MovieChat Forums > General Discussion > Public shaming (warning, controversial t...

Public shaming (warning, controversial topic, please be nice)

posted 7 years ago by Renovatio (2990)
49 replies | jump to latest

What do you guys think of contemporary public shaming?

Trying to get perceived evildoers to apologise publicly and exposing every alleged wrongdoing?

Whether media led or internet led... If find it disconcerting. I think the point of civilisation is that we moved beyond tarring and feathering in a public square... This seems like a regression to mob rule...

What defence is there for the accused? Especially in this age of easy access to people's private lives and anonymous rumour mongering...

I think I noticed this most clearly during the Tiger Woods scandal... Even my educated, white-collar colleagues were part of the rumour mill, taking about it during meetings, following every detail, etc... It felt odd and out of place for someone's private life to be such a matter of public engaggment and opinion... Especially as there was not even an allegation of crime involved...

Obviously, the current round of Hollywood scandals are quite different as there are potential criminal implications to the allegations and workplace sexual harrasment is inherently a public matter. I'm not equating these scandals with Woods' escapades... But I can't shake the feeling that there is something odd about the way we relish the public shaming as a way to seek justice, even before anything has been proven...

Am I the only one who feels this way? Is everyone else ok about this?

[–] TexasJack (12516) 7 years ago

Crime should be reported to the police, not to Twitter.

[–] Barclays (960) 7 years ago

There you go.👍

[–] McQualude (4231) 7 years ago

I'm always more skeptical when the court is public opinion.

[–] Cookie.L.A. (2117) 7 years ago

What's wrong with reporting crimes to both?

I think one factor is, many don't really trust the legal system any more. This probably REALLY turned a corner with the O.J. Simpson trial.

Public shaming has always been a way for society to discourage behavior it doesn't admire. At least we don't put people in pillories in the public square any more, and throw garbage at them, as our forefathers did.
.

[–] TexasJack (12516) 7 years ago

We basically are creating pillories through the social media machine. People are losing their jobs, their memberships in professional associations and tons of money all based on unproven accusations.

[–] [deleted] 7 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Cookie.L.A. (2117) 7 years ago

<< The very sad side effect to all of this is that so many people will be directly affected in terms of employment. >>

And that is Mr. Spacey's fault, for creating the situation everyone (including the victims) is reacting to..
.

[–] mplo (2372) 7 years ago

Some accusations, however, are not just simply figments of certain people's imaginations, but they're legitimate, and the perpetrators deserve to be exposed for their lousy public and personal behaviors.

[–] [deleted] 7 years ago

What's wrong with reporting crimes to both?

If you report a crime to the police, they tend to ask a lot of hard questions before making an arrest and ruining a person's life. A person can be charged with public mischief for making a false police report.

Reporters may not have tough standards when questioning an apparent victim. They apt to be more worried about being sued.

Social media has no standards when it comes to vetting stories.

[–] Cookie.L.A. (2117) 7 years ago

<< If you report a crime to the police, they tend to ask a lot of hard questions before making an arrest and ruining a person's life. >>

Mmmmmm...it's all interconnected. As soon as someone is questioned by the police it's reported on anyway, so it's not like the two are separate.

I think the thing re: news reports is to consider where it comes from. For instance, when the second 14-year-old came forward about Kevin Spacey, the online site (Vulture, which is an offshoot of the respected New York magazine) verified with his longtime friends that he had mentioned the events to them going back decades, and spoke with his doctor, who said he had been discussing it with him in sessions since 2015 or something.

A person is in control of what they share about their lives, and when. If they want to tell a news source something, even if it is years after the fact, and the paper or magazine finds it to be newsworthy, they will report the person's report.

I don't see how you can control what other people say about their own lives, and what has happened to them, good or bad. Or why you would want to.
.

[–] [deleted] 7 years ago

Mmmmmm...it's all interconnected. As soon as someone is questioned by the police it's reported on anyway, so it's not like the two are separate.

What if they run to TMZ, the National Enquirer or Entertainment Tonight, not exactly bastions of great journalism, but no police report is made? Or they go on social media? You made a good point about the fact that media outlets have different standards, but often many don't consider that when rushing to judgement.

People are also more inclined to suspend skepticism on certain subjects such as politics, religion and accusations of child molestation. For example, it's easier to believe a negative story about a politician you don't support or a particular group you dislike.

Many of the people coming forward are likely telling the truth, but there will be a few who will come forward who aren't.

[–] BillHicksFan (10717) 7 years ago

If people can't take WORDS online, how will they ever live in the real world?

[–] Renovatio (2990) 7 years ago

Valid point, people need to be thick skinned...

However, I was speaking more to the very real consequences of this kind of reputation smearing... people losing their jobs and careers, their businesses, being ostercised from their social circle, having honors revoked, etc...

All because of allegations, which is the strange part... In some instances, it's beyond the kind of thing you'd expect from being foind guilty of a crime ina court of law...

[–] Barclays (960) 7 years ago

Ironically the people engaging in the reputation smearing prove that they are just as much of an asshole as the person they are trying to shame.

[–] Cookie.L.A. (2117) 7 years ago

<< I was speaking more to the very real consequences of this kind of reputation smearing... people losing their jobs and careers, their businesses, being ostercised from their social circle, having honors revoked, etc... >>

I actually think there are more protections in place now to keep people from being quickly fired.

Throughout most of history, villagers would run you out of town with pitchforks if they didn't like you, or set your barn on fire. Through the 1960's, when a gay bar was raided, the names of the people there were printed in the newspaper, and then they would be fired.

I think the thing is, with information traded faster now, and the public having easier ways to voice an opinion, everyone is more easily held accountable now. That doesn't mean they will get run out of town like in the old days, but events will certainly be talked about more publicly.

I don't think it's either good or bad.
.

[–] Catbookss (13664) 7 years ago

"However, I was speaking more to the very real consequences of this kind of reputation smearing... people losing their jobs and careers, their businesses, being ostercised from their social circle, having honors revoked, etc...

All because of allegations, which is the strange part... In some instances, it's beyond the kind of thing you'd expect from being foind guilty of a crime ina court of law."

I understand what you're saying, and it's a valid point.

However, victims of sexual abuse/harassment/even rape, have also been smeared for speaking up -- not just to the press -- as well as having lost their jobs and careers, and being ostracized from their social circles. Meanwhile, those who actually are guilty of these actions are free to carry on as they had before, victimising even more people. Those are very real consequences as well.

[–] MissMargoChanning (6630) 7 years ago

"However, victims of sexual abuse/harassment/even rape, have also been smeared for speaking up -- not just to the press -- as well as having lost their jobs and careers, and being ostracized from their social circles. Meanwhile, those who actually are guilty of these actions are free to carry on as they had before, victimizing even more people. Those are very real consequences as well. "

Pretty much what I was thinking. Careers and jobs have been lost to those who have tried to report this behavior, or WORSE, just said NO to these people who have the power to make or break them.....
No pun intended.

[–] Catbookss (13664) 7 years ago

"Careers and jobs have been lost to those who have tried to report this behavior, or WORSE, just said NO to these people who have the power to make or break them..... "

Exactly so, and yet these realities aren't being taken into consideration as equally very real consequences, even though it's been going on for a very long time.

[–] MissMargoChanning (6630) 7 years ago

And people ask, "Why wasn't this behavior reported right away???"

[–] Catbookss (13664) 7 years ago

I know! It's beyond me why everyone doesn't understand why it wasn't, in *most* cases, not just with Weinstein (or any of the others currently coming to light -- allegedly). This is nothing new.

[–] mplo (2372) 7 years ago

Unfortunately, an awful lot of people who are the victims of sexual abuse/harassment, and/or rape are afraid to report it, for fear of losing their jobs, being ostracized by family and friends, and due to the very stigma of being a victim to such behaviors, especially rape. Another reason why so many people are afraid to report sexual harassment, rape, or any other abuse is because, in the vast majority of cases, especially rape, the rapist and the victim know each other, either as longtime friends, or acquaintances. Eight or nine times out of ten, that's the case.

[–] MissMargoChanning (6630) 7 years ago

Yup! That's pretty much what I implied.

[–] mplo (2372) 7 years ago

Here's another thing that I read/heard: Despite the fact that many people claim that the original 1969 Woodstock Festival had no violent incidents, there were many sexual assaults/rapes, which went unreported. That's how sexual assault/rape was handled back in the late 1960's.

[–] MissMargoChanning (6630) 7 years ago

well, the times were much different then, than they are now.

[–] mplo (2372) 7 years ago

That's very true, MissMargoChanning. Sooner or later, things had to change...some for the better, some for worse.

The fact that sexual assault/rape went unreported back in the late 1960's was rather disgraceful, and didn't help much, either.

[–] croft_alice (12180) 7 years ago

I'm used to it,nothing surprises me anymore.

[–] BiffGG (662) 7 years ago

Whether warranted or not in a given situation public shaming is not going away as it makes people feel better about their own crappy lives. It is more noticeable now with the internet versus when people spoke in whispers years ago about the local person while in the grocery store, pharmacy, or church. But people whether they be Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, Weinstein, Spacey, etc. should be able to go under due process by the law or else we will revert to a time like the Salem witch trials where people will be persecuted on a whim. Hopefully, there is a special place in hell for those who help cover the tracks of the offenders.

[–] GlenEllyn (21659) 7 years ago

I feel that public shaming is over the top nowadays, thanks to the internet and social media. "Everyone" knows about it. Slip up just once on something relatively minor and folks are very quick to condemn without knowing all the facts or context. Right away it's, "he should be fired." Even when it's a one-time thing. (I'm not talking about criminal behavior here.) Before the internet, the circle of people who knew about the incident was limited, and likely knew the person involved, knew their character, and were perhaps more forgiving. Or at least knew if they deserved to be forgiven. Today we're judging people we've never met and know nothing about, yet we're ready to totally screw up their lives by (very) publicly shaming them.

You mentioned Tiger Woods. I'm not condoning what he did by any means, but why were the women not equally to blame? They knew he was married. And as you said, there were no criminal implications so I don't understand the preoccupation of so many people. I suppose it makes them feel good to tear someone else's life apart??

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 7 years ago

If these snowflake scumbags like Spacey can't take the heat they need to get out of the kitchen. BTW, I hope he's wearing an orange jumpsuit soon.

😎

[–] Renovatio (2990) 7 years ago

Have any of you guys read "So You've Been Publicly Shamed" by Jon Ronson... It's facinating, especially in light of the current media frenzy as well as, separately, the resistence of Trump to public shaming...

Regardless of where you stand on the issue, or the people involved, it's a good read... Worth checking out

[–] Catbookss (13664) 7 years ago

In the case with Tiger Woods, where no crime, nor even a vague allegation of a crime, occurred, I agree with you. Leave that crap to the tabloids, although I'd prefer it not even happen there. I didn't follow it and wasn't interested, personally.

As you say, in the instance of Weinstein, Cosby, Singer, Spacey and others, it is inherently a public matter due to alleged crimes having occurred.

[–] mplo (2372) 7 years ago

Very true, Catbookss! Well said. Thanks.