The Problem of Public Shaming*

Frye, Harrison

doi:10.1111/jopp.12252

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 23 publications

(3 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…And our actions can linger, as videos circulate and recirculate. By transforming the scale of public shaming (Frye 2022), scholars agree that digital technologiesand social media in particular-turned a perhaps-onceproductive practice of social sanction into a kind of pathological "norm enforcement that is indeterminate, uncalibrated, and often tips into behavior punishable in its own right" (Klonick 2019(Klonick , 1032. This concern is not unfounded.…”

Section: "Mostly An Example Of Twitter Run Amok"mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…OPS is a concern for those invested in ensuring the internet is safe and welcoming for all. As a result, scholars have suggested strategies for mitigating the pathologies of OPS-solutions that largely center on adopting new social norms, whether around the appropriate scale of public shaming (Frye 2022) or "about the use of the Internet" more generally Parr 2020a, 1011). As I argue, however, the kind of social norm creation and enforcement these scholars appeal to is more effective within a specific network structure.…”

Section: Social Media and Social Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Social Media, Social Control, and the Politics of Public Shaming

FORESTAL

2023

Am Polit Sci Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While there is disagreement over the value of public shaming, scholars largely agree that social media introduce pathologies. But while scholars rightly identify the effects of online public shaming (OPS), they misidentify the cause. Rather than solely a problem of scale, OPS’s effects are also shaped by the network structure within which they take place. In this article, I argue that the social conditions necessary for productive public shaming are more likely to obtain in a closed social network structure. Using the cases of Twitter, Wikipedia, and Reddit, I show how the design of social media platforms facilitates different network structures among users, with differing results for OPS. In evaluating OPS by way of network structure, I argue, we can not only better understand why OPS works productively in some cases and not in others, but also derive lessons for how to deploy, discuss, and respond to it more effectively.

show abstract

Section: "Mostly An Example Of Twitter Run Amok"mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Social Media and Social Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Media, Social Control, and the Politics of Public Shaming

FORESTAL

2023

Am Polit Sci Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When criticism is initiated publicly rather than privately, the pool of critics can expand exponentially, snowballing out of the initial critic's control (Billingham & Parr, 2020). The cascade of public shaming can even entrap researchers who are not well enough informed to adequately adjudicate the criticism, creating a problem of proportionality (Frye, 2022).…”

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Promoting Civility in Formal And Informal Open Science Contexts

Darda,

Conry-Murray,

Schmidt

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The open-science movement is driven by the desire to increase research transparency, accessibility, and equity in conducting, reporting, and sharing research. Because open science aims to enable access and inclusion, and because incivility impedes both access and inclusion, many open-science organizations endorse the need for interpersonal civility. In this article, we present empirically validated solutions for promoting interpersonal civility in both formal and informal open-science contexts. We begin by defining formal versus informal contexts, as well as illustrating the advantages of each for achieving open-science goals. We present publicly documented instances of interpersonal incivility that have occurred in both formal and informal contexts, and we conclude by presenting five scientifically supported recommendations for promoting civility in open-science formal and informal contexts.

show abstract

“…Third is shaming (Cheung, 2014;Norlock, 2017), which at worst borders hate speech. This is less controversial as generally negatively construed as discipline-transformed-into-harm (Billingham and Parr, 2020;Fritz, 2021;Frye, 2021), but nonetheless attempting to shame people into conforming with norms remains a prominent activity. Shaming may be aimed at immigrants (Rohlfing and Sonnenberg, 2016), white supremacists (Milbrandt, 2020), people with criminal convictions (Dunsby and Howes, 2019), fat people (Ravary et al, 2019;Spratt, 2021), senders of "dick pics" (Paasonen and Sundén, 2021), sexually-active women (Jane, 2017;Van Royen et al, 2018), women who eat on public transport (Alberti, 2021), those who over-use water during droughts (Milbrandt, 2017), entitled white women ("Karens") (Negra and Leyda, 2021), welfare recipients (Brooker et al, 2015), those behind on school lunch money payments (Oravec, 2020), those who use their volunteering experiences to get dates (Laywine, 2021), and even doctors trying to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic (Dolezal et al, 2021).…”

Section: Privatised Disciplinementioning

confidence: 99%

Digital Modernity

O’Hara

2022

FNT in Web Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Modernity" is a social, cultural or historical descriptor for a certain type of society or set of social arrangements. This monograph reviews narratives of digital modernity, without endorsing them; as narratives, they selectively discuss aspects of our sociotechnical context, descriptively, teleologically or normatively. Digital modernity narratives focus on the possibilities of the data gathered by an ambient data infrastructure, enabled by ubiquitous devices such as the smartphone, and activities such as social networking and e-commerce. Some emphasise continuities with 20th century modernity narratives, while others emphasise discontinuity, such as theories of the singularity. Digital modernity is characterised by: a subjunctive outlook where people's choices can be anticipated and improved upon; the valorisation of disruptive innovation on demand; and control provided by data analysis within a virtual realm (cyberspace or the metaverse) which can be extended and applied to the physical world (in such applications as the quantified self and the smart city). The synergies and tensions between these three aspects are explored, as are the opportunities for and dilemmas posed by misinformation. Five principles emerge from the study of relevant texts and business models: (1) the quantity of data being produced in the world has enabled, and been enabled by, technological, social, economic and

show abstract

The Problem of Public Shaming*

Cited by 6 publications

References 23 publications

Social Media, Social Control, and the Politics of Public Shaming

Social Media, Social Control, and the Politics of Public Shaming

Promoting Civility in Formal And Informal Open Science Contexts

Digital Modernity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About