To find out why the Charities Regulator blocked me after I commented on their Maser action v inaction on fake pro-life “charities” on Facebook, I sent an FOI and Subject Access Request. They refused FOI but I got SAR. In it were these 2 screenshots. No explanation why though? 🤔 
If you’re a state agency (not a private individual) you do not get to block citizens from communicating with or about you because they say critical things or ridicule you. Foundational for healthy democracy for citizens (and mural artists) to be able to freely express opinions.
Hilariously, in their FOI refusal to explain blocking me, the Charities Regulator effectively maligned its own social media team by telling me that I'm not missing out on much; "it does not appear that the Requester has suffered any disadvantage". THE SHADE!!
And apparently I am not my twitter account which, if you think about it, is quite a profound philosophical insight.
The big take-away from every bit of this story is that, worryingly, the CRA seems stuffed with Not Smarts. It was Not Smart to order Maser mural removal, to fail to get out in front of the Facebook fake charity issue, to block people on Twitter, to refuse FOIs, to not unblock.
Really. Not Smart. Why would you block people on Twitter for criticising your agency’s actions? You’re just courting more criticism? And then you double down and dig in after your foolishness is pointed out? Oh dear.
After much poking on why they hold these Twitter screenshots, Charities Regulator finally reveal they feel citizens ridiculing the state agency's (manifestly bad) decisions ="interference with their functions". Being the butt of jokes makes them so sad that they can't function?
Charities Regulatory Authority also seems to be under the odd impression that they have powers to somehow formally "review" things that random people say about them. Consistent with previous over-reach misbehaviour, but still mind-boggling.
Ok there’s an update to this and it’s so nuts that I’m filled with the horror, pain, pity and confusion that floods you when you confront a bully and discover their family is abusive, they’ve got a chronic illness and they were never taught to read.
But the @Charities_Reg is a state agency, and a regulatory one at that, so my empathy is misplaced and irrelevant. So I’m going to share the latest communication with them explaining why they blocked me on Twitter and are keeping screenshots of my tweets. *deep breath*
In the CRA’s letter explaining why they blocked me, a *state regulator* is saying that they’re under the impression that every time someone @‘s them, those people’s tweets are automatically tweeted out from @Charities_Reg as if the CRA had tweeted it themselves. I kid you not.
Apparently the @Charities_Reg didn’t block me because I poked critical fun at their order to remove Maser mural and highlighted their inaction to remove dozens of fake charities pages from Facebook. No. They blocked me on Twitter because, um, they don’t know how Twitter works?
Having avoided calls from a lawyer for a week and thought really hard about it, the CRA went with “We’re not an arrogant censorious over-reaching bully regulator. Honest. We’re just pathetic and incompetent. Please go away now.”
CRA explanation of why they blocked me +tweets referred. Jist: "You made a satire of our thing- people might think WE made it! You publicly reported potential fake charities! When we block you, nobody can see your tweets about us! Stop being mean to us!"
All of those Facebook pages are still up. It was very frustrating that no remedial action was taken before the referendum either by the CRA or Facebook to ensure that the fake “charity” page category got removed. Some of the pages ran ads etc.
My Easy Guide to Regulating the Arts in Ireland in response to the CRA ordering the removal of the Master mural "could reasonably be interpreted as a document that was issued by the Charities Regulatory Authority". Indeed?
