Nats 1700 Tutorial Assignment: Cyber-Shaming When looking at “Cyber-shaming:

Nats 1700 Tutorial Assignment: Cyber-Shaming

 

            When looking at “Cyber-shaming: Retribution in a Virtual World”, we tend to see that Jon Ronson and society or the so-called “mob” express their views in two totally different angles. Ronson believes that society has encountered a problem that has lasted many years with the fact that humanity portrays a lack of empathy when it comes to cyber-shaming. On the other hand, society thinks shaming and punishing someone through the internet is the way to go. Ronson believes the amount of freedom given to users on the internet is what triggers them to feel the need to shame and punish someone. What derives a person from doing such a thing simply comes from Ronson’s “snowflake and avalanche theory”. This theory consists of two main ideas which are the snowflake and the avalanche whereas the snowflake is one of hundreds of thousands of comments and the avalanche acts as the victim. The user shaming the victim through the internet only does this because they feel that their comment will not have an effect on the victim as there are so many others doing the exact same. Just like a snowflake when compared to an avalanche, it has no harm to the final outcome and just sits there without any attention.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Neil McDonald’s corresponding statement (“the scary thing about the internet…is that it allows human nature to do as it likes. Shamers abide by no due process. No government oversees them…what has taken form is the biggest Kangaroo court in human history – capricious, vicious, stupid, out of control and all with effective impunity”) refers to the fact that shamers or humans do as they like because there is no physical surveillance. They have no sense of empathy towards the victim as they feel no one has control over their comments but themselves so they do as they like. The term “kangaroo court” refers to the fact that the outcome is predetermined and one side of the argument will not be heard giving the trial an unfair ruling. This is exactly what we see when looking at cyber shaming. One side is never heard and in this case, will always be the victim and this is why Ronson believes that the best thing for the victim to do is to stay quiet for as long as it takes. As bad as it sounds this will allow for new trending victims to catch the eye of the “mob” or shamer’s, giving you a chance to breath freely with little to no shaming. McDonald ends his statement with two words that sum up his statement which consisted of “effective impunity”, and these two words really explain a lot in terms of how shamers receive no punishment for their actions. This leads to many different outcomes for victims including potential suicide which I believe outweighs the so-called “crimes” committed by the targeted victims of cyber-shaming.

These victims receive so much hate that it allows them to consider the option of suicide which I believe no human being should ever consider. ‘Cyber-shamers’ have one goal in life when online and that is to find a potential target to put down and make themselves fell higher in power. I believe this does in fact outweigh whatever the targeted victims have done because it isn’t necessary as they could have gone on with their life without commenting about the issue. In some cases, the crimes of the targeted victims without a doubt outweighs “the mobs” responses but most of the time it’s the little mistakes that people love to feed off of that make them the snowflake to the avalanche. When you look at an individual you can conclude many things but do not know their intentions towards the post that they may have recklessly posted but that gives no excuse for people to publicly shame that individual. Cyber-shaming had gone to an extent where people encounter a hate for the internet due to these inappropriate comments these people have to say about another individual