3 ms·
>Over the perception of their actions, not their actual actions. Trying to discuss in good faith here so hopefully this doesn't garner venom: it doesn't feel n
by DetroitThrow 6y ago
>Over the perception of their actions, not their actual actions.
Trying to discuss in good faith here so hopefully this doesn't garner venom: it doesn't feel novel to be fired or quit over public perception of actions or statements - all my corporate employers since the onset of social media have had disclaimers to not enter the public discourse in such a way that might cause negative publicity for them.
>Nobody anywhere would care a single bit were there not mass hysteria.
This is what my original comment was getting at: claims of 'mass hysteria' come off as something like a conspiracy against a specific group or unfairly targeted wrong-think, which feels like a much more exciting answer than the mundane reality. It seems hysterical in itself to not just assume we're in a politically polarized climate and certain topics of discourse easily earn you close friends and/or committed enemies - something that can make any group dynamic fall apart.
>Also it's not necessarily harassment to call out people if they are not doing their jobs. It's just very (almost pathetically) petty.
Entirely agree! I do think social media has had a tendency to allow people to indulge in their worst sides without much consequence in the case of doxxing and, well, harassment by mass-reaching out to personal lines of contact. That's really distinct in my eyes from filing a complaint to their public employer for the public perception of their public statements.
- jariel 6y agoSo this is a good comment - however the term 'hysteria' may not be correct, I suggest that the reaction is ultimately hysterical to the point of overreaction. I think frankly it's driven a small group of unimportant people, causing more serious forces to act out of fear or opportunity, which snowballs into overreaction. A 'fear' moves over a group of people causing weird effects. Maybe we need a term for this - but how do we have 'serious consequences' out of essentially 'inconsequential acts'? It's leveraged consistently by those that want to use 'every little interaction' as 'proof' of their particular ideology. It's just too much, it's wearing on my otherwise sympathetic view of people.
- GoblinSlayer 6y agoThe reason for hysteria isn't polarization alone, but also the left has a mission and is compelled to use everything to complete it, including such hysteric campaigns. Maybe it's not truly hysteria, but it looks, walk and talks like one.