Social media and public shaming

[David]

I thought this was a really good article.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/21/internet-shaming-lindsey-stone-jon-ronson

[Dave The Man]

Well it is Wrong but it’s the Life we live now.

Though I am not on any of the Social Media Sites just on Forums

[Wokko]

One of the worst inventions ever. Makes people isolated, addicted to the attention and always on their Facebook or whatever. Everyone had more of a 'social life' and were more connected to each other before this shit.

All that and now you can have your life ruined, forever, because of a stupid social media post. It should all be burned to the ground.

I keep a very minimal online presence now, but it took a long time to break the habit. Kids with their peer group pressures, curiosity and lack of awareness of future and consequences have no chance.

[David]

[Tannin]

Bah. Load of complete horseshit. Try living in a small town. Try living in a closed community, such as a ship or an army platoon. Try going to school. Try having a job. On-line, you can just change your handle and life goes on. In real life shaming, you can't escape.

So people can be arseholes. Wow! What are you going to discover next, fire? The wheel?

[Mugwump]

Hard cases make bad laws. Every technology has its downside, and this is one. Personally I'm a facebook voyeur, using it to keep up with what some friends are doing and offering the odd like or word of encouragement while hardly ever posting anything. But it's a good little tool for doing that.

This case is so clearly a massive overreaction that it's not that interesting unless you are in a position to do something about it.. Noone was physically injured, and it was just a dumb thing to do. Not everyone who does something dumb is wicked. I've seen enough of life to know that already.

As for unfair dismissal laws, David, all I can say is that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Toughen these further and injustices happen easily on the other side via the small minority of obtuse and boneheaded workers and lawyers who exploit them. And you create the conditions for even more casualisation of the workforce.

[The Prototype]

I have my settings in private like David as well now, unless I am posting something I want everyone to see I have my list divided so there are some that don't see some posts. I have worked out that if I want my own opinion without it being trolled, or abused for it that I keep it this way.

Also prevents friends of friends commenting on something as well when I am not interested in them doing so. Some people on Facebook are better when they're not able to enter into some discussions.

A lot of the time some don't like what is posted on Facebook so I've made sure that those that have an issue do not see what is posted, like some friends are interested in sports they don't see any sports related posts, etc.

It's sad that some things posted on social media that are intended as a joke can end up pretty bad, I guess in the future they will just have to make sure they have only those who know they're not serious able to see these sorts of posts.

[David]

[Mugwump]

Physically going into someone's sacred or revered place and conveying insulting gestures in defiance of its observances seems like a dumb thing to do, to me. And Arlington is that place in the US. It's even dumber to then post it in the public domain. Finally, anyone who has been the cemeteries of
Arlington, or Normandy, or Ypres , or wherever, who does not feel some human sense of humility, awe , moral anger or sorrow is lacking in imagination and feeling, in my view. But it says that this girl has some kind of medical condition, so I guess that explains it.

On the employment law issue, I'd have thought that this was arguably a prohibited ground of discrimination anyway. My point is that by trying to make the law respond to extreme cases, you will make it a serpent's coil of nonsense, to the advantage only of the vexatious, opportunistic, and litigious. I deal with this stuff more often than I'd like. The decent workers with a terrible boss usually walk away because they have the mindset to succeed somewhere else. The unreasonably entitled exploit it. Big businesses don't care too much, because they can afford the costs and their competitors have the same, so it's all passed through to the public. It's one of the many little barriers to entry that make them happy. Small firms can be disabled by a few stinking employees. Sentiment does not always make for good practical ethics.

[Tannin]

She was actually rather lucky. If she'd pulled that same stunt in the wrong pub instead of on Facebook, she'd have wound up lying in a gutter with her head split open. That would have happened in 2014, or 1914, and probably 1814. If she'd pulled that stunt in 1614 or 1514 she'd have been burned alive at the stake, with all the neighbours looking on and gloating.

People are nasty creatures. People in groups are very nasty creatures. Always have been. Pretending that social media isn't people and rediscovering the wheel on the pages of Facebook doesn't make you a deep social thinker, it just shows how little you know about the world around you.

I'd expect a 13-year-old to make that sort of deep "discovery", not some supposedly clever, educated person writing for the Guardian. I made some equally world-shaking "discoveries" when I was 13, and just like that writer, I thought I'd unlocked some new secret that no-one else had ever thought about before. I bet you did too. That's what 13-year-olds do. The real question is why is the Guardian giving such piffle air space?

(Ans: coz it's click bait. The Guardian prints a lot of great stuff, often stuff you just can't get on lesser papers, but my word it prints some juvenile garbage on a slow day.)

[David]

The phenomena that Henley is describing (particularly in the first story) are very new. People assuming your identity, posting things as if they were you? That's not just weird, it's something that we've never even dreamed of dealing with before. How does that make him feel? How would that make you feel, and what could you do about it? These are legitimate, interesting questions.

Humans may not have changed, but social media has reordered the way we interact and the way we express ourselves. That may not sound like an interesting revelation on its own (and there are many articles that talk about things like this in a stupid or superficial way), but it's undeniably true. And this writer, for once, has something interesting to say about that, I feel.

[Tannin]

What has that got to do with doing dumb things in a graveyard and being abused for it? Nothing that I can see. Even if it did, people have been assuming other people's identities for ever. I daresay I could find examples from ancient Rome if I could be bothered looking for them. There are certainly plenty of examples from the Middle Ages. Do let me know when you discover that hot, red stuff you get from matches.

[ronrat]

She threw it out there. She insulted a Nations war dead and it was her own. It was her own doing. Could you imagine the uproar if one of our players, or Essendons, did something similar. Bye bye ANZAC game. If you are utterly brainless and put stuff on this or twitter etc you have one person only to blame. And it is not me. Her employee has every right to ascertain that this person does not represent the companies values.

If you want to be on these puerile social media sites that make the owners millions whilst you get nothing then more fool you. Your problem.

[think positive]

[Dave The Man]

I have Tried Twitter and Facebook but Cancelled Accounts because of Dickhead's on there.

I only have Youtube but there still Idiots on there.

Something you have to take into account when you sign up for these things