So who runs @RCArmitage?

Today Richard Armitage tweeted twice about the Orlando massacre. First, he tweeted critically about guns.

Screen shot 2016-06-12 at 12.56.03 PM

Then, he deleted the first tweet and expressed himself against hatred and prejudice.

Screen shot 2016-06-12 at 2.29.20 PM

I could say a lot of things about this. As you probably know, I tend to agree on a general level with both sentiments (although of course, reality is more complex). And I don’t know why the first post was deleted — did Armitage change his mind after reading the news? Did he regret the flak he attracted from non-fan tweeps by using the #Orlando hashtag? Did someone else realize that a 100 percent anti-gun position is potentially politically unwise in the United States for anyone seeking a wide audience (even though I am guessing it is the position of many other celebrities as well)? I don’t know.

If there’s a publicity person running this account (or more than one) they need to get a grip about their message and stick to one. When @RCArmitage tweets an opinion about something I care about — and then deletes it — if I’ve agreed or thought about it in the meantime, I feel like an idiot for having spent time thinking about it. It wouldn’t matter if it’s about something stupid, although it undermines the fan experience. I hate the tweeting and deleting because it’s the kind of thing that makes me think I need to spend all my time reading twitter or I will miss something, and then I feel stupid for caring that much or even being willing to spend that much time at the computer. But it’s more serious if the tweeting and deleting concerns something important, because I actually have engaged with thinking about it and caring about it and on that level, I’m emotionally attached. I’m willing to feel stupid for caring about Armitage’s silliness, but I’m not willing to feel silly for caring about politics.

~ by Servetus on June 12, 2016.

219 Responses to “So who runs @RCArmitage?”

  1. Hear hear!

  2. I don’t think he should have deleted the tweet; it’s not the first time he has spoken out against guns. He had guts in my opinion for posting it. But then wimping out about is hard to reconcile. I don’t know if it is because maybe ISIS was involved instead of a homophobic mass murderer and he felt the gun culture aspect didn’t apply; or if he didn’t want to deal with the gun lover backlash; or was it would be bad for business or he felt a hypocrite for perpetuating entertainment involving guns. I don’t know why so I will just have to be glad he posted it at all and hope he evolves to some day leaving up and standing by what he feels is right.

    • I guess I’m in a different place fan-wise than just being grateful he spoke.

    • Think it’s possible, since he RTd the breaking news about ISIS involvement too, that he felt that changed the situation. But I also don’t feel it was necessary for him to delete the original tweet. Apparently he’s going to keep doing it regularly though.

      • Yeah, it’s not either / or. My major interface with this is my LGBTQ friends from Florida on FB who feel like someone’s just announcement open season on them, which isn’t wrong, either. It’s at least three things: radical Muslim sentiment affects Americans; American gun laws make it easy to assemble the material to commit terrorist acts; lack of protection and general social attitudes make it easy for anyone (radical or not) to target this group in a hate crime.

        And yeah, I don’t imagine my opinion on this will influence him very much 🙂

        • Yes, I agree it was a hate crime as well as terrorism. I think the term “hate crime” gets thrown around when motivation is unproven, but in this case, it doesn’t seem much of a stretch.

          • I think that the relatively recent (since a few years now) institution of a federal statute on hate crimes increases the willingness of people to apply the term if they are extremely angry. But I agree it’s not a stretch in a case like this.

        • It was both radical terrorism and a hate crime if we are to believe his father’s excuse. He used a weapon that no one would be, or should be using on a deer. So, no one should be able to acquire them outside of the military or law enforcement. Yup, I said it. Yup, liberal in a blue state. I’ve lived in Connecticut my entire life, with the exception of college. We have strong opinions about gun violence here. Remember, it is a very small state. We have all been affected deeply. This could not be happening without guns. How did this man pass a background check when he has been on a watch list?

      • Looks like both tweets are now deleted? I really don’t understand what goes on in his mind. It would be nice to know though because now it seems like his condolences are insincere or too controversial or something?? What is going on with him. I am genuinely disappointed in his behaviour. Is marketing his project all he cares about? I didn’t think so since he posted some stuff about immigration and the economic union but the last two deleted tweets leaves me baffled.

  3. I know this isn’t your main point – but do you still think a publicity person runs this account? After he deleted- what, 3 or 4 tweets last week, and we ended up with I think 2? I think he clearly seems to be handling his own account. I think it’s just more of what we’ve talked about before – he makes a statement, then for whatever reason, personally retracts it.

    I’ve deleted some of my own tweets before, for various reasons, and probably will again. But people have questioned or disagreed with me before, and that’s the time that you CLARIFY your opinion… not usually necessary to delete it. But since his m.o. is not to be conversational on Twitter, I don’t think he feels comfortable clarifying without direct replying OR leaving up a tweet that he wished later to elaborate on.

    • Several of us have thought for a while that the account is co-run — that he and someone else both have access. He seems to have no involvement at all with many of his tweets.

      • Like maybe the pure retweets? i.e. Japan & Ecuador earthquakes, even the BMWi photo/retweet? Some seem very personally from him….most lately, imo.

        • I don’t know if there’s a general principle. But there have been a lot of tweets that have been just a link to something. There was one of these to the Berlin Station VR information, for instance, that was there without comment and then got deleted some time later. That would be a good candidate.

          • Indeed odd behaviour. Are other celebs prone to that kind of thing too? If he has a PR person to tweet for him, why not leave it completely in the hands of the professional?

            • I don’t know. But he fairly regularly shows inconsistency with regard to the sort of general publicity twitter training rules that we’re familiar with, so the whole thing has always been weird.

  4. Something tells me he’s not too excited about the society in which he lives – on a meta-level.
    It’s not frustrating to me, but I’m not running a blog. He could just have left the original tweet. Do you really suspect his account is run by someone? If it is, I question the competence – again. And on a Sunday!

    • Well, he and I share that view. I just think if you speak on something important you shouldn’t be retracting it later. He did this on #nowalls, too. it pushes buttons on two of my more significant political concerns, so it probably bugs me more than it would some people.

      I never wrote out the argument for this but I think Perry might have. Let me see if I can find the link.

      • Please do if you can find it.
        I def. hold on to my previous opinion that once you’ve submitted anything on social media, it remains.
        It’s actually rather vexing why he retracts, but I believe @sparkhouse1 above have some seriously valid points.
        I’m closing down now. It’s my bedtime. Good night every one 💤

        • I’ve looked for it, but her blog is hard to search if you don’t know exactly what you’re looking for. You could ask her.

      • I think that he must still have a lot of social anxiety, as crazy as that seems to us. He has very strong political opinions. Something disturbs him, so he tweets about it. Then he wonders if he’s offended people, and deletes it. I wish he would have the confidence to stand behind what he’s felt and tweeted. If some of us disagree with him strongly enough that they feel the need to stop supporting him, so be it. We are far too many that he would find himself alone. I love it when he’s political. That along with his being so caring and charitable are endearing. It’s part of him, love it or leave it.

        • I’ve always thought he must have strong opinions about certain things — from time to time he has seemed really strongly principled — and he certainly is aware of the political news. Hidden depths I wish he would show more coherently, but the deleting is self-undermining.

  5. Probably all of the above? In the public’s mind, the fact that ISIS claimed responsibility will cancel out the discussion about guns. And yet, how did this guy get a weapon high-powered enough to kill 50 people? Is it legal? If it is, whoa, I have no words.

    • Yeah, the gun he had was legal to own in Florida. I don’t know if he owned it legally, but I’m guessing he did, since he worked as a security guard.

      It’s very frustrating as a piece of this that ISIS claims responsibility for things that IMO it can’t possibly have done. I don’t question that the guy was inspired by ISIS but that ISIS planned this? Doubtful.

      • I totally agree. We had a gunmen loose in Ottawa a year or so ago, who killed one person and managed to get all the way into the Parliament Buildings before he was shot dead. The govt jumped all over it as a terrorist attack – they were introducing a fairly draconian anti-terror law at the time so the attack played right into their hands. But I was never convinced. The individual was a drifter and probably had delusions of being of jihadist, but he used his aunt’s hunting rifle. ISIS involvement seems highly unlikely.

        • Orlando police department confirms that the shooter purchased the gun legally in Florida last week.

          The current prevailing defense analysis suggests that ISIS is on the downturn — too many enemies, not enough resources — but that it will take several years for them to disintegrate fully.

        • and now Marco Rubio says there is no difference between an attack being planned by ISIS and inspired by ISIS. Uch.

      • They were legal. He only purchased them quite recently.

  6. RA should be free to delete his Tweets if he decides to change his mind on what he wants to say. People should just accept his actions. He is only human and he is no different from anyone else. It’s his Twitter account, he should be allowed to do whatever he wants with it.

    • My goodness. Did you see me anywhere saying RICHARD ARMITAGE MAY NOT DELETE TWEETS ? He’s free to do what he wants and I am free to discuss with others how I react to it.

  7. BBC News just aired a special on Orlando. They interviewed someone from Huffington Post’s Queer Blog who said that homophobia is still very much around and that he doesn’t want to jump to conclusion just because the shooter may have claimed IS sympathies, he may have done so only to get a certain response in the media, but instead is someone mainly filled with hatred against LGBT communities. IS is known to claim responsibility for whatever terror attack is expected to give them media attention, no?
    What is going on these days? Tel Aviv, Orlando, EM riots, Beirut – deeply worrying.

    • Personally, that’s exactly my position on this. Florida has a huge number of refugees from everywhere possible, and it attracts a lot of people because of low taxes and the weather (which I hated, but that’s by the bye). So you have a very unhomogeneous population of people who are in close contact with each other in urban areas, lots of opportunity for conflict and plenty of room for radical views. I absolutely think that it makes sense from the killer’s POV to tag ISIS on this without ISIS having any idea. And there’s no denying that the availability of weapons in the US facilitates this kind of thing.

      • What I find very alarming with regard to the recent attacks (whether terror, hate or both) is that they are committed by fairly young people who are often nationals of the respective country but have a immigrant background. Like this guy – he was 29 and was born in NY. His parents came from Afghanistan. France in November – also French/Belgian nationals who got radicalised. To me, at the end of the day, this proves that “building walls” (mentally or physically) doesn’t help anybody and certainly not those we should help to integrate.

        • yes, and crucially that Americans can no longer kid themselves that what happens elsewhere in the world has no impact on what happens here. If people are radicalizing because of what is happening in Afghanistan (for instance), we bear a role in that development by our failure to resolve the situation or our actions that have made it worse. It’s a bit unfair to create a situation that engenders a flood of refugees or migration, and then say “well they should have stayed where they came from if they don’t like our values here.” Everyone has a right to a peaceful, safe existence.

        • 👏

  8. Sure. And I disagree with them. I didn’t say “everyone must agree that this is an annoying behavior.” I’m only explaining why I find it annoying, and not just coincidental. One can outgrow naivete, or one can cultivate it. That’s a personal decision, obviously.

  9. In think this man was a religious homophobic. There are plenty of Christians and Muslims and other religious fundamentalists of all persuasions who think that LGBT people should be wiped from the face of the earth and occasionally you will get someone who makes that final step and decides to take matters into their own hands – doing their bit for God. Any extremist is a likely contender, not just Muslims – and I wish that people would remember that. In 1999, a white extremist planted a nail bomb in a gay bar in London (2 killed and 80 injured – thank goodness he didn’t have access to a powerful gun).
    As for his decision to delete, he is entitled to do what he likes without being told off like a naughty boy.

    • Re, the politics, I totally agree.

      You have expressed before when I say something critical about Armitage that I am “telling him off.” In my world, my opinions are as important as Armitage’s and criticism and praise are delivered as I see fit. I have a crush on him, and I respect his right to do what he does, but I also preserve my right to react as I react. If that stance is a problem for you, you might be more comfortable reading other materials, because this blog has always been that way, and that isn’t going to change.

  10. I have to admit that when he deleted that tweet just minutes after I posted a response that it felt a bit awkward like I should just keep my opinions to myself but then I realized that to think that is just silly. Sometimes I am surprised when he does delete his tweets though. He doesn’t strike me as someone who would express an opinion that wasn’t well thought out first. I do wonder if he would delete less often if Twitter had an edit button.

    • yeah, that’s possible. It took FB a long time — years — to take that step (allowing people to edit rather than delete posts) and I wonder if it’s a programming / resources problem or a philosophy issue.

      I’m not opposed to him changing his opinion about something — all of us do that all of the time. It’s the appearance of “I’ll speak about this, oh, no, oops, I won’t” that is frustrating.

  11. I have to admit that when I see a political or potentially controversial tweet, I often wonder how long it will be before it disappears. I understand the desire to be all things to all people, especially in his line of work. I also understand the desire to revise an initial emotional response with something more cerebral and potentially less divisive. Whether deleting is the right way to go, I don’t know. Is there anything wrong with displaying emotion? Definitely not. Do I wish he wouldn’t do it? Yes, but then I wish a lot of things. 😊

    • Yeah, I’m not saying there was no reason I can understand for doing it (and frankly, I don’t have to understand the reason — I am not him. He could do it because he didn’t like the letter O and that would be justified).

  12. My thought process is that he deleted it after seeing there was an ISIS connection. Not sure if you saw this, but Lee Pace and RA both tweeted at the same time. 😉

    • I did notice that. 🙂 Which raises interesting questions about the question of who runs the account.

      • Both comments made sounded like they came from the respective men.

      • Does L Pace also delete his tweets in similar intervals?

        • Someone who watches that account more concentratedly than I do would have to answer. My impression is no.

        • I know that he does delete tweets, though.

          • Well, don’t we all? I do when I misspelled something or need to rephrase as statement… but deleting perfectly okay tweets regularly – that could be considered OTT. He’s been in this business long enough to have thicker skin, no? (And aren’t lions supposed to roar 😉 not cower?)

            • I think it’s long been apparent that Richard Armitage is personally nothing like the characters he often plays. Which is fine, he doesn’t need to be. There’s been a lot of evidence since he’s been tweeting, though, that he lacks certain qualities of personality that would be considered normal even people who have no aggressive tendencies. The question for me has been — does that facilitate or harm his art?

              • Do you think people still mixup/misunderstand RL persons with fictional characters ? I read your essay on the culpa question. Very interesting. I agree that we all have a version of our crush(es) in our minds that for obvious reasons are not based on reality – we usually don’t know them that well or not at all. I wouldn’t expect him to be anything like his characters in RL, but I do expect a 44 almost 45 year old adult to have some backbone and stand up for what he/she believes – political or otherwise. If you don’t want the public uproar – don’t join social media – especially as a celeb.

                Maybe he never really bothered to get his head around the social media issue? I guess he was persuaded to join rather than being personally enthusiastic about it.

                • Tulpa not culpa – bl*** autocorrect

                • I can’t speak about people in general, but in the Armitage fandom one sees it all the time (and it absolutely conditions how these fans then read the shows and read him and his statements). It isn’t all fans but it’s not a tiny segment, either.

                  And yes — it’s something that one expects of a person in middle age, that they have an opinion and can defend it. He himself used to admit that he saw himself as “not his age,” but I also think that is a characteristic of midlife. As you say “some backbone.” My question has been, if he lacks a certain amount of backbone, does that make it easier for him to play more roles — i.e., does he cultivate the lack of certain features of his own identity or fail on purpose to develop them? (I think this is a different question than his recent self-description as someone who has a lot of empathy, albeit related).

                  And yeah — if you don’t want uproar don’t join Twitter. Most people learn quickly how it works and his failure to do so suggests to me that (pace the opinion of certain fans) he doesn’t spend all that much time with it. He definitely wasn’t an early adopter and the entire way it happened suggested that it was planned and arranged for him by a publicist.

                  • Re the age thing – I’ll turn 41 in a couple of weeks and don’t feel like it either. But that is more a perception of what I thought e.g. at 20 what it must feel like to be 40 and “old”, maybe also when comparing myself to my parents at 40. Now I wonder where this last 40 years went? It doesn’t feel as long as it sounds. Am I making sense? Maybe that is his mid-life crisis talking too 😉

                    Does it help his art? I don’t thing it would help. An artists/actor has to make decisions about his performance. He may always doubt whether it was the right one or find some fault with his performance later, but he made a choice and went with it. Now that he’s going into producing, he def needs to have his head on his shoulders and stand up for his decisions. A pushover personality wouldn’t ave gotten as far in this business as he has.

                    I don’t follow his twitter, but from the tweets I’ve seen so far that you posted, he seems to have this funny attitude of sometimes reining the “kids” (i.e. fans) in, often with this slightly scolding undertone. Which is off-putting IMO

                    • scolding: it sure is.

                      re, whether he’s a pushover — I think he himself is very determined and ambitious, and he’s not a pushover when it comes to him / his own desires and plans. But I do think he’s non-confrontational (he has described himself as a “people pleaser” repeatedly) and not naturally the alpha type. This creates a definite impression of passive aggression.

                      re, could it help his art — I think there is an argument that it could allow him to “slide in” to someone else’s identity much more easily if he were no so invested in his own.

              • The art definitely is not suffering! We know of tortured artists. But is he an example of a great gormless artist? (* poor Rich – if he’s truly gormless – if you feel agony/irritation when he deletes tweets. Just imagine what he’s going through when he posts them!)

                • Gormless is not right word, I just realize. Whatever the word is for somebody lacking in conviction of their own beliefs.

                • Some people disagree; it’s actually been a marked reason for leaving the fandom (people decide that his performances and choices aren’t courageous enough). Apart from people who are annoyed by the wishywashiness.

                  • This makes me wonder how much sway des his agent or other people in his personal life have on his choices (Hoping they truly are choices at this point in his career). But maybe he doesn’t get the right offers. Auditions can be difficult too.

                    • He’s indicated in the past that auditions have been a problem for him. I think he’s finally getting the point in his career where he’s not auditioning (or at least not for everything).

                  • Or maybe he is not comfortable being “Richard Armitage” the RL guy on twitter. Nothing to hide behind etc.. Didn’t he say that he wouldn’t never to a show like Dancing With the Stars, for example, as RA?

                    • …would never be…

                      (I think it’s getting past my bedtime 😉 )

                    • yeah, he is a big fan of the idea that characters are created in the interplay between them, in the reactions, and that he wouldn’t do a one-man show, etc.

                      My suspicion is that he trained for a very different career than the one he ended up having. He wanted to be a classical actor and in that case there would have been comparatively less interest in his person. He broke through in the public eye in a situation that created a fandom for him — which has been a mixed blessing in that it creates a situation in which fans are very interested in his person. He is not unsurprisingly resistant to that (any sane person would be).

                  • I guess that is a fair reason for getting out of fandom. From what I’ve seen he’s been courageous but I haven’t been around long enough to make that assessment since the beginning of his career.

                    We don’t have any idea of what roles he may have passed up do we?

                    • No, it’s something we have no information on as far as I know. It’s only since The Hobbit that anyone cares enough to report this info and he almost never says.

  13. Maybe like a lot of non-Americans he’s throwing up his hands about the whole gun debate. Like there is no point in discussing it anymore, and not on his Twitter. All of us may opinions but nothing we think or say is going to effect your gun laws.

    Or, the human toll sinks in and rather than use a tragedy to score a political point which he’ll never win, he decided to focus on the men and women who lost their lives.

    Or, maybe indeciveness is a character trait and it becomes more pronounced in times of emotional stress.

    • yeah, we will never know the reason.

      However, I question the viewpoint (which is now overwhelming my personal RL FB feed) that speaking about the gun debate is using “a tragedy to score a political point.” Particularly in this case. We’ve endured months of ridiculous discussion about bathrooms of all things, for instance. LGBTQ people’s lives are politicized to the absolute max right now if we are having a serious national discussion about where people can pee safely. Their romantic lives have been politicized for years via the debate over same sex marriages. In short, it’s somehow fine to politicize people to the point that the unhinged take out their craziness on gay folk — did you know that an LGBt person is 4x as likely to experience violence in the US as a Muslim? — but then when something actually happens to gay folk because we have politicized the hell out of their choices, discussing it to make a point about the crazy level of gun violence in the US is “using a tragedy to score a political point.”? I don’t buy it. Frankly, if we can’t talk about it acute points, then why talk about it at all? Because nobody in the US could give a shit about it at any other time.

      I know you’re not a US citizen. I think the argument is problematic and that it is used on the Right in the US to end discussion about problems that threaten to dissolve our civil society. I am not saying you are doing this.

      • Maybe there is an order to it for some people – the sympathy for the persons killed, then the looking at it from the political perspective.

        Richard may have thought, “shit, I’m gonna get criticized for talking about guns rather than the people who died.”

        Not saying that is the right way – but people deal with things differently.

        Being gay has been made into a political act – you’re right that every facet of their lives is politicized. Though I do think that the bathroom discourse was important. They are politicized in life, so why not death?

        Also at what point is he going to start thinking of himself as an American? Especially if certain speculations are true.

        • So in that case, why not add a tweet, or if you’re going to delete, reiterate the point?

          re: the bathroom discourse — I have mixed feelings, because a lot of people were not experiencing problems now are. Since this whole thing, we now have people standing watch at bathrooms, people getting threatened and attacked in bathrooms at a level that is noticeable. Not that things were perfect before, but, for instance, in North Carolina there was no law about who could use which bathroom in any city but Charlotte. Now the whole state has a bathroom law.

          I doubt he’ll ever think of himself as an American; even if he were a citizen. He’ll still have spent the first four decades of his life elsewhere. Identity is complex, and he might think of himself as a citizen in a formal sense without “feeling” American. And identity is also assigned to us by others, and as long as he keeps his accent — which he has shown no signs of losing — for most Americans he will fall in the category of “Brit.”

          • Re not adding tweets – I think you’ve answered that in other posts about his tweets. He’s not a confrontational person.

            Plus he’s apparently being asked about Lee due to the timestamps which probably just reinforced his “abort, abort” inclination.

            I make no apologies about adoring richlee. But probably some things are best left alone especially when people feel emotional

            • maybe. But we then shouldn’t ask ourselves why nothing ever changes.

              • Nothing will change with respect to Richard but I guess at least he tweets consistently in his own peculiar manner.

                I bet you’ll be floored at the day that he does keep a controversial tweet up!

                I remember in the Merlin fandom
                – it became a running joke as to how long Bradley James keep his tweets up.

                What these poor fools don’t realize is even if they delete somebody already has a screen capture of it!

    • I can see an argument that one is unfairly exploiting a tragedy if it is anomalous. But fact is that 91 people per day in the US die of gun violence.

    • Even though he is not a U.S. citizen, he has chosen to live here. It is quite normal for our celebrities to make their political views known, and to use their fame as a means to bring attention to causes or candidates.

      • Do you know many naturalized citizens, though? If so, ask them how they feel about people’s responses to their political opinions once it’s known that they are an immigrant.

  14. I think RA’s original tweet would have been fine if he left out the gun message. Now that there is the ISIS connection it does change the gun debate.

    • How so? ISIS and easy access to guns are two problems that can exist simultaneously and contribute to the same outcome. Plus, the lovely binding agent of homophobia.

      What floors me was that the shooter was a security guard who was being investigated by FBI – don’t these agencies talk to each other?

      • Even more interesting to note (acc. to BBC News), he was a security guard at a public (or even federal?) building.

        He was investigated by the FBI but nothing could be proven. IMO we shouldn’t put the principle “innocent until proven guilty” at risk only because we are currently faced with a horrendous crime.

        • To some extent i agree. But we live with restrictions on our liberty all the time. Two small examples: no liquid through security; or,check stops for intoxication. Why not suspend this guy’s license to carry or buy guns or work with guns until he was cleared by the FBI?

          The principle is important but only because our justice system cannot function in any other way. It’s not because “innocent until proven guilty” is the most just or best way of doing things.

          • From what I understand, he was said he was “cleared” (my interpretation) as nothing could be proven, i.e. investigated but never charged. What else would you expect? (honestly curious question)

            • Sorry – meant to say that I’m really curious to hear your thoughts…

              • No I get it.

                2013 – interviewed twice because he told co-workers about affiliation with terror group.

                2014 – interviewed because of connection to suicide bomber.

                It floors me that his employer didn’t sack him earlier.

                The standard is not “cleared” but just didn’t have enough proof to justify further intervention i.e. Reasonable and probable cause for us, Canadians.

                I’m not for a police state. In fact, I dislike cops in general.

                But there had to be a better way to handle this – some list to say he’s been interviewed twice for possible terrorist connections? They already have these lists for flights – why not for guns?

                It will be like a prescription record in a pharmacy. But that would require a national gun registry and all legal sellers to be on the same page, which will never fly.

          • In his case, he probably would have been deprived of his livelihood as he was a security guard. I myself fall on the “innocent till proven guilty” side of things, and I would also say that we can never protect ourselves fully against people who wish to harm us. (That said, there are plenty of things we could do to protect ourselves against gun violence that don’t involve everyone getting a gun).

    • Not really. The guy bought the gun legally in Florida last week. US gun law makes it incredibly easy for radicals to put their hands on weapons. The gun debate is directly relevant.

      • I get it. I was thinking more along the changing narratives whenever these attacks happen. I was heading to be last night when the news was breaking. Of course, the first narrative is gun control. Let’s get all the facts first before making assumptions. As a U.S. citizen I do have a concern that this guy had been on the FBI’s radar and still was able to purchase guns. IMO there should be no need for an average citizen to buy an assault rifle.

    • Which may make the cynical minds (“Verschwoerungstheoretiker”) among us wonder who put the ISIS info out in the first place and why? As stated by several people above, just because IS may claim responsibility, doesn’t actually mean they planned it.

      • It suits big chunks of the American political sphere, left and right, if this is ISIS, and the 24 hour news stations love that.

        I guess the guy did call 911 and affirm allegiance to an ISIS cleric. And that made people speculate.

      • I believe the shooter himself called 911 prior to the incident. He said he was supporting Isis. Now whether that was true, or if he knew it would add to his suicide by cop intrigue, who knows?

  15. He has deleted his second tweet now. I know it’s his right but I am troubled by it nonetheless.

    • WTF.

    • Just had a thought.. what if he’s deleting tweets because of people getting nasty with each other in the replies and he wants to shut that down?

      • If that’s his reasoning (I heard a variant of that somewhere else a little while ago), then he should just not ever tweet about anything that people disagree about so vociferously. He’s been bitten on the guns issue before and if he lives in the U.S., he knows exactly which buttons this pushes with US fans, who are likely to be the most exercised. The problem, though, is that there will always be disagreement. Always.

  16. This reaction annoys me completely.
    He must be aware of his status as a public person, so it is clearly thoughtless to evoke a discussion about a severe tragedy in connection with all-too-loose gun laws in the US – and then delete the statements as if nothing has happened.
    I don’t mind if he deletes joke tweets or promotional tweets, but in this case today, he made a mistake.
    Sure, he can decide what to keep and what do skip, but he should think first before he writes anyway.

    • yeah, I’m kind of speechless at this point.

    • He definitely did make a huge mistake deleting the second tweet. Huge. I’ll still watch anything he is in but I’m really really disappointed in him as a human being right now. I’m also disappointed in myself for getting my emotions be sidetracked by his bumbling of this instead of what happened to the dead and wounded. He really needs to think over what he does, as do I.

      • I think that’s a good point, although I would argue that many people have enough emotional space to consider both issues (the tragedy and the fandom) simultaneously. It’s troublesome if his discourse distracts from the issue he is trying to speak about and ends up pointing only to his behavior.

    • Who said that: ” we have to be responsible for each other. Empathy is a great way to ‘plug in’….”would I say this to; my Mum?….my child?….my best friend?….my loved one?….,” If the answer is no, then don’t write it, no matter how angry or hurt you are. Be one of the strong ones, the ‘silent pioneers’ for decent, thoughtful, kindness and consideration. Your words ricochet, they can be read and re-read, long after you have forgotten about it. Be good to each other”.
      The answer of why does he often delete is here.
      But i agree:”He really needs to think over what he does” as I try to do. 🙂

      • I suppose that’s correct. And I suppose that is at the core of why I found that comment so problematic at the time.

  17. This is one of the reasons I don’t follow him on twitter – it makes him seem wishy-washy, imo, and that’s not a trait I enjoy in anyone. I get that he doesn’t want the flack from a tweet like the first one . . . but then don’t say it at all. It’s not like a backlash would be hard to predict. headdesk It’s much easier to keep the crush intact when I ignore his twitter.

  18. Reading up on the events on Twitter here because I actually decided to tune out about four hours ago. I find the tweet/delete behaviour rather difficult to deal with. To me it sometimes feels as if I am being taken for a ride, being mucked around with. Assuming that tweets are written for the purpose of being seen, then deleting a tweet without explanation to me looks like somebody is messing with the readers. Well, or maybe just unsure of his/her own voice.
    On another level, I have to say that I find that mass commentary via 140 characters is somewhat inflationary and devalues comments in general.
    As for the tweets in question – I found tweet #2 somewhat out of character. “Prayers for the victims” strikes me as rather unusual for a self-confessed European, especially when the man in question hardly ever references religion.

    • That was my initial reading, too. He tweeted what he thought and a publicist intervened and said something “more appropriate” for Americans. But it’s a Sunday …

      re: mucked around — yes. Agree.

    • When he does what you call “throwing a glass into a room,” if it’s about icecream or jokes or something, I think, silly ME for caring about a celebrity. But when it’s about important things, I think, these are important things to care about, why is he toying with my reactions? In the end the lesson is the same (silly ME for caring about a celebrity) but I think some things are potentially less joke-capable.

      • As we all agree – it’s anyone’s absolute right to delete statements. It’s when it is done on a regular basis and always without explanation, that readers may feel foolish for having entertained the notions expressed previously.
        I was wondering, however, how much pressure celebs feel that they have to react to atrocities with a sympathetic tweet? Do they think their audience expects them to do so? And does that occasionally lead to half-hearted statements? As always, I think that Twitter is more harmful than conducive to proper discussion.

        • I do think it was probably expected that he say something today (although he’s run into the problem before of having tweeted about one catastrophe and not another, and getting called on it). Maybe especially because he took some flak for not referring to America in his tweet about “being a European”.

          re: the question of half-heartedness — this is an interesting problem. I am a fan of using the polite expression because it both indicates that you are present and aware and it saves you from having said something inappropriate. But it does lead to a certain formulaity and perhaps artists in particular feel vulnerable to the charge that their expressions of sympathy are pro forma.

          • Good point re. deciding to add his voice to this particular tragedy after snubbing America with his last missive.
            As much as some celebs annoy me with their strongly voiced opinions (one particular recent colleague comes to mind), I have to commend them for being true to their words in the sense that they leave them on their timeline and occasionally also react when followers raise objections. That is useful and plausible behaviour.
            This will sound like APM, but I suppose a leopard cannot change its spots…

            • lol

            • Don’t think he ‘snubbed’ anyone… it seems to be far beyond him to react negatively to anything 😉 and i’m not saying that’s a positive, some thing really do need to be opposed or else where would we end up?

              • Let’s put it this way: I don’t think he intentionally snubbed anyone. But by praising Europe to the high heavens (and somewhat naively, too – has he not heard of UKIP, Pegida, Front Nationale etc. etc.?), some people felt excluded/alienated. I know, I know – you can’t please everyone. And nor should you. But when you’re using a medium of mass communication you have to be aware of how your statements will be read or how they could be construed.

                • Somebody will always construe… i’d rather wish he’d stick to his guns more often or generally. It was a European issue in this case, some other times he commented on US ones. He can never be everything to everyone and should probably try less to be that. And it was probably a bit unwisely formulated but the principles he mentioned stand true at least in the initial intent of the EU…. still far away from reality. But it seems round ‘ere we’re even forgetting what we once aspired to… For once he actually made the argument that was sorely missing from the debate. Anyway, not like he took a public stance locally or sadly at this point anyone is any longer prepared to hear reason and such arguments. But all that aside i felt it was one of the very few times when he made an overall good point .. and i’m not going to spite myself and go look if he hasn’t deleted that too 😉

                  • LOL, I wondered that as well. Is that Europe tweet still there? I haven’t looked but I imagine someone would tell us 🙂

                    • I’m doing the monkey thing here can’t see can’t hear 😊I just want next week to come and I’m off work for a few days doing the touristy thing with visitors so whatever happens hopefully I’ll be somewhere calm ( she tells herself :-;)

                • The notion that because Armitage praised Europeans, he doesn’t appreciate the US is a known reasoning error / informal fallacy, actually, “affirming the disjunct” (a subset of “false dilemma”). You see it a lot in the US conservative media (e.g., Pope makes statement affirming that we need to do more to help the poor; Fox News reports that Pope despies all rich people). But people make it all the time.

                  I agree you can’t please everyone but there are common things that one can look out for and avoid.

                  • Yup. I should point out that I believe the error in interpretation lies with the readers. A kind of wilful misinterpretation, if you want. But the writer/tweeter could avoid error/misinterpretation by writing/tweeting clearly.

                    • yeah, and this is the kind of reader misinterpretation he could have anticipated, and he could have fixed it with a subordinate clause somewhere conceding that his future is not only European anymore, that he also has ties to America. Would have cost him ten words max.

  19. I just unfollwed him. it hurt to do so but I had to before I lose anymore respect for him. I can sympathize with the position he is in and why he feels he must retract certain statements but it’s gotten to the point that he deletes or apologizes so often that I don’t really take anything that he says seriously.

    • (((KellyDS))). You and I have been on this fence together for so long, but I’m sorry this was the straw.

      • I’m trying to remain optimistic and am hoping, as Antigone said above, that it will be easier to keep the crush alive if I don’t follow his Twitter.

  20. If I was on Twitter, and I followed him, I would also unfollow him at this point. There are times when “wishy-washy” might not matter. In my view, this was not one of those times. He reveals himself as lacking courage and conviction. I know many will disagree with me, and many will stick up for him and fabricate a dozen possible excuses about why he cannot express an opinion and stick to it. I believe that what he did today confirms a nagging suspicion of mine, which is that his main concern is how he himself appears to others. This suggests a level of vanity which I am, unfortunately, finding decidedly unattractive. It’s really disappointing to me, but it is wholly my problem because I have imagined him to be different in my own mind.

    • I think that’s not implausible, i.e., I do think he cares a great deal how he looks to others (and realizes that he may be found wanting). What he doesn’t seem to realize is that there are always people who will find him wanting. In 2015 he seemed to think that disagreements of opinion were primarily trivial, and that’s true if we are talking about his beard, but it’s not true if we’re talking about mass shootings. It is reasonable to conclude that he can’t seem to accept that not everyone will love everything about him all the times. This was an occasional theme in his early press — he would insist that he had gotten to that point but it was never entirely clear from his behavior or other statements.

  21. Is it possible by being wish-washy he actually encourages dissension? If people are successful in getting him to delete a tweet doesn’t that encourage the behavior?

  22. I cannot comprehend how his tweets, one and two, could hinder his career or affect his popularity with his fans in any significant way. I don’t see his core audience as card-carrying members of the NRA. His anti-gun stance is mainstream for people in the entertainment industry. The general public does not even know who RA is, at this point. Obviously the only people upset by his choice to delete tweets are the ones who follow him. So my question is, why does he choose to upset his fans by deleting tweets? They seem to be a reasonable response to a horrific gun-related event., IMO. Perhaps he is not the one choosing. Just wondering what his motivation is. I know he is perfectly free to tweet and delete at will, no hard feelings from me because I am not on Twitter, but why cause all the drama?

    • You know, that is a good point (although the Twitter stream in response to the first post did include an unusual proportion of non-fans, they weren’t deafening). He can’t not know that fans are annoyed by the deleting, because he even said something about it once (to the tune of he’ll delete if he wants).

  23. I 100% agree with you on this one Serv and also with Kathy Jones. If a person speaks out at all about a tragedy like this they should be prepared to stand behind what they have said. On both counts he’s making statements that are relatively safe, not that they won’t spark controversy, but enough people agree with what he says to balance out those who might not. So what’s the risk in standing by them? Who is he afraid of offending exactly and why? He should either choose to use Twitter only as a machine for promoting his career and make no political statements at all, or if and when he speaks personally and from the heart, make sure he can stand behind what he says. I feel that in trying to do both he’s kind of botching it up badly. Just IMO. It doesn’t hurt my ‘crush’ because I’m willing to forgive him for a lot🙂😉

    • yeah, his Twitter “performance” has been at best mixed. If he’s really as bothered by responses to what he says as these deletions may indicate, he’s also clearly not enjoying it very much. He really should rejig it to be something like lighthearted remarks now and then, selfies and self-promotion. Those are all things he can do reasonably well (although he would have to make himself put up with it if people didn’t react the way he wanted them to).

      I think if he’d said something like “I’m shocked and horrified and keeping the victims and their families in my thoughts” that would have been laudable and unpolitical and he would not have drawn any fire — and he mus tknow this.

  24. This is just my thoughts regarding who actually runs @RCArmitage account. I am of the old school, your name is your word. The account bears Mr. Armitage’s name; he should have the last word about what is posted. We have all posted things and then had second thoughts, Mr. Armitage is no exception. As far as the topic, horrific. My heart goes out to all those who have are suffered the acts of hatred today in Orlando and anywhere else in the world. We shall keep brave, they must not win!

    • Sure, he’s entitled to have second thoughts. I think the jury is still out on who tweets for him. Sometime he is tweeting for himself. Sometimes we wonder. But I think if he is going to behave in ways that he has second thoughts about principled positions he takes, he is going to look bad.

      Florida is definitely still on my mind, too.

  25. I think it comes down to the perception of what is more important to Mr Armitage: expressing his opinion or trying not to rock the boat with his fans. I don’t follow him, but from what I’ve seen on Twitter, it seems to be the latter.

  26. That’s why I yelled at him. If he has an opinion, he has the right to express it.
    I apologized to him for losing my temper and yelling at him. I won’t, however, apologize for fussing at him about deleting his tweets. I feel that, if he’s going to post his opinion, then he needs to stick by it, damn the consequences.
    Even when I don’t agree with him, I still feel he has the right to express his own opinion.

    • he certainly does. He now looks very defensive about his own opinions (maybe he is). Although he has the right, I hope he won’t take us through this again unless he means to leave the post stand (this is two rounds of this in several months). He was the one who said “keepitfun” and yet he doesn’t seem to follow that rule himself.

  27. Oh my, this ‘deleting thingy’ gets really, really old!!!

    • Yep, das hat sooooo einen Bart. Und apropos: der ist mir in einem anderen Kontext um einges lieber 😁

      • Das man mal was löscht, versteh ich ja, aber diese Art des Twitterns kapier ich einfach nicht…
        Immer diese Bartliebhaber 🙂

        • Geht mir genauso. Ich verstehe das absolut nicht…

          • Ob da hypernervöse Lösch-Daumen am Werk sind, die ein Eigenleben entwickeln???

            • Er verursacht viel mehr Ärger und Frustration, als er mit der ursprünglichen (ersten) Aussage ausgelöst hätte (, die mir persönlich aus dem Herzen sprach). Irgendwie scheint er schlecht beraten zu sein.
              Wer liest seiner Meinung nach wohl diese Tweets? Weiten Teilen der Welt ist er vollkommen unbekannt. (In meinem RL kennt ihn keiner.) Es kommt mir aber so vor, als ob ihm die Meinung Außenstehender wichtiger wäre, als die Tatsache, dass er Menschen vor den Kopf stößt, die seine Äußerungen tatsächlich wahrnehmen und die sich langsam ziemlich “veräppelt” vorkommen. Vielleicht sollte ihm das mal einer sagen.

          • So, I just read the theory that he’s tweeting for insiders. He only wants very close fans / watchers to see these tweets and so the deletions guarantee that you can only find out what he knows by reading fan sites. This seems completely implausible to me.

            • Verschwörungstheorie lässt grüßen…
              Hier kann wohl jemand der Versuchung nicht widerstehen, sich als besonders oder gar auserwählt zu fühlen. “Er sendet uns geheime Botschaften, die nur für den inneren Kreis bestimmt sind.” Ja sind wir denn hier bei den Freimaurern… 😉

              • I agree, it’s an interpretation that assumes his fans are the center of his world in a way that I don’t find credible, and that he wishes to speak to a particular circle of fans. Since he himself knows about interfan rivalries, this would seem unwise.

                • Na ja, auf der anderen Seite erscheint mir sein Twitter-Verhalten in mancher Hinsicht tatsächlich nicht weise 🙂
                  Wenn er Hinweise auf zukünftige Projekte gibt und damit den detektivischen Spürsinn seiner Fans anstachelt, dann ist das für mich Spaß und ich bewundere den Spürsinn, den viele von euch an den Tag legen. Das ist pure Unterhaltung, zumal ich nicht vorhabe, irgendwelche Tickets zu kaufen.
                  Aber wie du schon gesagt hast, es gibt sehr ernsthafte Themen und wenn er sich dazu äußert, dann sollte er meiner Meinung nach zu seinen Aussagen stehen oder sie gleich bleiben lassen. Das Hin und Her nervt und ich würde es nicht als geheime Botschaft werten, sondern darin eher ein Zeichen der Unsicherheit sehen.

                  • That’s what was bugging my Friday — that he hinted at these projects, but then got angry when from his perspective fans took the hints too seriously. He really seems to have a controlling impulse.

                    • Hattest du den Frankie-Tweet so verstanden, dass er ärgerlich wurde?
                      Mein Englisch ist lückenhaft und ich habe noch kein gutes Gefühl für Zwischentöne. Ich hatte das so verstanden, dass er auf humorvolle (und doppeldeutige) Art davor warnt, überzureagieren und sich zum Beispiel übereilt ins finanzielle Risiko zu begeben. Andererseits hat er sicher einen “kleinen” Kontrollzwang. Meine Oma sagt dazu “Angst vor der eigenen Courage”.

                    • maybe “angry” is too much, but it was definitely a scold. The thing is, he set up that situation. If he wanted to tell fans not to buy tickets, he could have done that as well. It is reasonable to expect, as a fan, that when someone says announcements are coming up, that they will happen in a reasonable amount of time. I get that he enjoys teasing people but there are consequences to giving in to that impulse.

                    • Das stimmt und mit den Konsequenzen kann er nicht sehr gut umgehen. Seine Lernkurve ist in diesem Fall nicht sehr steil (positiv ausgedrückt). 🙂
                      Ich sehe das nicht so eng mit den Ankündigungen, weil mich so etwas nicht sofort zur Tat schreiten lässt. Sensiblere Seelen stresst das sicherlich sehr.

                    • Perhaps it’s too many years in college classrooms, but I’ve learned to come to accept that people react differently to news and will do different things in response. Some people will be very tense and others will be very calm. Just the way people are …

                    • Die Menschen sind eben verschieden (Gott sei Dank!) und RA ist eben auf seine Weise verschieden… 🙂
                      Wir rollen die Augen zum Himmel, schütteln den Kopf und üben uns darin, gelassen zu bleiben. Schließlich kann er ja nix für unsere Erwartungen und unsere persönliche Definition des gesunden Menschenverstandes.

            • Ah… A conspiracy!!! Why didn’t I think of that? 😉

  28. They say to think what you have posted before you send it. As a celebrity you know your words are going to be scrutinized unbelievably and if you are going to get into anything political or religious expect flack. It’s just common sense. As a celebrity you have opened yourself up to the public and they will definitely take advantage of it, so be prepared, keep your skin tough and if you don’t want flack keep away from certain ideals. Keep comments general and simply stated. Then push Tweet.

  29. Comparing Lee Pace´s and Richard Armitage´s tweets, Lee appears to be much more straightforward and less calculating. Deleting jokes or silly pictures is one thing. But posting 2 different statements in a matter of such importance and tragic, and deleting them one after the other, in my eyes seems rather immature. If you don´t dare to really stand up for your opinions and convictions in public, just keep silence. I am very disappointed.

    • Thanks for the comment, and welcome.

      • Thanks for having me and thanks for all your inspiring thoughts and interesting analyses on all things Armitage! Hopefully in the future I´ll find more pleasant aspects to discuss than this one yesterday. Just love his work.

  30. Look i’m not going to slam the door shut on him, i don’t think so. But i have to say reality rules my life at the moment to a degree where his posting and deleting or whatever is just very secondary and pretty unimportant. Party because for me 140 characters are not reality, regardless who they comes from. It’s just a distortion of reality, mainly in its most negative extremes. I haven’t read his twitter in years and don’t plan to go back, the impulse-from-the-gut responses have long made that unproductive for me. Not saying everyone has such impulses or reacts upon them. But i just don’t find the ‘discussion’ in any way interesting to me. I do read fans otoh, but i can do that by following accounts and reading their tweets. Enough to sort of have an idea what is going on without the need to be in it up to my neck.
    I also have to confess to being less affected by his opinions, first because i noticed a while ago there is nothing in there influencing my own much. And he doesn’t use twitter to make any fundamental statements about things either. Yes he may influence fans but there are only about 200k of them around and his voice is not prominent publicly. I am not making a statement of value, it’s just a fact. He has obviously, for whatever reason, made the choice long time ago to keep a relatively low public profile, in spite of his work and even in relation to his work – it just follows usual business practice and never goes beyond that.
    As far as i’ve seen he’s sometimes weighed in on issues he has experienced personally and they have obviously made an impact on him and i do enjoy reading about them, at the same level i do enjoy listening to him speak about his work. But he doesn’t show signs, or has decided to not share those decisions publicly, to follow the things that make him tick inside with public actions or public expressions of those ideas. A choice he is perfectly entitled to. But since that is the case it just doesn’t generally make me hold my breath in waiting to see what he says or does on twitter because it is neither of significant consequence there nor seems of significance to him.
    I can’t pretend to know why that is but i can see why twitter would not necessarily be suited to everyone as a form of self expression. We have all seen examples of people/public figures who use it effectively and of those who don’t use it at all and still express their views publicly otherwise in interviews, etc.

    I have by education and experience a soft spot for those who choose active social engagement and there is a certain level of disappointment in accepting that it is not his choice, however intelligent, talented, well articulated and gentle minded he may be. He’s not quite passive either to be fair to him, he’s just not one of public stance and gesture and speech by nature.
    Then again not everyone is born a leader or wants to be one, probably most artists who become leaders of opinion do it almost on impulse and belief and not by strategic design of some sort. Or based on certain education and circumstances in their life. In his own small way he has made a difference and in many cases a small difference goes a long long way. It feels unfair of me to burden someone unwilling with my big expectations. He’s not done anything to raise them voluntarily as a person and my disappointment is my own doing. In his own way he’s been inspirational without necessarily leading the way. And he’s tried to manage a position/situation he’s found himself in which he probably didn’t plan to be in. Others choose to voluntarily take themselves out of such interactions and control their public output completely or have none of it, in fact the vast majority do. And i feel some obligation to measure myself against the expectations i’ve shifted onto him 🙂
    Then again i’m sadly too old to not know my own mind and my own convictions. He can influence my heart but not my mind at this stage.
    On a very personal level and only because i worked as a teacher and education is something so close to my heart i can’t help wishing he’d want to play a bigger role for kids and youngsters. I believe he could do much more, but it’s not a responsibility that should be forced on anyone.

    • That was really well said and I thank you for saying that. ” It feels unfair of me to burden someone unwilling with my big expectations. ” A lot of what you wrote gave me a lot to think about. I have been leaning towards unfollowing him (as KellyDS wrote above). Servetus’ post and a lot of the comments have once again given me a lot to think about.

    • I think your comment deals with a straw man, as interest in a crush celebrity’s opinion and accepting influence by it are two separate things. I have seen a few comments remarking that he affected a Brexit opinion, but many more that said he hadn’t. As for me, I don’t think his opinions about politics are likely to influence mine at all (I know more about politics than he does, I suspect) and I am not holding my breath waiting to read them. (I in particular am not in the group of people who bug him to tweet more often or tweet concern at him if he hasn’t tweeted in a long time. I am possibly the only person in the fandom who thinks he could tweet less.) However, if he expresses an opinion that I care about / think about, then deletes it (and especially if it concurs with mine) that is significant to me. In particular, yesterday, because I have friends who are caught up in this (my friend’s partner was found, but my RL FB feed is filled with pictures of three of the victims, because the gay male world in central Florida is well connected and apparently I know a lot of people who know people), I find his apparent indecision about this issue problematic. Had he said nothing, I wouldn’t have cared, but then he said something and unsaid it.

      Similarly, I think there is a difference between burdening someone with expectations and expecting him to behave in ways that are typical of average ethical humans. If I expected Armitage to be a crusader for a political cause against his inclination, that would indeed be unfair. (This is one reason that I haven’t ever taken his charitable behavior under strong consideration, for instance — because I know a lot of people who work in philanthropy and was raised in a way that made certain kind of philanthropic activities a moral obligation. I do not apply this standard or expectation to him.) However, if someone expresses an opinion about a tragedy, then retracts it, then expresses another opinion, then retracts it — that is not me laying an unsolicited expectation on the man to crusade. That is the man apparently putting himself out to speak and then saying “oops, no.” I didn’t expect or force him to speak, but it is not unreasonable for me or others to react to it when he does so. It is a normal human expectation that when someone makes a sympathetic remark about a tragedy, that they don’t “unsay” that an hour later. This isn’t an expectation laid only a celebrity, it is one that we lay on all humans as a matter of ethics or at least manners.

      I didn’t ask him to join Twitter (in fact, I was unenthused about the possibility for years) and I didn’t ask him to tweet ever or about this issue specifically. However, it explodes the conventions of plausibility to tell fans that if a celebrity they care about or are crushed on does tweet or speak about something important that they shouldn’t react to it or “expect too much.” He remains free not to tweet, or only to tweet promotions, or only to talk about the things he wants. I don’t expect him to say anything, really. But if speech matters, then it has consequences.

      • Glad your friend’s partner was ok after all and sorry that it came all too close to home 😦 I don’t think anyone is unaffected and most people will feel at least sad and sorry and also frustrated by what has happened.
        I was just speaking about myself and my general view of his tweeted opinions, i wouldn’t presume to recommend any course of action or opinion to anyone else.
        Lack of interest translated to me in not of particular influence on me or something i would value or consider in my own actions or opinions. It’s my own choice after futile involvement with opinions of little to no duration which to me indicate either they were just a reflex polite reaction or simply not opinions he was prepared to stand behind publicly or otherwise. Not read everything but personally i haven’t noticed him picking up any of these opinions in interviews or occasions of public consequence. So they don’t matter to me.. in comparison to say opinions of people who go to further length to articulate them, publish them and act publicly according to these opinions.
        Most of us are sympathetic individuals and express our approval or agreement with certain opinions personally to people or publicly if we so choose. I’ve said this before, but for me personally and it is strictly personal opinions tweeted opinions tend to mean little as they involve zero effort and are in most cases just spontaneous reactions or following current trends. Sorry i’m skeptical in terms of the weight people place on them and i am likely to just read through and pay particular attention only if actions confirm these opinions. Anyone can agree with trends and generic opinions on twitter , doesn’t mean people who don’t express them there don’t have even stronger ones. This is what i meant by high expectation, my expectation is not some polite statements, that is no expectation at all (and i don’t expect even that if is retracted, it becomes pointless). My expectation is action on issue people believe in. Or that is the kind of thing i’ve decided to involve my energy/mind/heart in as much less likely to hit me in the face.
        I fully accept however that that is not the norm and in my experience even standing firm behind a public opinion is not either. (Not least with how little support i have seen over these last few months in local opinions from people around me).
        So i for one choose for myself only for inconsequential temporary routine politeness or standard statements expressed in 140 characters to mean little to me in either a good or a bad way.

        • Well, the first deleted tweet corresponded to something he said to an interviewer in the fall of 2013, and I am not sure that he’s been interviewed since he began speaking about Trump/walls and Brexit.

          One way that this could be read is in light of his own statements via Cybersmile. Although that would be troubling.

  31. Yes, this is what I am trying to communicate although ineffectively. My opinions on matters are not influenced by RA, rather I am disappointed in him as a person for tweeting a thought, feeling, or conviction and then deleting it. Especially in this instance where lives were lost.
    For some reason it is making me angry and I don’t often get caught up in such things. As much as I enjoy some of his twitter posts things like the last two deleted tweets are making me feel it is not worth it for me to follow him on twitter. I think I will just stick to interviews (print or otherwise – since he can’t retract them lol) and his movies, TV and stage work.

    • Well, following his own rule about keeping it fun, he made that hard for a lot of fans this weekend. I wonder if he wishes he could retract his interviews (I am sure he does). But I see the appeal of a more stable notion of his identity (this is what I was dealing with last summer). I think if you’re not enjoying his Twitter than it is wise to stay away for now.

  32. Von der Bildung mal eben ausgebremst 😁

    • Occam’s razor and all that.

      • 😂 Das musste ich jetzt erstmal googlen. Nicht, dass ich es vollumfänglich umrissen hätte, aber ich unterhalte mich gerne mit schlauen Leuten 😆 Hatte ich erwähnt, wie mich die Horizonterweiterung hier immer wieder vor Begeisterung in die Knie zwingt? rhetorische Frage 😀

  33. It’s amazing (as in surprising) how many comments. Here’s yet another.
    I’m inclined to believe the two tweets were retracted because both included elements that
    1) was perceived by some as maintaining a double standard
    2) included a post in which some of the comments were frankly very inclined towards bigotry (something I pointed out in a comment).
    I only wish RA would stand by his beliefs and submissions and defend them if need be. Tony Stephens has done precisely that. Not that anything needs defending, it’s his “bar”. The deletions, however, are irritating!

    • Toby– Sorry, Danish auto correct😟

    • I don’t think he needs to defend them. He could read my paragraphs about “who are you speaking to” in the post about trolls and thing about that question. I get that he might want to talk about these things occasionally — but maybe not with total strangers who are already disinclined to be persuaded.

      • Persuasion for/against gun control?(personally I prefer the broader term weapons control, but that’s my opinion).
        One of my issues in teaching is targeting the text to the audience. It involves extensive knowledge into the type of receiver you want to target. A research is often necessary. However, this is in marketing, branding, and segmentation is pivotal. In this case, it’s a fandom, and I don’t think segmentation can apply to a fandom where no person is alike. The message will always be perceived differently by different people. It’s impossible to please everyone. He should know this by now. The first tweet was fine – the second was alright. Lee Pace’s was better. RA should have left at least one of them.

        • Well, I disagree about the prioritization here (I thought Pace said the safe thing) but I agree that he will never get all his fans cheering if he says something about guns.

          • Just out of curiosity – which prioritization would you prefer? I’m assuming we’re talking about the tweets, and I’m also assuming based on your comment that you don’t “like” a safe statement.

            • I’m saying Pace’s tweet was only better if you assume “safe” is best. I have ceased to believe that “safe” is best in these settings, although I understand why a celebrity would stick with safe.

              • So do I, and in this particular instance I estimate that safe was the most sensible option. However, if you don’t appreciate “sensible”, well…(nods her head and shrugs).

  34. For him it is difficult to comment on such controversial issues, during an election campaign, without offending, awaken certain susceptibilities (guns,, muslims).
    As for praying on the fate of the victims, the positions of some preachy religious, against LGBT or other adverse religion, can sometimes be extremist.
    I pray so that we have a global thought about all the victims of the extremists of any edges.

  35. […] because of the effect his statements often have on fans’ treatment of each other; second, because of his frequent tendency to delete; and finally, because of the impression of advocating wishy-washiness and passive aggression that […]

  36. […] think it’s sort of like I feel about deleted political tweets. I feel disappointed, and then I think, why are you disappointed? In that case, it’s because […]

  37. […] “So who runs @RCArmitage?” June 12, 2016. Expresses my frustration over Armitage’s deletion of tweets after the […]

  38. […] for my capacity to develop a fuller picture of him) and sympathy for what he’s saying and feelings of extreme alienation about the regular tweet/delete exercise when it concerns something si… and occasional serious […]

  39. […] most apparent and most serious. But there were others: the need to adjust to Armitage as tweep, the regular rounds of tweet/delete, and the (in my opinion deleterious) effects his illusory presence on Twitter has had on the fandom […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: