The late literary critic Umberto Eco once said: “Social media gives legions of idiots the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner.”
He could be right.
A professor at the renowned Stanford Graduate School of Business (SGSB) faced the issue head on, conducting studies with a research associate on netizens reactions and how these often lead to a bashing frenzy.
“Moral outrage has traditionally served a valuable social function, expressing group values and inhibiting deviant behavior, but the exponential dynamics of Internet postings make this expression of legitimate individual outrage appear excessive and unjust,” said SGSB psychology professor, Benoît Monin and graduate student Takuya Sawaoka.
They said that while people are quick to call attention to racist, sexist or unpatriotic behavior on social media, they are seen more like bullies giving excessive punishment when that outcry goes viral.
“One of the features of the digital age is that anyone’s words or actions can go viral, whether they intend to or not. In many cases, the social media posts that are met with viral outrage were never intended to be seen by people outside of the poster’s social circle. Someone doesn’t even need to be on social media in order for their actions to go viral,” Sawaoka was quoted in SGSB’s publication, Insight, as saying.
The researchers cited a 2013 incident about a public outcry over a young woman who twitted that she’ll not catch AIDS in Africa because she was white. Her post went viral despite her maintaining that it was meant to be a joke. Worse, it caused her her job.
This has happened to a netizen in the Philippines who, at the height of the public’s wariness over the earthquakes that rocked various parts of the country in April, posted remarks that sparked angry reactions on social media – and consequently his job. He said it was just meant to be a bit of humor.
“On the one hand, speaking out against injustice is vital for social progress, and it’s admirable that people feel empowered to call out words and actions they believe are wrong,” said Sawaoka. “On the other hand, it’s hard not to feel somewhat sympathetic for people who are belittled by thousands of strangers online, and who even lose friends and careers as a result of a poorly thought-out joke.”
The question about how to respond to injustice in the digital age is complex, Sawaoka and Monin concluded in the paper.
There is no easy solution, the researchers say.
“Our findings illustrate a challenging moral dilemma. It is worth reconsidering whether the mass shaming of specific individuals is really the best way to achieve social progress,” said Sawaoka.
