NIH Hid Public Comments Package — page 97
of 128 pages
← p.96 p.98 → · this page in the original PDF · package
/OD) [E]
Lankford,
>; Polimeni,
/OD) [E]
You cannot post to someone's page on Twitter in the same way you can on Facebook. On Twitter, you
can either reply to someone's tweet (aka tweet thread) or tweet under an established hashtag. The
hashtag is a way to filter and organize tweets across Twitter by creating a feed with only those tweets
using the same hashtag. It's a way to create a conversation on the platform. The hashtag for the chat
was established by the NIH so that all chat participants could see the conversation around brain health.
PETA posted both to NIH tweets and used the hashtag in this scenario. Participants would be looking at
the tweets appearing on the hashtag (i.e. the conversation) and would have seen PETA's posts, and
those following the tweet thread would have also seen PETA's posts. This means there would be no way
to follow the information on the Twitter chat without being disrupted by the posts and being forced to
work around them to get the relevant health information.
2. Are you aware of complaints we've received against other types of posts, unrelated to animal testing? E.g.,
posts concerning Dr. Fauci, or posts concerning vaccine misinformation? I know I've asked this before, but
Plaintiffs specifically want to know if the complaints NIH receives are really focused on PETA, or if NIH received
complaints about inflammatory posts on a variety of subjects. I think Plaintiffs want to make the argument that
NIH is targeted animal rights posts over other inflammatory posts when they are equally inappropriate. Since
Plaintiffs want this answer as part of our fact stipulation negotiations, I think we have to provide it.
Yes - we've received complaints about other inappropriate and/or off topic content that is not related to
animal testing. Please see the screenshots and links to posts below.
https://www.facebook.com/43331696829/posts/10159317371801830/?d=n
https://www.facebook.com/43331696829/posts/10159342469336830/?d=n
https://www.facebook.com/100064843296393/posts/239873164850792/?d=n
https://www.facebook.com/100064843296393/posts/251454613692647/?d=n
https://www.facebook.com/100064843296393/posts/255266059978169/?d=n
https://www.facebook.com/100064843296393/posts/255956623242446/?d=n
https://www.facebook.com/nih.gov/posts/255820046589437
https://www.instagram.com/p/CT2N82Jlcui/?utm_medium=copy_link
Let us know if you any additional questions.
Thanks!
Anna
From: Kern, Anna (NIH/OD) [E]
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2022 3:25 PM
To: Imhoff, Sarah (NIH/OD) [E] <
@nih.gov>
Cc: Spruill, Crystal (NIH/OD) [C] <
@nih.gov>; Prince, Scott (NIH/OD) [E] <
@nih.gov>; Lankford,
David (NIH/OD) [E] <
@od31tm1.od.nih.gov>; Myles, Renate (NIH/OD) [E] <
@mail.nih.gov>; Polimeni,
Lydia (NIH/OD) [E] <
@nih.gov>; Fine, Amanda (NIH/OD) [E] <
@nih.gov>; Haley Spencer
<
@palladianpartners.com>
Subject: RE: PETA Lawsuit Update and Requests for Information
Hi Sarah,
You're correct - we did not delete these comments. I imagine since she made several comments in a row with no time in
between the comments it violated FB's community standards and they were removed. See FB's policy regarding spam
here: https://transparency.fb.com/policies/community-standards/spam/
This is our OCR of the page, with running headers and footers removed. The
Committee's PDF
is authoritative; quote from it. Machine-readable, including the uncleaned
text: /api/page/nih_public_comments/97
Records on this page
| Record | Date | Type | Pages |
|---|---|---|---|
| RE: PETA Lawsuit Update and Requests for Information | 2022-01-18 | 97–98 | |
| RE: PETA Lawsuit Update and Requests for Information | 2022-01-19 | 96–97 |