE Tweet about porn on MY page. Anyone can use multiple clicks to find other people, and go to those people\u2019s pages. Doing so would require LEAVING the page they were on. However, the story he ran said there were links to porn on MY page.\u00a0 Clearly this is not true. Let\u2019s see some proof.<\/p>\n
Incidentally, Dave also claimed on air that I used my Twitter feed to \u201cbash Sharon Harrington.\u201d I run on my own merits, not on the incompetence of others. My resume is plenty strong enough to do so. \u00a0Since<\/p>\n
I have never even considered using Twitter to bash Sharon, I would be very surprised if there is even one Tweet on my feed doing so.<\/p>\n
Is it journalism if you just make things up as you go along?<\/p>\n
Take a look at the feed, yourself, and tell me what you find. @DanForSuprvisor<\/p>\n