It appears that a big part of this discussion is about how we as a group are not sure if it really is a situation in which she "[did] something really f cking stupid", though.
Clearly, you do interpret her statement to be an offensive, racist remark, but by her own admission, she instead was commenting on how "[l]iving in America puts us in a bit of a bubble when it comes to what is going on in the third world. I was making fun of that bubble."
Whether or not her explanation for the off-color is truly genuine is up for debate, but scuttling somebody's life and career for something that only might have been a racist remark doesn't seem all that fair to me and (it would appear) a significant fraction of commenters here.
Her explanation does sound like it was crafted by a political PR group - which makes sense considering her profession - but I'm still happy to take her word for it.
However, it's pretty easy to see how it could be considered a racist and bigoted tweet and I'd expect her to have realised this before sending it.
EDIT: I totally agree that scuttling someones life on career off the back of one tweet is unfair - I 100% agree with that. As I said in the original comment, the bullying she experienced was totally unfair.
I don't believe, however, that her career is ruined by it - evidenced by the fact that she's now gainfully employed. I think it's definitely a red flag on her resume but by doing volunteer service after the fact I'd be surprised if any company wouldn't see this as "I did something dumb, I learnt and grew from it".
Professionals in PR should naturally be extra-vigilant about issues like these.
if the joke had come out of Louis CK's mouth, its intention would have been obvious.
given that, as she said in the article, "only an insane person would think that white people can't get AIDS", and the phrasing is obviously comic (dour opening, sudden & glib reversal, edgy punchline), I literally cannot read the tweet as bigoted or racist. Is the joke off-color? yes. Is it obviously self-deprecating, and aware of the fucked-up-ed-ness of white & first-world privilege? yes.
if the joke had come out of Louis CK's mouth, its intention would have been obvious.
^Agreed but Louis CK is a world famous comedian. When he speaks I know to take most of what he says in jest. Theres a context I can apply when he speaks.
A counterpoint to this would be that she had a small following on Twitter, most of whom she may know in real life, who likely know that she was joking. They can apply a similar context because of their relationship with her.
However, I would expect her to know that people will be able to read a tweet without that context - thus taking it out of context - and reacting accordingly.
I literally cannot read the tweet as bigoted or racist
^And that's okay. I see it differently. We all take different understandings of things. The tweeter should have considered this when posting the tweet.
> And that's okay. I see it differently. We all take different understandings of things. The tweeter should have considered this when posting the tweet.
I find it hard to accept this. I've offended people, unintentionally. Heck, there are still a few times that to this day I don't understand why the person was offended (I mostly do understand when they explain themselves).
We are human; I don't think it is reasonable to parse everything 140 characters that ever leaves our mouths or fingers and correctly predict how any/every person in the world might possible interpret it.
I mean, do you know anyone, ever, that has never offended somebody? It seems like an impossible standard. People shouldn't brake to late and rear end somebody at a stop light. People shouldn't ski too fast on a ski slope and fall. They shouldn't trip and fall. They shouldn't talk over somebody during a conversation. But we do them, now and again.
I loathe posting in conversations like this because it is almost inevitable that someone somewhere will misconstrue what I am saying. "Look, Roger is sticking up for racist posting!" Uh, no, anything but, but someone somewhere is going to say that. I'll probably get lucky and that won't develop into a Twitterstorm, but who knows? A good part of me says just delete this and don't hit reply.
But I don't want to live in that kind of world of perfect expectations. I'm going to try hard to express myself well, but you (you=public, not you the poster I'm replying to) have to understand that modelling the minds of others is a difficult and mistake ridden field.
I think there's something to be said for the idea that when people don't have context, they should slow their roll on the pitchforks, not make the worst assumption.
That's why I'm happy to see post-mob coverage of stories like this one, and some of the Reddit mob-justice-gone-wrong situations.
1) when I read the offending tweet at the beginning of the article my first thought was "she's making fun of clueless white/rich people traveling abroad." (If you've traveled you may have bumped into this not-uncommon type.) so I think it's reasonable to believe that explanation.
2) I got the impression that this was a personal account, meaning I'd judge it based on what stupid shit I hear people say in bars or other social/personal situations. I know plenty of people who have said way worse things, and continue to.
When I was younger and much more stupid, I told a joke once that in hindsight was homophobic. I in no way every considered myself homophobic whatsoever and it was just pure stupidity and thoughtlessness on my part. I was at a party and my joke went over like a lead balloon and I was immediately embarrassed. I believe I deserved to be embarrassed and that thought me a lesson. I feel like that, or perhaps a stern lecture is an appropriate reaction to somebody telling a thoughtless, tasteless joke.
At some point in life we all realize that we're not as funny as Steven Colbert, we're not as good looking as Brad Pitt, etc, etc. When you come to that realization, learn your limits and don't try to pull off a racist joke or wear a speedo to the beach. It's unfortunate that she had to learn this lesson in such a painful and public way. She was clearly in the wrong, but I don't agree that mob justice fits the crime.
I'd like to live to a world where your actions outside of the workplace in a physical or online sense don't affect how you're perceived but it's just not true.
I'm dating myself, but I grew up thinking pretty much whatever you did outside of work--was no one's business.
The first time I knew society changed was
when Charlie Sheen was fired for his lifestyle. Actually, the first time was the Clinton/Monica fiasco.
The only benefit I see from this
hyper morality is true hypocrites/authority figures are exposed. I partied in the eighties, like everyone else; The only time I was offered hard drugs was by three off duty cops at different engagements. I don't
think I(a stranger) would get that offer today?
I don't like it when one of you guys are fired over something said, but I'm all for exposing hypocritical Politicians and Law Enforcement types. Yes, I have been harassed by law enforcement, and if it happens again, and all this tech works, I will post the offence online. Legally--I know they can randomly stop people, I can randomly post.
I now have two cameras front and rear of my vechicle. I am
waiting for the next time I get pulled over for no reason. I also
try to keep that Iphone camera handy if I suspect abuse of authority.
I liked the old system because I was white and middle class, but I can't imagine what a lot of women and minorites had to put up with?
(Actually the I more think about it, maybe the reason we are so sensitive over online comments is because, as white males, we didn't experience the injustice the rest had to endure? I know my generation wasen't sexist, or racist, but my father's generation--is a whole other story.)
I think you understand what I mean but are perhaps being dense for the sake of argument. There are people who hold simile views to yourself and these people take it up on themselves to bring people's employers into arguments that they have no part of or perhaps would be otherwise unaware of. That's not to say the employer cannot have a response to comments and posts of this nature but they are not allowed to deal with it in a professional manner because the mob is baying at their door.
Nope, not being intentionally dense - I'm already unintentionally dense without adding to it! - but your comment felt like you were saying that I did those things, when in fact I never have.
Clearly the person who fired her only did so because of public outcry, i.e. the bullying. That was in their best interest. It wasn't fair. It wasn't a consequence equal to her action. It may have been equal to the reaction to her tweet, but that reaction was unjust.
The consequences of the bullying, given her being fired, is much worse than if she was not fired. Her ability to compete in the workplace has been severely diminished because of this. Her PTSD that she will probably suffer for a long time has been greatly exacerbated by her firing.
Given the worst intention of her tweet (ignorance), getting fired was still not the right reaction to her "crime."
Do people need to be held accountable to their actions? I agree that they should. Outside of criminal law (since this wasn't criminal), the mob is not the right group to decide what the correct consequence of her actions should be. History shows that this leads to barbarism, which this was a case of.
She didn't get what was coming to her, she got much worse.
if you think the outcome from a professional standpoint was fair, you have a very bleak and dystopian view of fairness. she was posting something to her own private twitter account in her own time; it had nothing to do with the job.
The gray text makes it look like a lot of people disagree. So suppose for the sake of argument that lots of people on the internet considered this post "really f*cking stupid" and tried to get you fired for it - would that not be a problem?
I mean presumably you don't think it was a repugnant thing to have posted, but then neither did Justine Sacco.
A fair point but comparing the ideal that people should be held responsible for their actions to a bad racist joke intended to highlight that "living in America puts us in a bit of a bubble when it comes to what is going on in the third world" is apples and oranges at best.
If you feel like Gawker would be interested in running a piece on my comment then feel free to go ahead and submit it.
These things are subjective. Presumably Sacco felt that comparing genuinely racist content to someone's sarcastic joke about themselves was apples and oranges as well. I rather do myself.
Put it this way - nobody is against the idea of "people being held responsible for their actions". But it's pretty hard to buy that that's what happened here. I remember when the Sacco thing was trending and I never saw anyone who seemed hurt or angry, or even offended. To the contrary, people were thrilled that some PR asshole was going to get fired but didn't know it yet.
No one deserves to be bullied or harassed but consequences need to exist to actions.