When I filed my last DS-160 for my final H-1B renewal before I got my green card, I remember filling in my social media identifiers. In fact, a look at a 2019 document reveals that providing the identifiers has been required since at least back then[0]. Given that the identifiers must be offered, the intent must be that the posts should be read, so this is unsurprising[1].
I suppose one happy fact from this must be that USCIS has never had convenient access to dragnet surveillance. For if they did, they would simply have used the backdoor rather than ask you to make the profile public. For my part, I always assumed that the US Government knew everything I posted.
I'm sure that if they didn't like me for some reason, they'd find a Richelieu accusation to make from what I've written. One would imagine it is like that other self-evident thing in the First Amendment, "separation of church and state", that is also practiced where convenient and not otherwise. Unless born American (and perhaps now, also "to Americans born American") some degree of scepticism for the tenets of the American Civil Religion will serve anyone well.
1: I'm sure someone could construct machinery where a blacklist is produced by one arm of the government with view to posts which is used by another arm that which has no post-access but I think that was unlikely when this was designed
> I suppose one happy fact from this must be that USCIS has never had convenient access to dragnet surveillance. For if they did, they would simply have used the backdoor rather than ask you to make the profile public.
Not necessarily.
One of the very common tactics by federal investigators is asking a question they already know the answer to. That lets them know when you're lying, which can be a crime on its own!
Filling out paperwork for a security clearance long ago had two questions about "have you ever been a member of a group dedicated to the overthrow of the us government, if yes explain". The next question was about being an officer in such a group.
I always enjoyed that question in that there was a two line explanation field :)
I assume that was similar in that it's there to catch a lie (possibly just after the fact / legal leverage) ... not really find anything out with that question at that moment.
That's a good point. And particularly in immigration (and I think I recall in this very form - the DS-160) which has such questions such as "Are you a communist?" and "Are you a terrorist or have you ever sympathized with them?" which are clearly intended for the purpose you describe: to catch you in a lie and prosecute you for that even if not for something else.
I suppose the analogous technique here is whether you delete content they've already recorded. Though it could be simpler, and they're just trying to cause an unforced error where someone fails to make a profile public, creating an avenue to reject them even if it were perfectly fine otherwise.
Am I a terrorist or have I ever sympathized with them? Does singing old IRA songs after a couple of pints of Guinness count? If so, it's well I'm not filling out a DS-160.
I suppose one happy fact from this must be that USCIS has never had convenient access to dragnet surveillance. For if they did, they would simply have used the backdoor rather than ask you to make the profile public. For my part, I always assumed that the US Government knew everything I posted.
I'm sure that if they didn't like me for some reason, they'd find a Richelieu accusation to make from what I've written. One would imagine it is like that other self-evident thing in the First Amendment, "separation of church and state", that is also practiced where convenient and not otherwise. Unless born American (and perhaps now, also "to Americans born American") some degree of scepticism for the tenets of the American Civil Religion will serve anyone well.
0: https://travel.state.gov/content/dam/visas/Enhanced%20Vettin...
1: I'm sure someone could construct machinery where a blacklist is produced by one arm of the government with view to posts which is used by another arm that which has no post-access but I think that was unlikely when this was designed