Disagreeing and criticizing someone for something they said or did is neither bullying nor “mob justice”. And that’s what this generally is – someone gets caught saying something awful, is publicly criticized for it, and because their employer doesn’t want to be associated with stuff that may harm their business (or perhaps just because they don’t want to employ bigots) they might suffer professionally. What part of this is bullying or mob justice?
There also might be death threats and the like, and those are certainly wrong, but are not reasonably connected to disagreement and criticism.
Right, this goes to my point that all “internet shaming” is usually just a critical mass of people pointedly expressing a negative opinions about an individual until they tire of the subject and move on to new things to focus on. This has been how human beings have operated since we started walking upright; the difference is that the internet exposes many more people to incidents that will prompt discussion.
If we say this is wrong, then what could we do to stop it? Condemn anyone for saying anything bad about a certain incident?
In the real world, when I see something offensive or crazy, I don’t hesitate to tell friends about it. When it comes to offensive and crazy stuff we see online, is it realistic to expect people to behave differently?
I don’t have the slightest problem with confronting another person to hir face over offensive behavior. Publicizing that behavior with the intention of enlisting total strangers is something different and, yes, it very much is starting a process. Once you start involving 3rd parties whom you can’t control, you have fundamentally changed things from “you’ve offended me and I think you should be ashamed” to something else entirely.
There’s a huge difference between living a lie like Dolezal did and a single joke. IIRC the Twitter AIDS lady was not racist and basically a good person that was dumb enough to make an insensitive joke on Twitter. And, more importantly, unlucky enough that it happened to go viral.
Okay, perhaps you’re right that it changes the dynamic when a story is related to others. But I don’t think you can say it’s wrong to do that as a blanket statement.
Take the family who just went viral for “pranking” their kids in an abusive manner. It is completely absurd and unrealistic to expect people to view that video and then not tell their buddies about it, along with their personal opinions. monstro posted a thread about it, in fact.
Was she wrong to do that because she contributed to the scourge that is internet shaming? What should she have done instead?
What about just publicizing the behavior because you think it deserves to be publicized? That’s not necessarily intending to “enlist” anyone else, it’s just sharing something with the community that one thinks ought to be shared.
Why is calling someone out in public such a problem? Do you think no behavior that’s not illegal should ever be called out publicly? If there is some such behavior, then what kinds of behaviors qualify, and what is the cutoff? And if you do agree that some behavior deserves to be publicly called out, then the only disagreement appears to be what sorts of bad behavior deserve to be called out publicly – not that calling out bad behavior in public is necessarily wrong.
Nope. Some people don’t deserve to be listened to. A lady trying to buy apples or dinner or whatever, has no obligation to listen to some rando asshole telling her to go back where she came from.
Antivaxers, flat-earthers, climate change deniers, all deserve ridicule.
Well, looks like I’m in the minority but I agree with you. Maybe it won’t change opinions but maybe knowing that they are being recorded will at least keep idiots from verbally assaulting innocent passersby.
just like on this board, at my home, at my work, at most places of education, at most places of worship, etc, etc, etc, people dont deserve ridicule or shaming, its the ideas themselves that are worthy of reproach.
[ul]
[li]Shaming, as a reaction to unwelcome behavior can work to reduce the behavior. I think this is good and that shaming has it’s place.[/li][li]Shaming can also create a defensive reaction in the target that results in more solidified unattractive attitudes. I think this is unfortunate, but for me does not override shaming as a tactic.[/li][li]Shaming using social media can result in mob mentality. This to me is the key issue being discussed. It is not the shaming per se, it is the social media aspect resulting in mob mentality. On this I would apply the additional test - is the subject of shaming a public figure or a private individual? If the subject is a public figure then I am OK with shaming through social media, they have chosen to be in the public eye. If the subject is a private individual I am against shaming through social media, they have not chosen to be in the public eye. For anyone filming a private individual for the purpose of public shaming, I would say have the guts to confront them face-to-face rather than hide behind a camera phone.[/li][/ul]
This is another thing. We all agree death threats go too far, but they happen and often. Only on TV do cops really do more than roll their eyes and ask, “well what did you do to deserve it?” or say “then stop going online”.
There are Zero checks and balances on this type of activity; it’s all lynch mob mentality. More than likely even trying the direct approach just encourages the troop to fling more poo and howl louder.
That’s one of the negatives of the internet – it makes being an asshole much, much easier. Thirty years ago an asshole would have to get off his ass, cut out letters from magazines, get dressed in a hood and sunglasses, and drive to some far-off mailbox to drop off his death threat – now, it takes no effort whatsoever.
But their existence shouldn’t affect our willingness to challenge and criticize bad behavior.
If you publicize bad behavior through social media, what you “intend” means fuck-all. You cannot control how the mob will react. If you want to confront someone, step up, look hir in the eye, and plainly tell hir where the bear shit in the buckwheat.
So you’re saying that no bad behavior should ever be publicized (whether through social media or in any other way)? If you’re not saying that, then when is it okay to publicize bad behavior?
Oh…How about when it is actually bad enough to warrant destroying someone’s livlihood, upending their whole life (and their family’s too), and making them a pariah? Something involving violence perhaps?
Not a bit. If you aren’t mad enough to say something directly to the person who has angered you, how do you justify the risks that turning them over to “internet justice” carries? Seems kind of a chickenshit maneuver to me.
The two things aren’t mutually exclusive. I’ve seen videos before where people call out jerks and post videos on the internet for public consumption. What then? People can’t talk about their own life experiences now?
Many a person has been killed because someone confronted a jerk face-to-face. If you really believe claiming the moral high ground is only possible if you are willing to put your metaphorical hand down a metaphorical pit bull’s throat, then we are inhabiting two different planets.