Shea Allen, an investigative reporter for WAAY-TV, a Huntsville, Alabama, ABC affiliate, was fired from her job despite what had been considered sterling work because of a post she made on her personal blog.
Titled “Confessions of a Red Headed Reporter,” it was a light-hearted list of, she thought, minor quirks and trivial transgressions.
The fateful list:
1. I’ve gone bra-less during a live broadcast and no one was the wiser.
2. My best sources are the ones who secretly have a crush on me.
3. I am better live when I have no script and no idea what I’m talking about.
4. I’ve mastered the ability to contort my body into a position that makes me appear much skinner in front of the camera than I actually am.
5. I hate the right side of my face.
6. I’m frightened of old people and I refuse to do stories involving them or the places they reside.
7. Happy, fluffy, rainbow stories about good things make me depressed.
8. I’ve taken naps in the news car.
9. If you ramble and I deem you unnecessary for my story, I’ll stop recording but let you think otherwise.
10. I’ve stolen mail and then put it back. (maybe)
I am taking down the post regarding the alleged insane statements of Sandra Fluke regarding the GOP’s culpability for Anthony Weiner’s sexting. I am persuaded that it is a web hoax. Though it was sent to me as true, with a reference to “Best of the Web,” a reliable source, I have traced the item back to a blogger who tagged his post “satire” and “humor.”
This is why I detest web hoaxes.
While the claims attributed to Ms. Fluke were absurd and extreme, they were not especially funny, or so removed from other positions she has advocated that the hyperbole here would be obvious, at least to me.
S0…
Gratitude and kudos to Arthur in Maine, who refocused my attention on the post.
Apologies and regrets to Ethics Alarms readers. I do check sources, but this time I didn’t check well enough.
I apologize to my fellow GULC alum, Ms. Fluke, for believing her capable of such idiocy.
I apologize to Emily’s List.
I apologize to James Taranto, to whom I originally and erroneously credited for the pointer.
I do not apologize to Rush Limbaugh or the GOP. My comments regarding them in relation to Sandra Fluke stand.
“It’s unclear if his latest admission will hurt his standing with voters.”
—-NBC News, after revealing on its website that New York City mayoral candidate Anthony Weiner, who resigned from Congress in 2011 amid a sexting scandal, admitted today that there were more episodes like the one that forced his resignation. He issued the statement after a gossip website published an interview with an anonymous woman who claimed she had a six-month online relationship with him that continued after his earlier online activities were, uh, exposed.
The once and future studmuffin…”Mayor Studmuffin?” Really, New York?
Weiner’s statement was Clintonian with heavy dash of weasel, saying,
“I said that other texts and photos were likely to come out, and today they have. As I have said in the past, these things that I did were wrong and hurtful to my wife and caused us to go through challenges in our marriage that extended past my resignation from Congress. While some things that have been posted today are true and some are not, there is no question that what I did was wrong. This behavior is behind me.”
Note: Weiner also said the behavior was behind him when he resigned. (Actually, based on the photos, the behavior is clearly in front of him.) Given his talent for Clintonesque deceit, perhaps he means that all past behavior is behind him, since he’s talking in the present, and only future internet flashing is ahead of him.
A fed-up husband named Jim decided to pave the ground for his impending divorce announcement by uploading a video of his wife’s ridiculous tantrum to YouTube, where it went viral. The wife, known to us only by her first name of Whitney, reacts to her husband’s refusal to “take her to the lake” with the kind of meltdown that would get any seven-year old to time-out. During her antics, Jim sounds alternately resigned and amused, playing the role of a long-suffering spouse who is tolerating, once again, his wife’s and abusive bizarre behavior.
But then he knew he was being recorded.
Here’s the video.
Obviously Whitney has problems. Jim, however, is a cur. Every marriage has its moments where one or both partners behave outrageously, childishly, disgracefully, foolishly, abusively, embarrassingly, and it is a vital component of the unspoken pact of wedlock that these moments are private and confidential. Marriage is a relationship of trust, the one safe environment in which husband and wife can be completely free to be themselves without fear of wider exposure, criticism or humiliation, because each is secure in the belief that the other’s conduct is governed by unconditional love. What Jim did to Whitney is a horrible betrayal, a vicious act of cruelty designed to cause humiliation and shame to someone who trusted him.
You can say he couldn’t stand her tantrums any more, you can say he had been pushed to his limit, you can say that she got what such immaturity deserves, you can find all manner of rationalizations. Nevertheless, placing this video of a private encounter on the web is indefensible and unforgivable, a breach of trust, honesty, fairness and respect. It causes me to wonder what other cruelties accumulated to make his wife into the unstable basket case she appears to be. She is the victim here.
Post script:Once again, I am faced here with the dilemma we have debated before, regarding the ethics of my posting the video, the vehicle of the unethical web-shaming, and thus adding to the victim’s humiliation. My decision is to post it, because the video is so easily accessible on the link provided and elsewhere, because realistically, my contribution to its circulation is minimal, and most of all, because it is presented here in a context that is very different from that of the original sites, like Gawker, that initially commented on it. This is presented as an example of unethical web-shaming, with the message that the treatment of the wife that it represents is unethical, unconscionable, and cruel. I do not believe there is sufficient basis for considering the issue without viewing the video itself. If this additional circulation adds to Whitney’s pain, I am genuinely sorry. My hope is that I can make some progress is stemming what I consider to be a dangerous social trend of using the internet as a weapon of revenge and gratuitous meanness.
Maybe people would care if he looked like the President’s son, and not mine…
If Justin Carter were black or Muslim….
…maybe the news media would take an interest in a Texas teenager being imprisoned and charged with a terrorist threat for an obvious joke on Facebook;
…maybe progressive and civil rights organizations would question whether his prosecution was the result of an abuse of power by prosecutors, and fearful paranoia by the his community;
…maybe pundit and commentator accusations of official bias against his race or religion would result in authorities questioning the wisdom of their actions and the cruelty of Justin’s persecution;
…maybe professional activists and race-hucksters would use their influence to focus attention on his plight, the miscarriage of justice, and its dangerous implications for the rest of us;
…maybe the ACLU would deem his case worthy of its intervention and support;
...maybe Al Sharpton would organize demonstrations protesting law enforcement ruining the life of an innocent young man because he was insufficient sensitive to irrational public fearfulness, instead of organizing protests against a jury’s just and unimpeachable acquittal of a defendant based on inadequate evidence to convict.
…maybe the President of the United States would feel that his case was worthy of a lecture to the nation about the importance of free speech, and why fear of guns, violence and terrorism shouldn’t turn the U.S. into a censorious police state.
But unfortunately for Justin Carter and the First Amendment, he isn’t black or Muslim, so the serious criminal charges against him for daring to express himself remain, the news media has been silent on the case for more than a week, the ACLU ignores him, the President’s attentions and priorities remain elsewhere, and most of the public has never heard of him, or doesn’t give a damn.
Remember, the words that made Justin a criminal are these:
“Oh yeah, I’m real messed up in the head. I think Ima shoot up a kindergarten and watch the blood of the innocent rain down and eat the beating heart of one of them.” lol. jk.”
Post them on Facebook, Twitter, Link’d In, or your own blog, and let’s see if they can arrest all of us.
Well, that’s one more show I won’t be watching on Netflix…
On his blog, the creator of the critically-praised HBO drama “The Wire” hit all the marks of Trayvon Martin derangement—misstatement of facts, ignorance of the law, presumption of guilt without proof, unreasoning fury, and appeal to violence. David Simon wrote, Continue reading →
I went into this with my eyes open, so I am accountable.
The U.S.’s favorite racist, Woodrow Wilson.
When I poked the hornets nest of the nauseating racist website Chimpmania, I knew I risked having Ethics Alarms being descended upon by the ideological clones of Simon Legree and Woodrow Wilson. My routine response would be to nix such posts, as I similarly make sure other vile screeds never see the light of a laptop.
However, the Ethics Alarms post in question was about the importance of not censoring vile websites, because of the First Amendment, naturally, but also because people with unethical views are more dangerous when they hide in the shadows. It is important that we know about them and their thought processes; sometimes, with persuasion and patience, we can even bring them back to civilization. It is also important that we consider and understand how such individuals came to have their humanity so darkened and warped.
I am not the government: like Facebook, Ethics Alarms is not obligated by law or principle to allow every comment, no matter how offensive, to be seen and read. To the contrary, it is obligated to maintain an environment conducive to productive ethics discourse, enlightenment and debate. In this case, however, I recognized the apparent hypocrisy of extolling the benefits of allowing racists to roam free on the web while personally censoring the comments from the very same racists whose rights the original post was defending. Continue reading →
“This website spews hatred and promotes violence against people of color. It targeted my family and posted pictures of my children. It is vile and extreme and if the internet is an international forum we should have regulations about promoting violence against people. It’s not humane, it’s barbaric and there is no place for that type of behavior anywhere in society and most definitely not on a public forum.”
Heidi did not articulate a legal or Constitutional justification for closing down a website (because there is none) , and I was surprised that my friend would support such an effort. Spewing hatred is acceptable free speech for the most part. I think the Daily Kos and right wing talk show host Mark Levin spew hatred, but I’ll defend to the death their right to do spew it. “Promoting violence” has to become threatening and genuinely illegal before it qualifies as conduct that can justify censorship; what is inhumane and barbaric is a matter of opinion. Being in the mood to flag civic ignorance as I watched live feeds of a responsible, brave, unquestionably correct jury verdict in the Zimmerman case being protested around the country, I started to write my friend a little primer on the First Amendment. I decided to check out the website in question first, though, and “Cowabunga!” as Bart Simpson used to say* in such situations. Chimpmania is one ugly, hateful racist website. Continue reading →
Debra LaFave, poster girl for the “Being Raped By Your Teacher Is OK If She’s Hot” contingent
I’ve flagged this kind of post before, and I’ll continue to do so until sophomoric bloggers and commentators stop snickering and winking about child sexual abuse and outrageous breach of trust.
Why it is hard to grasp the concept that a school teacher seducing and having sex with an underage student is a despicable and harmful crime, and not some sort of male fantasy come true, I cannot conceive. Our education system consistently fails at conveying values and knowledge, but the fact that public schools are too often hunting grounds for sexual predators seeking to use their positions and power to turn kids into living, breathing sex toys is, you know, kind of cute and titillating to people like Eric Owens, laughably called the “Education Editor” at the Daily Caller. Continue reading →
Ethics Alarms 