Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Nadia Bartel: some shaming is a good thing

By Rob Cover - posted Monday, 6 September 2021


Breaching lockdown rules-and then doing it a second time in 48 hours after an apology for the first breach-is role-modelling behaviour that says to the public and to her followers "lockdowns don't matter". It suggests that the rules are unimportant.

This is obviously unfortunate at a time in which the lockdown is a necessary, vital component in public health to keep pressures off the hospitals and hard-working medical staff while the long-delayed vaccinations to reduce the severity and hospital impact are rolled out across Victoria.

Being shamed by the Premier is, therefore, a necessary remedy to the damage Bartel's actions may have done to the credibility and demands of the-however difficult-of the public health restrictions.

Advertisement

That shaming, however, should not be understood as a call for large members of the public to engage in a mass pile-on of hate, anger and condemnation.

Shaming plays an important role in helping to communicate and encourage debate on public standards and expectations, such as when a public figure has, however well-meaning or unthinking, appeared in dehumanising blackface. But public shaming has its limits, too, in the era of instanteous digital reactions and fast-response which can result in aggressive nad hostile mob-like pile-ons that themselves de-humanise, wound and are increasingly recognised as causing harm to the target in unprecedented ways. In extreme cases, suicide.

Online mob shaming and pile-ons are not public debate. At best, they actually promote the person being shamed by making them a victim, increasing their following and boosting their brand. At worst, they position the victim to see themselves as no longer having a worthwhile life, causing mental health and possible self-harm.

At this point, it is likely safest and best to have witnessed the necessary shaming of Nadia Bartel done by our parliamentary representatives and government officers, and leave off with the pile-on.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

7 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Rob Cover is Professor of Digital Communication at RMIT University, Melbourne where he researches contemporary media cultures. The author of six books, his most recent are Flirting in the era of #MeToo: Negotiating Intimacy (with Alison Bartlett and Kyra Clarke) and Population, Mobility and Belonging.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Rob Cover

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Rob Cover
Article Tools
Comment 7 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy