Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It's hyperbole, as the victim doesn't actually die. But there are certainly similarities.

They were able to get Sacco fired. They were able to mobilize someone to take her picture right after her plane landed. And she had to leave Cape Town because "no one could guarantee her safety". So, it could have easily escalated into a real lynch mob.

How about people getting "swatted" by internet vigilantes?

So the "not dying" part is about the only significant difference I can see in some of these more extreme cases, and, God help me, I wouldn't be overly shocked if someone actually does end up dead from an "internet shaming" some day.



It's happened already: http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/online-trolls-w...

(posting from a throwaway because I resolved to stop commenting here, but couldn't help myself here)


Not only is someone bound to end up dead, based on past human behaviour the majority of shamers will claim they deserved it, and feel no shame themselves for their part in the death of an innocent. Diffusion of responsibility is a terrible thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion_of_responsibility




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: