The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

Boris Johnson privatises official Mayor of London Twitter account

By Samira Shackle Published 20 March 2012 15:40

Politicians are well aware of the campaigning power of Twitter. Which explains why Boris Johnson appears to have changed the name of the non-partisan @MayorOfLondon Twitter account to -- you guessed it, @BorisJohnson. Changing the account instantly gives the Mayor 253,152 followers.

This matters because the Mayor of London account is an official tool of the Greater London Authority, used to communicate with the public. Taxpayer money will have gone towards it in the form of staff time spent manning the account. Now that the name has been changed, the embedded link on the page has been changed from the neutral www.london.gov.uk to Boris's campaign website, www.backboris2012.com.

Over at Liberal Conspiracy, Sunny Hundal, who reported this story first, points out that Gordon Brown established the No 10 Downing Street Twitter account but didn't change it to his own name when he stepped down.

UPDATE 3.30pm

The BackBoris2012 website has published the following statement:

As some of you may have noticed, earlier today Boris changed the name of his Twitter account from @MayorofLondon to @BorisJohnson. While the name of the account may have changed, rest assured that the account is still - and has always been - controlled by Boris.

No City Hall resources will be used to update or maintain the account - that would be against the rules. Given we're now in the official election period, this change is being made so there can be no question of Boris using official resources to campaign.

Of course those who no longer wish to follow the account are of course welcome to "unfollow" at any time.

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

Tags: Boris Johnson

More from Samira Shackle

View the discussion thread.

9 comments

Tue, 2012-03-20 20:21 — Muhammad Haque (not verified)

Having said all that about Boris "privatising" the twitter account, what have you to say about his weaknesses? How have your publication - the New Statesman- reported the role the costs and the abuses of the holder of that post in the name of the people of London? Where in the magazine has there been any real examine of the relative importance to "ordinary Londoners" of the London assembly and the holder of that post in the Onion? Your magazine has not, in the years since May 2008, shown the way at all and that is a real letdown. Just as it is a letdown for pro-democracy people in this Metropolis that no "mainstream" media outlet has examined the work of either the Mayor or that of the London Assembly. Had they done so, they would have found and been impelled by sheer force of the evidence encountered to share the findings with the wider pubic that it is the ordinary people who know better than either Boris or Ken or anyone else seeking to pose as or be a credible, vote-worthy candidate this time, about what should be done by anyone claiming fitness to have so much powers over so much money and much else besides "in the name of the ordinary people of London". Can the New Statesman make a start even at this ‘late’ stage? I don’t think that the New Statesman itself has ever gotten in touch with ordinary people, notwithstanding the image, the plugs and the promotions. It is time that it did get in touch and told the truth. This is one certain way that I see a pro-Con “mayoral election” propaganda bandwagon being stopped.

Tue, 2012-03-20 20:42 — A meadows (not verified)

thank god Livingstone didn't use millons of pounds of tax payers money on a newspaper called the londoner to tell everyone what A good job he was doing, Oh wait

Tue, 2012-03-20 16:15 — John V. Keogh (not verified)

Makes sense if he expects to lose to Ken.

Tue, 2012-03-20 16:18 — Kevin Irving (not verified)

I thought the whole point of Twitter is that you posted your own thoughts. How many people man this site and how much are they paid? What a total waste of taxpayers money.

Tue, 2012-03-20 16:24 — Tesco Shelf Stacker (not verified)

"Politicians are well aware of the campaigning power of Twitter."

Really? During the run-up to the national referendum on changing how we vote for MPs to Parliament - Twitter was dominated by Pro-AV campaigners and yet the No campaign won, overwhelmingly.

Wed, 2012-03-21 13:54 — Steve Lockett (not verified)

More importantly, 250,000+ people were following the Twit in the first place. Have you nothing better to do?

Tue, 2012-03-20 17:17 — MrMoth (not verified)

"No City Hall resources will be used to update or maintain the account" - but they were used to establish it, and to build to 250k followers. How typically disingenuous.

Tue, 2012-03-20 17:18 — __karl__ (not verified)

Could prove to be a bit of an own goal if tens of thousands suddenly unfollowed the account... Perhaps the 'power of Twitter' could be harnessed to bring about just such an eventuality? #UnfollowBoris ;)

Tue, 2012-03-20 18:13 — Adrian Short (not verified)

Boris knows this is the official GLA mayor's Twitter account, not his personal account. He was "given guidance" on its use in 2009 when someone complained about him using it for party political purposes:

http://alt.adrianshort.co.uk/blog/2012/03/20/boris-hijacks-official-at-m...

London taxpayers will probably be forking out to recover @MayorOfLondon from whoever's now squatting it too.