You've probably seen someone who goes onto his (or her) social media or blog to troll others. This person will post something to the internet, and then quickly remove it, due to being reported for abuse and/or violation of the terms of service for the site. This person then repeats, ad nauseam.
As a writer and person who champions the cause of stopping bullying, I find this practice reprehensible. Not only does this give the troll the opportunity to continue bullying his or her targets, but it also protects them from disciplinary action by the Internet community. Also, as someone who takes pride in my work, and considers posting online to be the electronic equivalent of publishing, what sense does it make to publish and then retract?
In the offline world of publishing, there are laws that prevent slander and libel in printed media. This is why newspapers and magazines spend so much time and effort to verify information before they run with a story. There is a legal and ethical requirement for published media to do so. It is the contention that there needs to be a similar requirement for social media sites and other hosted online media outlets.
Indeed, I suggest that sites like Twitter should use their analytical ability to review the behavior of habitual offenders of site TOE. There are harassers/trolls who use the post-and-delete tactic to avoid disciplinary action by the hosting website. Even when the offending information is deleted, that information still exists in electronic form for some time. For the protection of the members of the online community, habitual offenders should be subject to disciplinary action, up to permanent suspension.
In truth, the controversial post-and-delete user is nothing more than a person who seeks self-aggrandizement at the expense of others, not a shock jock like Howard Stern. They emulate the outrageous tone of Donald Trump, without the integrity to own their words for all to see.