Over the summer, Twitter created a new policy for its platform: for certain accounts, tweets that break Twitter’s rules will stay up for the public to debate its content.

In late September, Facebook announced a similar one—they will allow any post from a politician to stay, even if it breaks one or more of their rules, as long as the rule was not broken in an ad. These two policies do more harm than good as they give free rein to politicians to post anything they want.

Twitter released a statement outlining who they consider falls under this new policy: “The account must be or represent a government/elected official, be running for public office, or be considered for a government position (i.e., next in line, awaiting confirmation, named successor to an appointed position); Have more than 100,000 followers; and be verified.”

For these accounts, unless the tweet is a direct threat or a call for violence against an individual or group, Twitter will opt instead to place a warning on the tweet. They will also change the algorithms for the tweet, making fewer people see it in the hopes of lessening its impact.

The issue with all of this is that the policy does not stop the release of the information. People are still able to see the rule-breaking information, and the officials tweeting  face no repercussions.

In my time on Twitter since the policy came out, I have not seen this warning on tweets violating Twitter’s rules. These include President Trump’s attack on Iran where he threatens “obliteration” and his attacks on the whistleblower which can be seen as harassment against Twitter’s policies.

The major tweet from the President I was surprised was not taken down or labeled was a retweet of a video of Rep. Omar of Minnesota dancing. The video, taken at an event celebrating the congresswoman, was doctored to make it seem that Omar—who is Muslim—was celebrating the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. This should be seen as breaking the rules because it calls for violence against a specific individual and attacks them based on religion.

Another issue with this new Twitter policy is that no punishment comes to the officials who write the tweets. The only action that occurs is labeling. The official gets no warning, suspension or ban placed on their account, so there isn’t anything stopping the official from continuing to break the rules.

Trump can continue attacking Rep. Omar in this way, as all that will happen is an ambiguous percentage of his 60 million-plus followers won’t see it. The tweets can keep getting flagged by users, but because it’s not a direct threat of violence, it won’t be taken down. Rep. Steve King of Iowa, who was taken off of Republican committees due to his white supremacist remarks, can keep spewing hatred.

On Facebook, their version of the policy is so relaxed that as long as the post is not an advertisement or a direct threat of harm, anything can be said. No label will be placed on it as it would have on Twitter. These guidelines are so relaxed that the man who created the content standards for Facebook has come out against the new policy, arguing that leaving hate speech from politicians up will lead to more violence against the attacked groups.

I am not on Facebook much, nor do I follow politicians on Facebook, but I feel that their policy is a front to act as if they are taking steps to regulate content.

36 percent of Facebook’s top 100 stories are usually related to politics, and there is barely any oversight of politicians’ accounts on the site due to being continually accused of halting conservative voices such as Alex Jones and Milo Yiannopoulos. So, by not limiting the reach of the post or putting a warning on it as Twitter does, this new policy shows that Facebook is simply trying to lessen criticism from conservatives.

Twitter and Facebook are the two biggest social media sites for public debate to occur; they are forums for politicians and public officials to connect and interact with their constituents.

However, social media sites need regulation as they are easy to abuse. These new rules allow politicians to post basically whatever they want, while regular people are still bound by the social media sites’ policies. Harassment and hateful conduct are the two rules that are the most likely to be broken and the ones public officials who should be banned break the most. Now, the President is able to harass whoever he wants through Twitter without consequences. Those like Rep. Steve King are able to spread white nationalist ideologies without an issue.

No one should be able to spew hatred, even if they are in public office, and Twitter and Facebook are allowing it to spread freely.