Internet shaming.

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

Is this out of control? Of course, you commit a serious crime, you do the time. I'm referring to people who misbehave by yelling at a service worker or tells an off color joke and the like. Should they lose their livelihood for 1 misstep? Should they be threatened for a social misstep? Their family ostracized?

 

Condemnation and outrage seem to be the auto default in human behaviour, especially in this age of social media. Is that right? Is it wrong to be compassionate towards those who make mistakes. Whatever happened to "let him who is without sin cast the first stone"? LOL, I make myself laugh sometimes. :)

[Midnite-Energies 110563]

Personally I feel the internet has given everyone with a device a voice and made it so there is very little responsibility or consequence for what is said or done. Before the internet if you had an issue with someone/something you dealt with it in person, via letter or a letter to the editor sort of deal. It gave people time to think about what they wanted to say and what their goal was. There was also responsibility for actions and words, tolerance and basic respect. many of these things have been lost in the digital world.

 

Making comments or posting opinions is pretty much immediate now. You can make/fake email addresses with any name and you can basically say whatever you want with very few repercussions. It has not made society better in the big picture scheme of things.

 

You have but to go on any site with comments and you will see people shaming, calling out, accusing, degrading and then see the replies back. The worst is the mob mentalities where everyone needs to pile on and see if they can best the one before but usually in a positive way.

 

There are so many who are never touched by consequence and then there are those who said or did one wrong thing and their lives are ruined. It's really a sad state of affairs.

 

My motto is and has been, be the change you want to see. Things can only change one person at a time.

[Ice4fun 78396]

Like most things in life people can choose to use things for good reasons or Bad... the Internet is no different. On a positive front it has opened up the world for people and somewhat leveled the playing field in a world where knowledge and access to data and a corresponding ability to communicate can mean the difference between poverty or affluence...the internet has transformed the world we live in and the transformation still continues

 

For all its benefits the internet also has its dark sides one of which is the fact that it has provided bullies with a huge platform from which to spew their lies and abuse.

 

Because of its very nature of allowing people anonymity or at the very least the perception of it... people's natural tendency to moderate their speech in a public forum seems to have reduced dramatically. Where before people might a have been willing to politely disagree all to often now they feel safe in attacking in often a very personal way the pople they may disagree with.

 

Now I understand that there are certainly times when it could be argued that the person attacked might of had it coming because of their initial comment or behavior I am just suggesting that the threshold for the veracity of the reply has been dramatically lower by the internet anonymity.

 

We don't really have to look to far to see evidence of that... we see it fairly regularly here on this board and we are the "friendly" board. We often feel very comfortable here jumping on someone who says something wrong or stupid or makes a mistake... I wonder would we pile on like that in real life if people knew who we are or do we just feel safe here hidden behind our profile names.

 

Just my Opinion

[mrgreen760 37785]

Internet shaming and the political correctness movement seem to go hand in hand these days and a lot of it seems to be driven by anger and self loathing. Anger mostly about themselves and attacking behind the cloak of secrecy allows them to feel better, superior and they can blame others for their lot in life and avoid taking any responsibility.

 

Peace

MG

[MightyPen 67414]

I'm referring to people who misbehave by yelling at a service worker or tells an off color joke and the like. Should they lose their livelihood for 1 misstep? Should they be threatened for a social misstep? Their family ostracized?

I don't have a problem with people who yell at service workers or tell ugly "jokes" having their behaviour publicized. They did something stupid in a public place; what's the problem if that behaviour gets shared and others get to see what they're capable of?

 

The consequences that might ensue with family, colleagues, or their employer/clients is a matter between the offender and those other parties. But I don't think "but I never thought the people who matter to me would know I did X" is much of a defense or the basis for outrage. People need to own their actions; the only sure defense is, well, not to yell at wait staff or say repugnant shit.

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

Internet shaming is where someone says something improper that gets captured and posted online. The "gatekeepers of morality" then try to ruin this persons reputation, livelihood and security by posting hate filled comments and threats online. They gloat over the misfortune of others and have no concern for their very deliberate attacks. Not a virtue I want to practice.

 

What causes it? I do think it is based in anger and a desire to gloat. There also seems to be a disconnect between the severity of the "social crime" and the wanton savagery of the shaming.

 

The other aspect of internet shaming is the disregard for context. No one ever asks about that. Did they mean something else? Are they 99.9% of the time a decent person? No one seems to care. He/She must be punished, shamed, left traumatized and broken for having made a social faux pas. If they can threaten their employer, hopefully they can also get them fired!

 

It's not something I want any part of.

[Studio 110 by Sophia 150333]

I usually prefer to not speak on hot topics, but in this case I will.

 

I posted today " pobody is nerfect" this is a saying I learned long ago as a child. It kinda stuck with me. My mother instilled a virtue in me that will never be removed. This was " true virtue is when you can accept others mistakes, and a mistake is what happens once...maybe twice" then after that is a character flaw in the individual. EVEN then, a flaw is a flaw and does not give a true picture into the persons values as a whole.

 

Internet shaming is the most cowardice movement, that I am proud to say I have : not done,

defend those who are attacked

and reach out to those who need a compassionate ear.

 

I have been under attack almost my whole career, but as the saying goes

" cream rises to the top" and must say is true.

 

Let's take the lion killer/dentist for example and also the "legal hunter girl"

I had done a search on his info, had the number of his office but choose to allow the universe to take care of that. I was appalled at his actions, but who am I to call, txt or email about his actions? He did an illegal act, therefore...HIS WORLD IS CRASHING IN without my added say so.

NOW the chick who legally hunted.....I still have an issue with that in my own morals, but she did not break laws. Who am I to ruin her life, stalk or shame her? I am no one, I am just me.

 

So in this industry, I have met many ladies and many gents. The ladies whom perhaps crossed me the wrong way, I simply de-attach from. No longer their cheerleader, no longer will I stand by them in friendships. BUT NEVER WOULD PUT IN HARMS WAY. If I did...could I sleep soundly? NO!

I will always respect your right to carry on, and will maintain a professional respect. unless you killed my dog intentionally lol.

 

Same as clients. We all have bad days, providers and clients alike. And if your worlds is so small not to allow room for forgiveness or respect then it is time to go separate ways I suppose. Would I call your boss cause you did a no show? NO!!!!! Would I blast your name for a simple no show???? NO!!!! if you harmed me, robbed me....well I wont call your boss, I will call 911! But will warn others of your actions privately.

 

Us providers who are here for the long hull, we have many good days, and few bad. The difference is, those of us who are professional and have respect will do our best to make it right by you. But keep in mind, we are not fools either, wont be bullied into a freebie. That said, you have to give every person a chance to make it right before you judge.

 

anyhow, back to my daily chores lol. Hope you all find love, peace and happiness no matter who or what you do!

[TorontoMelanieJolliet 4458]

This discussion has me thinking.. if people actually do start to realize that all their actions/words can have a very public affect, will that mean that we will eventually start to 'behave' in public (and private) again? Like will a side effect be that we become more civil?

[TorontoMelanieJolliet 4458]

Internet shaming is where someone says something improper that gets captured and posted online. The "gatekeepers of morality" then try to ruin this persons reputation, livelihood and security by posting hate filled comments and threats online. They gloat over the misfortune of others and have no concern for their very deliberate attacks. Not a virtue I want to practice.

 

What causes it? I do think it is based in anger and a desire to gloat. There also seems to be a disconnect between the severity of the "social crime" and the wanton savagery of the shaming.

 

The other aspect of internet shaming is the disregard for context. No one ever asks about that. Did they mean something else? Are they 99.9% of the time a decent person? No one seems to care. He/She must be punished, shamed, left traumatized and broken for having made a social faux pas. If they can threaten their employer, hopefully they can also get them fired!

 

It's not something I want any part of.

 

I once heard that this can be like the middle ages where there was a community shaming, like when they used to put people in the gallows in the town square etc. I'm not sure about the sicology of it but it seems that all through the ages, people have stayed the same mentally

[Phaedrus 209521]

I really don't like the online shame mob at all.

 

The mob doesn't care that initial reports of something may be inaccurate, or misleading, or just plain wrong. The mob doesn't care that it may have no clue about the context of whatever happened, or be ignorant of nuance. The mob doesn't care if it gets the wrong person; it suffers no consequences for that. The mob doesn't care if the damage it inflicts on its victim is entirely out of proportion to the perceived or actual offence; it suffers no consequences for that, either. The mob doesn't care if some, any or all of its individual members are just as guilty of the perceived crime as whoever's having their life destroyed today.

 

We've all said stupid things in the heat of the moment. We've all made jokes at the expense of another person or group, or said things that others might find offensive. That's just being human. Almost all of us get away with it almost all of the time. Public figures don't, but that's part of being a public figure. For the rest of us... we're immune and blessedly unnoticed, until suddenly we're not.

 

There are people who are sufficiently evil to deserve what they get... but they are very few and far between, and the mob is an immensely bad judge of their identity.

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

Is this about Steph Guthrie?

 

Nope. Take your MRA goggles off, OBE. The world is what we make of it. :)

 

By the way, has there been a decision on that? Last I read on it was back in July.

 

Additional Comments:

This discussion has me thinking.. if people actually do start to realize that all their actions/words can have a very public affect, will that mean that we will eventually start to 'behave' in public (and private) again? Like will a side effect be that we become more civil?

 

Thanks for joining the discussion, Mel. You make a very good point. My point is that the punishment is WAY out of proportion to the social faux pas. People should criticize bad behaviour but it can be done with compassion and "fair comment".

 

In some countries if you steal some food you get your hand cut off. It doesn't matter that you were starving. Yes, you may not steal again but now the person can't even work to put food on his table. That's an extreme example of excessive punishment and I'm not saying things here are as bad as that but people do become broken and depressed from internet shaming and can lose their job and the means to put food on their table. What's is distressingly similar in both cases is the mind set that says "too bad, own it!"

 

That's not the kind of person I strive to be.

[MightyPen 67414]

I think it might be helpful if you refer to some specific examples you think are unfair, because your reference to "internet shaming" can be interpreted very broadly. As a result, different people may think you're talking about different things.

 

I'm still perfectly fine with someone's obnoxious public behaviour being captured and shared. It's a natural hazard of living in an age where everyone's carrying a camera, all the time.

 

If real-world consequences are warranted (i.e. you clearly violate your profession's ethical standards and suffer an appropriate consequence)... well, hey.

 

I'm sure there are cases where the consequences are irrational and unwarranted; I'd have to evaluate that case by case. But I thought, for example, that Shawn Simoes losing his job at Hydro One was awesome and delicious justice, and a reminder that we live in an era where guys can't just walk around being obnoxious dicks and expect to get away with it when their job demands otherwise.

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

I think it might be helpful if you refer to some specific examples you think are unfair, because your reference to "internet shaming" can be interpreted very broadly. As a result, different people may think you're talking about different things.

 

I'm still perfectly fine with someone's obnoxious public behaviour being captured and shared. It's a natural hazard of living in an age where everyone's carrying a camera, all the time.

 

If real-world consequences are warranted (i.e. you clearly violate your profession's ethical standards and suffer an appropriate consequence)... well, hey.

 

I'm sure there are cases where the consequences are irrational and unwarranted; I'd have to evaluate that case by case. But I thought, for example, that Shawn Simoes losing his job at Hydro One was awesome and delicious justice, and a reminder that we live in an era where guys can't just walk around being obnoxious dicks and expect to get away with it when their job demands otherwise.

 

Appreciate your points, MP. I have a feeling we are on opposite sides on this issue and it might be pointless trying to explain why I hold my position. It is based in giving people the benefit of the doubt and recognizing we are human and make mistakes from time to time. I feel there are better ways to handle these missteps than with excessive punishment.

 

I could give examples but what good is ranking these offences given they are so subjective. Here, swearing in public or telling an off color joke can get you threatened, shamed and possibly fired(without cause in many cases) if the employer just doesn't want the aggravation from the mob.

In other parts of the world being gay can get you killed by people who think this is accountable punishment. If you blog about religious extremism in Pakistan you can get hacked to pieces by people who think your accountable for holding an offensive view. If you blog about these deaths you can also get hacked to pieces. It's the same rigid mindset at play, just differing examples and consequences.

 

Maybe it's out of fashion nowadays but I'll almost always choose compassion over rigidity when it comes to social faux pas.

[MightyPen 67414]

I could give examples but what good is ranking these offences given they are so subjective. Here, swearing in public or telling an off color joke can get you threatened, shamed and possibly fired(without cause in many cases) if the employer just doesn't want the aggravation from the mob.

I think that's an opportunity to discuss what constitutes "just cause", the nature of the employment contracts people choose to sign, and our obligation in a society to be mindful of what others find deeply offensive. The problem isn't that people are made aware of obnoxious behaviour in the first place.

 

In other parts of the world being gay can get you killed by people who think this is accountable punishment.

It's probably no surprise that I can find that deeply troubling, yet have no trouble with people paying socially for being exposed as hateful or obnoxious. Maybe these two things aren't as closely related as you think... or maybe, there are many, many shades of position between the two extremes you cite.

 

Maybe it's out of fashion nowadays but I'll almost always choose compassion over rigidity when it comes to social faux pas.

I think this perhaps hinges on whether one perceives a certain action as a "faux pas" versus "obnoxious and hateful".

 

If someone shouts to a television camera, for example, "the Jews are the cause of all the world's problems and those ovens were a pretty good idea," do you think that's just a cute little faux pas that should be kept anonymous and hidden from view? Or is it perhaps something that people associated with that person should be aware their friend/family/employee/employer is capable of?

 

In essence you have in your mind a set of behaviours that you think are trivial, but others (shockingly!) think are alarmingly, red-flag obnoxious and deserving of scorn. I'm not sure which behaviours you have in mind because you haven't been specific. But near as I can tell, if you're looking for why some people react so strongly and with such outrage to something you think is no big deal, the answer is: "to some people it's a really, really big deal."

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

I think that's an opportunity to discuss what constitutes "just cause", the nature of the employment contracts people choose to sign, and our obligation in a society to be mindful of what others find deeply offensive. The problem isn't that people are made aware of obnoxious behaviour in the first place.

 

 

It's probably no surprise that I can find that deeply troubling, yet have no trouble with people paying socially for being exposed as hateful or obnoxious. Maybe these two things aren't as closely related as you think... or maybe, there are many, many shades of position between the two extremes you cite.

 

 

I think this perhaps hinges on whether one perceives a certain action as a "faux pas" versus "obnoxious and hateful".

 

If someone shouts to a television camera, for example, "the Jews are the cause of all the world's problems and those ovens were a pretty good idea," do you think that's just a cute little faux pas that should be kept anonymous and hidden from view? Or is it perhaps something that people associated with that person should be aware their friend/family/employee/employer is capable of?

 

In essence you have in your mind a set of behaviours that you think are trivial, but others (shockingly!) think are alarmingly, red-flag obnoxious and deserving of scorn. I'm not sure which behaviours you have in mind because you haven't been specific. But near as I can tell, if you're looking for why some people react so strongly and with such outrage to something you think is no big deal, the answer is: "to some people it's a really, really big deal."

 

You are very articulate and quite polite when making your points. I guess we all have our baselines from which we view this world. Thanks for sharing your always welcome opinion.