Support NeoGAF

[Slayven]

Pretty sad my dude didn't get an award for that monologue, or at least a career out of it. Part of me watched that thinking "I wonder if this is just script for him or is this real talk..."

Good acting 'cism is always great. The racist ass coach in 42 got a little to into the role.

 

[Suikoguy]

I see two core issues:


1.) The harassment itself

2.) The shitheel who elevated an obscure comment made to 20 followers to a widespread public level.

Obviously, we need improved laws to allow for charges to be brought to those who harass and issue death threats to people online. But at the same time, don't we need penalties for those who elevate someone who is not a public figure into the spotlight with the intention of harassing them?

The proximate cause of her harassment is Darby and by extension, Brietbart.

Foy <--> Darby <--> Harassers

 

[Zen_Arcade]

These people need to grow the fuck up. She made a tasteless joke, it's not that big of a deal. Certainly not enough of a deal to put her through all that bullshit.

 

[Seductivpancakes]

They're a hate group man, just destroying racial relations in America. God what the hell is it with you people!?!

What the fuck did I just watch?

 

[Slayven]

What the fuck did I just watch?

You just got Rhymed

 

[Angelus Errare]

What the fuck did I just watch?

The reason police shoot unarmed blacks and an award snub

Good acting 'cism is always great. The racist ass coach in 42 got a little to into the role.

Yea some of that was definitely pent up.

 

[Acerac]

People keep jumping on him, but really if that's how it was understood, what makes it any different than being a real insult?

I've heard plenty of times that, "It doesn't matter how you use the word, it matters how it makes someone feel". For instance the word "Thug". Even using it to describe a hardened, in jail 30 times, criminal. If they're black, describing them with that word is still racially charged. Even if that's not the intent.

Just as this comment may have been sarcasm, people may actually be mistaking this as a cold hearted, calloused, jab at the death of a cop. Which makes some people upset.

Now I'm not saying that every single person using this "opportunity" to attack this girl thinks this. I'm just presenting it from another viewpoint.

That's the whole point of the "joke". Poorly done as it may have been, the amount of support a cop/his family gets when he is murdered is ridiculous compared to the average citizen killed by the cops.

We understand that viewpoint. We're saying it's fucked up, and the response to this girl backs this up pretty strongly I feel.

 

[Ray Wonder]

That's the whole point of the "joke". Poorly done as it may have been, the amount of support a cop/his family gets when he is murdered is ridiculous compared to the average citizen killed by the cops.

We understand that viewpoint. We're saying it's fucked up, and the response to this girl backs this up pretty strongly I feel.

You should have said something like this, instead of, "What the fuck is this shit?" It's much more helpful, and shows what you mean.

People dog piling on a comment with useless jabs doesn't help.

 

[Acerac]

You should have said something like this, instead of, "What the fuck is this shit?" It's much more helpful, and shows what you mean.

People dog piling on a comment with useless jabs doesn't help.

It was the first notable comment. I thought the issue with it was clear enough, sorry I didn't note that others had similar complaints about it being a crappy post.

That said, now that you point it out, you're right, a lot of people seemed to take issue with the post, and in hindsight, they did so for similar reasons I did. Are you surprised? Did you expect that suddenly complaints about the shitty post would have different reasons?

I'm not trying to help, I'm asking a poster who made a shitty comment what they meant. Please don't worry about why I'm making my posts.

 

[IdreamofHIME]

Serious question, do you both know what satire is?

Unless you work for the Daily Show or the Onion, don't post satirical remarks about senstive issues on twitter and facebook.

 

[border]

At some point it became entirely appropriate for blogs and clickbait farms to blow up someone's ill-conceived Tweet or FB post for the sake of shaming them or getting them fired. Seems to happen pretty frequently now as well.

 

[Hellwarden]

Except that was a case of progressives finding Ms. Sacco's joke tasteless and overreacting. What we have in the OP is an organized effort to discredit a civil rights group through redirection and victim blaming. They are only comparable on the surface.

I don't know how much I agree with that last sentence.Their reasons for their actions may differ as much as night and day, but their actions are similar.

I know it may bother some people, but it feels like people sometimes selectively ignore examples of mob mentality when it suits their beliefs. And I think that's a big problem for two reasons.

One, if nothing is done about the act of sending threats online, it more or less gives the people who sends threats the okay. They see other people doing, not getting any trouble for their actions, and it spreads.That more or less means we condone the act of sending death threats as a society.

Two, nothing actually will get done regarding the passage of laws. Nothing. This is a problem that people in power do not care about, because it would require them to actually respond to an issue that isn't an easy "yes I agree" or "no I don't agree" for voters.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Unless you work for the Daily Show or the Onion, don't post satirical remarks about senstive issues on twitter and facebook.

That's bull.

 

[Jonm1010]

I don't know how much I agree with that last sentence.Their reasons for their actions may differ as much as night and day, but their actions are similar.

I know it may bother some people, but it feels like people sometimes selectively ignore examples of mob mentality when it suits their beliefs. And I think that's a big problem for two reasons.

One, if nothing is done about the act of sending threats online, it more or less gives the people who sends threats the okay. They see other people doing, not getting any trouble for their actions, and it spreads.That more or less means we condone the act of sending death threats as a society.

Two, nothing actually will get done regarding the passage of laws. Nothing. This is a problem that people in power do not care about, because it would require them to actually respond to an issue that isn't an easy "yes I agree" or "no I don't agree" for voters.

Yep there are two simultaneous issues at work here.

1.) The Right Wing machine that continues to try and denigrate, humiliate, obfuscate, deflect, attack and dismiss in any way possible those involved or those advocating acknowledgment of and the need to change the structural and cultural wrongs in this country that continue to systemically oppress minorities.

2.) The growing problem of mob justice through social media that often times leaves people as social pariahs through excessive harassment, illegal actions and often attempts to ruin their lives. Something that is not exclusive to one party, one ideology or one culture.

As someone that read the Justine Sacco thread in complete shock and disgust at the way people were straight up cheering on her life being ruined due to a poor joke about white privilege, it is very interesting to see how a person that is from the onset considered one of "us"(us being liberals) and how we are quick to change our tune. In the Sacco thread there was little to no effort to give the benefit of a doubt. The negative interpretation was the only right interpretation.

In this thread you almost see the reversal of arguments you hear when it is a perceived right winger saying insensitive things. Whereas the "don't say it if you can't deal with it" mentality has been flipped. I mean at the end of the day this lady did use a cops murder as a springboard to push her political agenda. If nothing else it is going to be a bit insensitive to a not insignificant number of people. Including those who are on her side. I'm mixed myself. It's a solid point but the timing leaves a lot to be desired.

However it doesn't deserve harassment of any kind.

Of course this isn't Breitbart's angle. They clearly are trying to make it into a narrative to support their own agenda and trying to sacrifice this woman in the process. And their motives are disgusting.

 

[diffusionx]

As someone that read the Justine Sacco thread in complete shock and disgust at the way people were straight up cheering on her life being ruined due to a poor joke about white privilege, it is very interesting to see how a person that is from the onset considered one of "us"(us being liberals) and how we are quick to change our tune. In the Sacco thread there was little to no effort to give the benefit of a doubt. The negative interpretation was the only right interpretation.

It's an evolving thing. The Sacco moment was so huge. Maybe it did make some point think about social media and the internet mob in a way they did not before.

I mean at the end of the day this lady did use a cops murder as a springboard to push her political agenda. If nothing else it is going to be a bit insensitive to a not insignificant number of people.

Everything is insensitive to somebody. That's not a high enough bar IMO.

But the point is that Breitbart guy didn't find it insensitive nor did Sam Biddle with Sacco. They faked outrage and ruined a person's life to get a few more clicks, and people happily jump on the bandwagon.

 

[Jonm1010]

It's an evolving thing. The Sacco moment was so huge. Maybe it did make some point think about social media and the internet mob in a way they did not before.



Everything is insensitive to somebody. That's not a high enough bar IMO.

But the point is that Breitbart guy didn't find it insensitive nor did Sam Biddle with Sacco. They faked outrage and ruined a person's life to get a few more clicks, and people happily jump on the bandwagon.

I don't think I disagree with anything you are saying, except maybe the bolded. Relatively speaking that is true. But I'm not saying it is right or wrong for her to use this as a spring board for a political agenda, just acknowledging that people, reasonable people, even those on her side, have a justification to call the remarks insensitive.

However nowhere did I condone the abuse or harassment. That is 100% uncalled for. Especially when we understand the full context of why this happened.

 

[RionaaM]

Unless you work for the Daily Show or the Onion, don't post satirical remarks about senstive issues on twitter and facebook.

Yep, otherwise you could get subhuman motherfuckers harassing the shit out of you and ruining your life, which apparently isn't the problem but a satirical remark made to highlight a racist and unfair situation is. Gotcha.