Oops. So maybe that joke wasn’t so funny.
There are a lot of interesting points made both in this
article and in the comments which follow. (You are free to reference those
too.) A sample: Do companies have a right to censor their
employees? When is it legitimate to
judge others for what they say on social media? Does this case show that protecting one’s privacy in the world of
the internet is a lost cause? Is this
issue about censorship, freedom of expression, or being civil?
Ah, a classic example of a “too soon” joke. Sadly, in this case the commentator and the spokesman, who we both fire, have essentially left their respective companies with their hands tied. As much as we would like to, the public will always be driven by generalizations first, rather than critically evaluating the situation instead. There is little the companies could do to protect themselves from a fiasco like this, other than laying a few people off, without putting their own reputation at stake. I won’t go as far as to say I praise the companies for their action and that they did the only right thing they could do, but the ex-employees honestly should have known better. It wouldn’t have been a problem had they made the joke within their own circle of close personal friends, who more likely than not wouldn’t judge them for it as much as the public would, but to release it in the internet space, let alone a social networking site, that can be easily monitored – that’s either a horrendously gross inadvertence or just plain stupid. That simply goes to show and exemplify the subtle dangers of internet usage, where information hardly can be controlled once published. I am certain unfortunate ex-employees wouldn’t have dare try telling the joke in front of a camera or interviewer, where they would be easily able to spot how inappropriate it would have been and the awkwardness that would have followed.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the proposition made at the end of the article to issue a warning message relieving the company’s affiliation with the personal moral views of their employees is merely the author’s wishful thinking. Not only would it be for the most part overlooked, in the cases that it isn’t, it will be perceived as a rather weak attempt at pathetic excuse.