3 ms·
I am conflicted because I agree with you, but also think that if someone said it was always an angry black man they would (rightly) have been fired without half
by solveit 6y ago
I am conflicted because I agree with you, but also think that if someone said it was always an angry black man they would (rightly) have been fired without half the controversy.
- airhead969 6y agoMaybe the moral of the story is - racist, sexist, -ist, or anything about a group of people: don't use absolute, stereotypical generalization language without cause as a public person and/or representing a company.
- solveit 6y agoSure, but where do we draw the line on people saying bad things while venting?
- mchusma 6y agoI agree people should have room for errors. However this person's job was "race and inclusion editor". If someone's job was to say "guard a vault" and the vault is robbed because they had a bad day, it's reasonable they are fired. I don't think this person should be "cancelled", but I can't imagine keeping this person in such a role.
- airhead969 6y agoYep, it seems like bad judgment in this case. In general, the outrage and retribution mob too often defenestrate proportionality.
- airhead969 6y agoHard to say. On the corp side, it depends on the professionalism and image the account and public personality is expected to uphold. It could be a good idea for such accounts to be held by a social media commenting approval dept acting as an extra layer of humans to double-check, e.g., "do you really want to post this as-is?"