if applicants refuse to unlock their accounts or otherwise don’t maintain a social media presence, the government may interpret it as an attempt to evade the requirement or deliberately hide online activity.
Here I was, wondering why people don't just say they don't have a social media account.
if applicants ... don’t maintain a social media presence, the government may interpret it as an attempt to evade the requirement or deliberately hide online activity.
A separate cable, obtained by multiple news outlets, directed embassies and consulates to vet applicants for “hostile attitudes towards our citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles”
...
Applicants for student and exchange visas will now have their “entire online presence” vetted, per the cable reportedly said. If students refuse to change their accounts to “public” and “limited access to, or visibility of, online presence could be construed as an effort to evade or hide certain activity.”
limited access to, or visibility of, online presence could be construed as an effort to evade or hide certain activity
Do you really not? Can you not connect the dots between "limited access to, or visibility of, online presence" and not having a social media account? Do you truly not understand how these two things are related?
I guess nobody can really know for sure, but in my opinion, if you truly don't have anything, nothing happens, as that's what they want, complacency.
I think EFF is just what-ifing things they could theoretically do in the future... which they do a lot. Not saying EFF is bad, but they do speculate a lot. Sometimes it's a good thing though.
Here I was, wondering why people don't just say they don't have a social media account.
So I have to create a Facebook account just to enter the country? It was bad enough having unrelated websites demand it.
Good thing I have no plans to ever visit again. Elbows up.
So what happens when you don’t have any?
Presumably it's disqualifying.
Straight to the gulags
I have not seen any language that suggests that, nor what EFF is saying.
Seems like a reasonable assumption to me
I don't see how that even implies that not having a presence in the first place is inherently a red flag...
Do you really not? Can you not connect the dots between "limited access to, or visibility of, online presence" and not having a social media account? Do you truly not understand how these two things are related?
I understand how people can infer subjective conclusions, but I don't agree that it objectively says as much.
I guess nobody can really know for sure, but in my opinion, if you truly don't have anything, nothing happens, as that's what they want, complacency.
I think EFF is just what-ifing things they could theoretically do in the future... which they do a lot. Not saying EFF is bad, but they do speculate a lot. Sometimes it's a good thing though.
I've recently deleted all my accounts except here - Now I look guilty by lack of social media.
"don't maintain a social media presence" covers not having any social medium account