8 ms·

Iowa reporter who exposed racist tweets fired for own tweets

31 points by apsec112 6y ago

ChrisGranger 6y ago
(2019)
jariel 6y ago
We really need a law or rule that protects people from this stuff. If you can't 'go to adult jail' when you're 16, you shouldn't go to 'twitter jail' either. Moreover - more subtly and more importantly - most teens in 2020 have absolutely no context for racism, 'spouse abuse' and these things (many do, but most don't). Teens say crazy, crazy things. They'll compare a lot of things to Gorillas, including, sadly 'Black people' - of course it's not right, but there is a context of 'extreme locker room talk' and they'll just say anything. I don't think they mean any of it, it's like someone making a joke about 'The English' - it's not meant to be hateful or offensive, it's just excessive joking around. It's only when you're an adult, when you see that 'some things are real' does it take another context then all of a sudden words really become a problem. For example - if this joke were not 'written down on record' - nobody, I mean nobody would care a single bit that he 'said something when he was 16' even if we knew for sure he said it. That it is 'on the record' is effectively what makes it 'situationally toxic' wherein brands have no choice but to back off, and HR teams hands are 'forced' into action. Twitter should also have a policy on this.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > If you can't 'go to adult jail' when you're 16 You absolutely can go to adult jail at 16.
  - jariel 6y ago
    Yes, if you're a stone cold killer, but otherwise, we have a separate set of rules for minors.
    - dragonwriter 6y ago
      You don't have to be a “stone cold killer”, in fact, the vast majority of juveniles transferred to criminal instead of juvenile court are for nonviolent offenses. It would be more accurate (though still very incompletely so) to say “if you're black”.
      - jariel 6y ago
        Edit: I edited this comment to reflect the 'vast majority of cases transferred to adult court are for non-violent offences' - not - 'the vast majority of juvenile cases are waived to adult court' which was my original interpretation. Only about 1/2 of Juvenile cases are even processed, and a tiny amount, about 0.6% go to adult court. [1] And if by 'vast majority of cases are for non-violent offences' you mean to say about 1/2 - then that's about right. (About 1/2 of the cases that are waived to adult court involve 'crimes against the person', the other 1/2 are property theft, drugs, public disorder). That some are for violent offences, some are for other types of crimes is relevant, but less so in the context that very few cases go to adult court. As for race: Black people are more likely to be waived to 'adult court' but it's mostly a function of the fact they are significantly more likely to be involved in physical crimes against the person, i.e. assault. Though they are overrepresented in all crimes. - for drugs and theft, they are less overrepresented, and White kids, for example are relatively more likely to go to 'adult court' for such crimes (i.e. drugs and theft) given the case rate. Because of the seriousness of violent crimes, which are inherently more likely to be referred to adult court, and the significant overrepresentation of Black kids in that category - more of them in are referred to adult court in relative terms. But the differential between races is small, and, the overall share of cases waived to adult court is quite small. Again: we have completely different systems for adults and juveniles. [1] https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/njcda/pdf/jcs2016.pdf https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/njcda/pdf/jcs2016.pdf
Covzire 6y ago
"It said that while in high school eight years earlier, Mr King had tweeted two racist jokes about black people." This insanity needs to end.
- aklemm 6y ago
  Yes, hopefully it will become so abhorrent that it will be obvious even to teenagers that race “jokes” aren’t acceptable.
  - apsec112 6y ago
    "But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. Early in the morning He returned to the temple. All the people came to Him, and He sat down and taught them. The scribes and Pharisees brought a woman caught in adultery. When they had put her in the middle, they said to Him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of adultery. Now Moses in the law commanded us to stone such, but what do You say?” They said this, testing Him, that they might have something of which to accuse Him. But Jesus stooped down and wrote on the ground with His finger, as though He did not hear them. So when they continued asking Him, He stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” Again He stooped down and wrote on the ground. Being convicted by their conscience, those who heard it went out one by one, beginning with the eldest even to the last. Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. When Jesus had stood up and saw no one but the woman, He said to her, “Woman, where are your accusers? Did no one condemn you?” She said, “No one, Lord.” Jesus said to her, “Neither do I condemn you. Go and sin no more.”"
    - aklemm 6y ago
      Contextually, that’s nonsense.
      - t0mbstone 6y ago
        I'm not religious but it makes sense to me: "Don't condemn other people for making the mistake of saying racist things in their past if you have said racist things in YOUR past yourself" It's very logical.
dwd 6y ago
You need to read the journalist's own account as to how this all blew up. He provides a lot more context and nuance as to who tweeted what and when, but basically screwed up and should have checked his own online history as well. https://www.cjr.org/first_person/aaron-calvin-viral-story-tweets.php https://www.cjr.org/first_person/aaron-calvin-viral-story-tw...
- aklemm 6y ago
  That’s very compelling and sad.
- cco 6y ago
  This is what that reporter wrote about the tweets. It is 10% of the article that was published by word count and appeared in the middle of the article, not the end as the reporter claims. I'll leave it to people to draw their own conclusions: A routine background check of King's social media revealed two racist jokes, one comparing black mothers to gorillas and another making light of black people killed in the holocaust. The joke tweets date back to 2012, when King was a 16-year-old high school student. Register editor:Here’s how we reported on Carson King’s tweets When asked about the tweets, King was remorseful and thanked the Register for pointing them out, saying they made him "sick." He has since deleted them. "That’s not something that I’m proud of at all," he told the Register during the day Tuesday. Tuesday evening, King spoke to local television stations about the now-deleted tweets. "I am embarrassed and stunned to reflect on what I thought was funny when I was 16-year-old," he said in a statement posted by WHO-TV. "I want to sincerely apologize." He also read the statement in a video posted by KCCI-TV. Anheuser-Busch InBev, Busch Light's parent company, announced in a statement Tuesday night that they will "have no further association with [King]," though they will honor their agreement to match the funds for the children's hospital.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- ponker 6y ago
  He should have "checked his online history" and realized that maybe he didn't need to write about another person's online history. I don't see him looking any better here -- he casually lobbed a rock at another man and then got all whiny about "editorial integrity" when the rock got thrown at him.
codeddesign 6y ago
This is exactly why people call a lot of “news” fake news. That news outlet was not doing journalism but rather a smear piece for the purpose of views. The guy was 16. Everyone would be fired if they dug up everyone that was done in their teens years and accountable for it today. This is news outlet abusively used their power without caring for the consequences of what it would to this man. I’m getting really tired of this shaming. I oppose gay marriage, I oppose abortion, and while they’re are racists, I don’t believe their is institutional fascism taking place based upon the color of skin. ...but that is what makes our country great. We can have different view points. We can have discussions. When we take away those we begin to turn into a society similar to China where it’s not acceptable to have differing views and certainly not discussion.
- throw5876543 6y ago
  This should also make us wonder if the news about China, Russia, India, and Saudi Arabia are smear pieces too.
  - xlm1717 6y ago
    Totally not a suspicious thing for a throwaway account to say.
    - dang 6y ago
      This breaks the site guidelines. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules. Note this one: "Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=true&page=0&query=by:dang%20astroturf https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
2038AD 6y ago
It's pretty funny that a lot of these cases of 'cancel culture' aren't the mob ("Twitter, do your thing") but journalists going after regular people. As it turns out it's far easier to expose someone without power. We're a pretty perverse society that random acts of harassment is being viewed with the television lens of "cancellation". That is a risk with the social medium. Another irony of the situation is that, with the primary center being Twitter, the transgressions have to be minor. Accounts that break the rules (i.e. are racist) are routinely and correctly banned and as such have all their transgressions erased.
- jariel 6y ago
  'Cancel Culture' is generally not 'a mob' - it's usually journos or individuals leveraging or hyping up a little bit of a mob. A Board is not going to dump a CEO because of just some angry people on Twitter, it's the pressure exerted by amplified voices, particularly those in the press. Once a fire starts, a lot of other writer tend to to pile on. If everything were just on Twitter, nobody would care. It's the 'newsification' of Twitter that creates the problem. The Board cannot ignore CNN, WaPo and all the ruffling they casuse.
- senectus1 6y ago
  I dont think it should be called "Cancel Culture", its more of "Burn Culture"... One little mistake and everyone wants to burn you at the stake like a witch in the old days. No matter that he made some stupid ill-informed posts back when he was 16 and not a fully developed adult with little real world experience. BURN HIM!! Come on Internet... we need to be able to have civil discussions and a chance for people to redeem themselves.
ponker 6y ago
The leaders of "cancel culture" are usually destined to become a Danton, Hebert, or Robespierre.
- TMWNN 6y ago
  The difference is of degree, not kind. To put another way, if the leaders of a modern mob had the power to execute their targets the way Danton or Robespierre did, who is confident that they would not let the guillotine blade fall?
  - ponker 6y ago
    I agree, but I was more talking about how those who would become self-styled enforcers of ideological purity tests often find themselves sufficiently impure and lose their heads the same way they took them.
Noos 6y ago
No sympathy. Cancel culture was all fine and good when it was used on people the progressive left didn't like, but when now it's applied to themselves? OMG its gone too far! I hope they enjoy the world they made.

31 points by apsec112 6y ago

(2019)

We really need a law or rule that protects people from this stuff. If you can't 'go to adult jail' when you're 16, you shouldn't go to 'twitter jail' either. Moreover - more subtly and more importantly - most teens in 2020 have absolutely no context for racism, 'spouse abuse' and these things (many do, but most don't). Teens say crazy, crazy things. They'll compare a lot of things to Gorillas, including, sadly 'Black people' - of course it's not right, but there is a context of 'extreme locker room talk' and they'll just say anything. I don't think they mean any of it, it's like someone making a joke about 'The English' - it's not meant to be hateful or offensive, it's just excessive joking around. It's only when you're an adult, when you see that 'some things are real' does it take another context then all of a sudden words really become a problem. For example - if this joke were not 'written down on record' - nobody, I mean nobody would care a single bit that he 'said something when he was 16' even if we knew for sure he said it. That it is 'on the record' is effectively what makes it 'situationally toxic' wherein brands have no choice but to back off, and HR teams hands are 'forced' into action. Twitter should also have a policy on this.

dragonwriter 6y ago
> If you can't 'go to adult jail' when you're 16 You absolutely can go to adult jail at 16.
- jariel 6y ago
  Yes, if you're a stone cold killer, but otherwise, we have a separate set of rules for minors.
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    You don't have to be a “stone cold killer”, in fact, the vast majority of juveniles transferred to criminal instead of juvenile court are for nonviolent offenses. It would be more accurate (though still very incompletely so) to say “if you're black”.
    - jariel 6y ago
      Edit: I edited this comment to reflect the 'vast majority of cases transferred to adult court are for non-violent offences' - not - 'the vast majority of juvenile cases are waived to adult court' which was my original interpretation. Only about 1/2 of Juvenile cases are even processed, and a tiny amount, about 0.6% go to adult court. [1] And if by 'vast majority of cases are for non-violent offences' you mean to say about 1/2 - then that's about right. (About 1/2 of the cases that are waived to adult court involve 'crimes against the person', the other 1/2 are property theft, drugs, public disorder). That some are for violent offences, some are for other types of crimes is relevant, but less so in the context that very few cases go to adult court. As for race: Black people are more likely to be waived to 'adult court' but it's mostly a function of the fact they are significantly more likely to be involved in physical crimes against the person, i.e. assault. Though they are overrepresented in all crimes. - for drugs and theft, they are less overrepresented, and White kids, for example are relatively more likely to go to 'adult court' for such crimes (i.e. drugs and theft) given the case rate. Because of the seriousness of violent crimes, which are inherently more likely to be referred to adult court, and the significant overrepresentation of Black kids in that category - more of them in are referred to adult court in relative terms. But the differential between races is small, and, the overall share of cases waived to adult court is quite small. Again: we have completely different systems for adults and juveniles. [1] https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/njcda/pdf/jcs2016.pdf https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/njcda/pdf/jcs2016.pdf

Covzire 6y ago

"It said that while in high school eight years earlier, Mr King had tweeted two racist jokes about black people." This insanity needs to end.

aklemm 6y ago
Yes, hopefully it will become so abhorrent that it will be obvious even to teenagers that race “jokes” aren’t acceptable.
- apsec112 6y ago
  "But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. Early in the morning He returned to the temple. All the people came to Him, and He sat down and taught them. The scribes and Pharisees brought a woman caught in adultery. When they had put her in the middle, they said to Him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of adultery. Now Moses in the law commanded us to stone such, but what do You say?” They said this, testing Him, that they might have something of which to accuse Him. But Jesus stooped down and wrote on the ground with His finger, as though He did not hear them. So when they continued asking Him, He stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” Again He stooped down and wrote on the ground. Being convicted by their conscience, those who heard it went out one by one, beginning with the eldest even to the last. Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. When Jesus had stood up and saw no one but the woman, He said to her, “Woman, where are your accusers? Did no one condemn you?” She said, “No one, Lord.” Jesus said to her, “Neither do I condemn you. Go and sin no more.”"
  - aklemm 6y ago
    Contextually, that’s nonsense.
    - t0mbstone 6y ago
      I'm not religious but it makes sense to me: "Don't condemn other people for making the mistake of saying racist things in their past if you have said racist things in YOUR past yourself" It's very logical.

dwd 6y ago

You need to read the journalist's own account as to how this all blew up. He provides a lot more context and nuance as to who tweeted what and when, but basically screwed up and should have checked his own online history as well. https://www.cjr.org/first_person/aaron-calvin-viral-story-tweets.php https://www.cjr.org/first_person/aaron-calvin-viral-story-tw...

aklemm 6y ago
That’s very compelling and sad.
cco 6y ago
This is what that reporter wrote about the tweets. It is 10% of the article that was published by word count and appeared in the middle of the article, not the end as the reporter claims. I'll leave it to people to draw their own conclusions: A routine background check of King's social media revealed two racist jokes, one comparing black mothers to gorillas and another making light of black people killed in the holocaust. The joke tweets date back to 2012, when King was a 16-year-old high school student. Register editor:Here’s how we reported on Carson King’s tweets When asked about the tweets, King was remorseful and thanked the Register for pointing them out, saying they made him "sick." He has since deleted them. "That’s not something that I’m proud of at all," he told the Register during the day Tuesday. Tuesday evening, King spoke to local television stations about the now-deleted tweets. "I am embarrassed and stunned to reflect on what I thought was funny when I was 16-year-old," he said in a statement posted by WHO-TV. "I want to sincerely apologize." He also read the statement in a video posted by KCCI-TV. Anheuser-Busch InBev, Busch Light's parent company, announced in a statement Tuesday night that they will "have no further association with [King]," though they will honor their agreement to match the funds for the children's hospital.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
ponker 6y ago
He should have "checked his online history" and realized that maybe he didn't need to write about another person's online history. I don't see him looking any better here -- he casually lobbed a rock at another man and then got all whiny about "editorial integrity" when the rock got thrown at him.

codeddesign 6y ago

This is exactly why people call a lot of “news” fake news. That news outlet was not doing journalism but rather a smear piece for the purpose of views. The guy was 16. Everyone would be fired if they dug up everyone that was done in their teens years and accountable for it today. This is news outlet abusively used their power without caring for the consequences of what it would to this man. I’m getting really tired of this shaming. I oppose gay marriage, I oppose abortion, and while they’re are racists, I don’t believe their is institutional fascism taking place based upon the color of skin. ...but that is what makes our country great. We can have different view points. We can have discussions. When we take away those we begin to turn into a society similar to China where it’s not acceptable to have differing views and certainly not discussion.

throw5876543 6y ago
This should also make us wonder if the news about China, Russia, India, and Saudi Arabia are smear pieces too.
- xlm1717 6y ago
  Totally not a suspicious thing for a throwaway account to say.
  - dang 6y ago
    This breaks the site guidelines. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules. Note this one: "Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=true&page=0&query=by:dang%20astroturf https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

2038AD 6y ago

It's pretty funny that a lot of these cases of 'cancel culture' aren't the mob ("Twitter, do your thing") but journalists going after regular people. As it turns out it's far easier to expose someone without power. We're a pretty perverse society that random acts of harassment is being viewed with the television lens of "cancellation". That is a risk with the social medium. Another irony of the situation is that, with the primary center being Twitter, the transgressions have to be minor. Accounts that break the rules (i.e. are racist) are routinely and correctly banned and as such have all their transgressions erased.

jariel 6y ago
'Cancel Culture' is generally not 'a mob' - it's usually journos or individuals leveraging or hyping up a little bit of a mob. A Board is not going to dump a CEO because of just some angry people on Twitter, it's the pressure exerted by amplified voices, particularly those in the press. Once a fire starts, a lot of other writer tend to to pile on. If everything were just on Twitter, nobody would care. It's the 'newsification' of Twitter that creates the problem. The Board cannot ignore CNN, WaPo and all the ruffling they casuse.
senectus1 6y ago
I dont think it should be called "Cancel Culture", its more of "Burn Culture"... One little mistake and everyone wants to burn you at the stake like a witch in the old days. No matter that he made some stupid ill-informed posts back when he was 16 and not a fully developed adult with little real world experience. BURN HIM!! Come on Internet... we need to be able to have civil discussions and a chance for people to redeem themselves.

ponker 6y ago

The leaders of "cancel culture" are usually destined to become a Danton, Hebert, or Robespierre.

TMWNN 6y ago
The difference is of degree, not kind. To put another way, if the leaders of a modern mob had the power to execute their targets the way Danton or Robespierre did, who is confident that they would not let the guillotine blade fall?
- ponker 6y ago
  I agree, but I was more talking about how those who would become self-styled enforcers of ideological purity tests often find themselves sufficiently impure and lose their heads the same way they took them.

Noos 6y ago

No sympathy. Cancel culture was all fine and good when it was used on people the progressive left didn't like, but when now it's applied to themselves? OMG its gone too far! I hope they enjoy the world they made.