Some Questions to Ask When Considering Whether to Publicize Online Wrongdoing

 We recently wrote a post about whether it is good practice to retweet ugly, sexist or racist messages.

A similar question involves whether it is categorically always good practice to publicize others’ wrongdoings via online and social media. A common answer is that people should be held accountable for their actions, and that a part of this involves having to live with the negative fall-out when they’ve done something wrong.

This question has been brought to the forefront again after actor Jon Lovitz tweeted about three girls who vandalized the home of his friend with anti-semitic images.

Judging by the overwhelmingly supportive responses on Twitter, most people thought that what he did was good, while a few didn’t.

At CiviliNation we strongly believe in individual responsibility and accountability online, and also realize that there are no unequivocally correct, bright-line responses that apply to each and every permutation of wrongdoing online (because when mistakes are made, they are severe – recall what happened when director Spike Lee recently tweeted information he believed was true but that turned out being false).

To get a conversation about this issue started, we’ve posted some initial and non-exhaustive questions to look at:

• Circumstances of the attack:
• What was the severity of the attack?
• Was it a one-time incident?
• Was it a repeated action?
• Was it an attack based on someone’s gender, ethnicity, race, religion or sexual orientation?
• Were there any counterfailing facts, e.g. was the attack a response to a prior attack?
• Did others get involved in the attack after it was initiated, i.e. did an online pile-on occur?

• Age of the target(s)/victim(s):
• Are they children?
• Are they teenagers?
• Are they young adults who are legally accountable as adults but still socially immature?
• Are they full-fledged adults in both a legal, social and emotional sense?

• Age of the attacker(s):
• Are they children?
• Are they teenagers?
• Are they young adults who are legally accountable as adults but still socially immature?
• Are they full-fledged adults in both a legal, social and emotional sense?

• What are the effects on the target or victim if the attack is publicized by others online?
• Is news of the attack publicized with the target’s consent?
• Is the target negatively stigmatized or branded  as a result of the publicizing?
• Is the target subject to intensified or more widespread victimization as a result of the initial attack being publicized?

• What are the effects on the attackers if the attack is publicized by others online, and should this be a consideration?
• Will the attacker be able to resume his or her life after the wrongdoing, or will he/she be permanently branded as a result of the misdeed?
• Will the attacker be able to express sincere remorse for his or her  actions and seek redemption, or will the online dissemination and permanent archiving of the attack prevent this?
• Does the ability to resume one’s life depend on the age and maturity of the attacker, i.e. should we hold children and teenagers to the same social standard as adults?
• Will the safely and lives of the attackers be threatened by people incensed about the wrongdoing?
• Will the safety and lives of the attacker’s family be threatened by others incensed about the wrongdoing?