I see both sides of the argument tbh. I think the biggest flaw for social media is that it doesn't allow us room to learn from our mistakes... it's treated more like a permanent record. I think we all say problematic things, especially at a younger age and maybe not so much racial commentary. However, certainly people write things when they are thinking freely that can be misconstrued or twisted by a malicious 3rd party ... but it shouldn't be that what we write can be used to encourage harassment or stalking behavior. Which arguably, that's what social media largely is... a pseudo-collective whose full potential is only realized through stalking behavior...
That will always be the case with social and it should not be used irresponsibly. She was a minor at the time and parents should've probably been paying attention to the types of things she put up . Yes, weird that she didn't erase it later. Of course, that could've been naivety as well, that those momentary posts from her being a minor couldn't have been misused... some people hang onto their accounts just to keep that adolescent post count (
), especially if they're an "original" Tweeter...
But to approach it at another angle: It is actually our right to be racist... believe it or not ... we can have those thoughts, we can cross those boundaries socially. We can do a list of things on the personal level. We can even set our personal boundaries along those lines. Sure, it's not morally-correct according to society, but then the social media mob was always less about being a moral police force and more about being attention-seeking. Engaging in stalking/harassment-like behavior keeps it all going. Which all sides do with their pointed words... it's only become this toxic
form of a moral authority only recently.
It doesn't
justify her remarks but do her remarks justify her losing her employment outside of the public domain (i.e. television)?... that's something we will have to figure out as a society as time goes on... but right now, it feels like an Eye For Eye, and it can only go on so long I think before we will have to rethink... it is already at the point that people are being banned/censored for holding certain political views... but if we use the moral lens to police other people's behavior in a more concise manner, then well, pretty much
any reason can be invented to condone that behavior using moral "guidelines"... that's one of the lessons of fascism... so yeah, it's a double-edged sword... the Eye for an Eye mentality... that persons who belittled another down to their pigment, we are allowed to undress them and tear them down to their studs, etc. How this is helpful
to society, not the person themselves, is the question.
I think whatever pigment the offender is, they should not lose their employment over it unless they are a public figure, PR, etc... with this one it is complicated if she announced her place of employment proudly, then in a way she was "representing" them. However, her showing her bum, jumping in another person's bed the first night, etc, it wasn't like she was going to be a good representative anyway... so that's a tough call.
I didn't think she is a victim, but arguably the punishment is a bit high and unnecessary... she is off the show, so her personal life should be off-limits to some degree... the concern for me is that the thing that used to empower us now gives me pause... I don't think most people who rant on social care about racism. Most don't even care they are causing more division in our society... the thing they want is to affect other people's lives... in effect, they can be bullies as long as they want to, as long as they work within a certain moral prism... and many have expressed this concern, so it's not just an Ellis thing...