Slashdot Mirror
Are We Too Quick To Act On Social Media Outrage?
RedK writes: Connie St-Louis, on June 8th, reported on apparently sexist remarks made by Sir Tim Hunt, a Nobel prize winning scientist, during an event organised for women in sciences. This led to the man's dismissal from his stations, all in such urgency that he did not even have time to present his side, nor was his side ever offered any weight. A leaked report a few days later suggests that the remarks were taken out of context. Further digging shows that the accuser has distorted the truth in many cases it seems. This is not the first time that people may have jumped the gun too soon on petty issues and ruined great events or careers.
This is the same thing that happened to a Texas Firefighter who supposedly had praised that sadistic little shit Dylan Roof, on Facebook. However, the post was a response in a thread, and the Firefighter claims it was in response to another poster, who had donated to a fund for the victims of the shooting. The words were "He needs to be praised for the good deed he has done." He was immediately suspended and is now a social Pariah, a walking target. The disturbing trend in these kinds of situations is the accuser doesn't even have a chance to defend themselves before they find their lives ruined.
Tim Hunt was attacked and dismissed from UCL, the Royal Society and other bodies
No he wasn't. He resigned from a couple (largely honorary) posts. He kept his paying job.
The Daily Mail article is not about how Connie was wrong. The Independent piece provides the alternative version to Connie's, in which Tim Hunt's comments are framed as a sarcastic protrayal of "what is keeping women out of STEM" (the classic boys club accusation) and adds the follow-up he did, telling women to not be discouraged by it and to go forward.
The Daily Mail simply did some digging into who exactly this Connie St Louis person is, and why maybe we should ask questions before we simply give her 100% trust in this matter.
"Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
Forced to resign. His wife got the call from HR, which was basically "either he resigns, or we remove him" while he was on the plane back from Seoul. Which makes it all the worse, the guy isn't even back from his conference, and without even meeting him, they ask for his resignation.
"Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
Recently I have been glued to a box set of the complete "Hill Street Blues" - yes, I know that telegraphs my age and unadventurous taste in TV. It was only the other night that I got quite angry at the spectacle of the police chief twisting Captain Furillo's arm to get him to abandon his defence of an apparently "bad cop". This guy, a narcotics agent, had shot and killed a young black man while interrupting some suspicious activity in the small hours. The cop claimed that he had given due warning, and fired only after being fired on - all of which was true. Also, the group he tried to apprehend were in fact committing crimes. Nevertheless, the police chief tells Furillo that it's vital for the department to be seen to throw this "bad cop" to the wolves. It's all about perception, he explains. The facts don't matter at all; all that counts is that this is a good time to throw someone to the wolves.
You know that "Hill Street Blues" is fiction, don't you?
You realize that's the kind of bullshit story that South Carolina cop Michael Slager gave after he shot Walter Scott, a black man, in the back? (Except that a video turned up.)
And you know that there are lots of other documented cases where the cops killed people (usually black) and claimed that they saw a gun -- where it turned out that they didn't have a gun?
And you know that according to sworn police testimony before the Knapp Commission, cops often carry guns around to plant on people they've killed, so that they could say they were defending themselves?
And you know that the police have unions and the kind of scenario you describe could never have happened in real life, don't you?
That's the kind of cock-and-bull story that defense attorneys for cops, and police union apologists, come up with when a cop is guilty as shit of an unjustified, racist murder, and they're getting paid big money to come up with desperate explanations for why their client is really innocent despite the overwhelming evidence that points to his guilt.
The story that you describe is pure pro-cop propaganda to defend the unjustified murders of black people, by creating a fantasy of a minority-loving conspiracy out to get cops.
Really, how can you fall for that? Don't you have more intelligence than that?
I stopped watching TV. I know a bit about the law, and the law and police procedures are so distorted and absurd that it's painful to watch. It's like watching a science fiction program where they don't know that you can't hear sounds through a vacuum. The suspects never say that they refuse to speak without a lawyer.
Hollywood used to have a lot of writers and producers pushing a liberal agenda in their films, until the House Un-American Activities Committee got them blacklisted. Now there's a lot of conservative propaganda like this. The conservative propaganda isn't even as good.
Actually, he did double-down. Listen to how to says in the BBC interview...
"I did mean the part about having trouble with girls," he said. "It is true that people - I have fallen in love with people in the lab and people in the lab have fallen in love with me and it's very disruptive to the science because it's terribly important that in a lab people are on a level playing field."
He said it. He wasn't joking. He confirmed what the original witnesses in Korea said he said. He double-downed and wanted everyone, via the BBC, to know it.
He changed his story afterwards. And you're buying the revised story.