JPNor
Shared on Tue, 11/05/2013 - 13:34
The women in the three photos above all have something in common:
1. They photographed something that they thought was funny, but was perceived as insensitive.
2. They published said photo to social media.
3. Their lives were ruined.
You've probably seen all three of these photos at least once. In the first photo, the two men went to a Halloween party dressed as George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin (in blackface). The second picture needs no explanation. And the third picture, perhaps the most extreme example of the above, is Alicia Ann Lynch, who dressed as a Boston Marathon bomb victim for Halloween.
In all three cases, the women lost their jobs shortly after their photos surfaced. In Alicia's case, however, internet justice was especially swift and incredibly harsh. She received multiple threats involving murder and rape. Her parents, and even some other random guy with the same name as her dad, received hate email and threats. And the collective Internetizens found a Tumblr account with many, many photos of her. Nude. By the time she deactived all her social media accounts, the damage had been done.
TL:DR? Alicia's life was completely ruined, at least for the near future, as a result of her stupidity.
It's arguable what was dumber: the original action, the fact that the action was documented, or that said documentation was published for the world to see. Regardless, I ask the question: Did their stupidity merit such a harsh punishment?
If I asked Trayvon Martin's mother, or a marathon amputee, I'm sure I know what their answer would be. But to the neutral rest of us, the observers, did they deserve to be fired for being stupid for a few minutes? (Really, really, stupidly insensitive?)
- JPNor's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
Comments
Submitted by DEEP_NNN on Tue, 11/05/2013 - 17:36
Should not have been fired unless the action had some kind of negative connection related to their jobs.
Posting pictures of yourself, writing about personal stuff, commenting on anything job related on the Internet is like playing Russian roulette. It's so unsafe. I've seen stuff on this site that could easily ruin some peoples lives. Hopefully for them, none of it leaked off-site. RogueRedneck can attest to what can happen if you publicly post content an employer might object to. All of these bad possibilities are why I have an aversion to social sites like Facebook.
The worst of it all, Social Sites get pushed by more than just the Social Site itself. I.E. 343i wants you to have a connected Facebook account in order win prizes chatting during a Twitch stream. It's a very common practice and I hate it.
Submitted by Oldschool 2o4f on Wed, 11/06/2013 - 06:15
If there is no connection to the employers business/reputation I'd say no. Your private life is just that. However, I can see where some might look at these and decide that's not someone they want to work with.
Side note, I worked many years ago with a guy who ended up on the 11:00 o' clock news, pinched for poaching wild pigs out of sweason and caught on camera when it happened. Unfortunately he was wearing the companies work shirt complete with all the obligatory company patches clearly visible. He was let go about 9 hours later.
Submitted by NorthernPlato on Wed, 11/06/2013 - 16:44
My issue with all three is that it's just a moment of stupidity and not understanding how their actions are being perceived. Being fired is an over-reaction to a normal part of being "young". I mean, in the first photo, the girl is just posing with the people that are being insensitive!
Considering some of the actions our publicily elected officials get into with no consequences whatsoever (looking at you, Rob Ford!), and it think these consequences of social media should be explicitly prevented in labour laws. Unless you're representing your company, while on their dime, your actions shouldn't be grounds for firing when the actions aren't illegal.
Sure, it may affect their future promotability and upward movement, but firing should be illegal.