Is the Prevalence of Internet Shaming Causing it to Lose Potency?

The author of a recent Scientific American article speculates that Internet shaming (personal attacks that go viral) has reached a crescendo and because there is so much of it, the impacts are becoming less severe.

To illustrate, David Pogue cites the case of Adam Mark Smith, who videotaped a confrontation with a Chick-fil-A counterperson in 2014 over the company’s affiliation with hate groups. Smith posted the video to You Tube, it went viral, and not only was the employee fired, but he received death threats, his private information was disseminated world-wide, and his children were harassed.

Pogue says that public shaming isn’t new: think stonings and putting miscreants in stocks in the public square. But on the Internet, a small error can lead to permanent and tragic life changes. And those who try to help also become targets for abuse.

Things move fast on the Internet and our collective memory is short. The next error in judgment will have the trolls attacking a different target. As a result, Pogue says, shaming’s prevalence might be its undoing, relegating it to just a sport (or online reality show) that none of us should take so personally.

It’s human nature to want to join crowd activities and follow it when the focus changes, but unfortunately, I do not see the tragic results of public shaming waning. Instead, I see them increasing as more and more attention is given to each occurrence.

Public shaming is not collapsing under its own weight; it needs a widespread collective effort by those moderating the sites where it occurs, rapidly removing the trolling content as well as the trolls. Those posting threats and personal attacks will only stop doing so when they know their conduct will not be tolerated, and this will only happen when there is sufficient and proficient moderation that promotes and enforces basic civility and respect.

You might also like