vivster said:
melbye said: ¨The fact that she wasn't fired when she celebrated a man's death is a travesty in my opinion. These companies need a social-media policy |
That's actually an interesting conundrum. I don't believe people should be punished in their job for things they do in their private time. And yes, private twitter accounts are still personal unless you tweet about your work on there. What people think, should also not be a reason for consequence.
But twitter is crossing an interesting line between private and public and thoughts and actions. Because suddenly private thoughts become public utterances, at which point the thought becomes harmful.I don't mind that she celebrated the death of someone, even though for the wrong reasons. But spreading an extremist feminist world view can and already is hurting people. So I support the action taken by her employer. I just wish there was a law against spreading stupidity. I don't care what you think to yourself or what you say in private conversation, but spreading dangerous ideologies should not only cost you your job but should also have other personal consequences.
|
When someone enters a relatively public space, maintains that public setting rather than changing it to private, lists their name and their employer, and discusses work on said platform then they have effectively forfeited their privacy in that situation, and they have become a public representative for their company.
As far as a law preventing speech in any capacity: hell fucking no. Speech laws need to refrain from anything that does not bring physical harm with it (threats or inciting violence). The moment you allow the government to arbitrarily decide what subjective language is "dangerous" is the moment you forfeit tthecountry to whoever happens to be in charge at the time, because suddenly dangerous language is any language that the people in power disagree with.