Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

newsweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 597 posts

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#251

Post by user-the-name »

tomcam wrote: post #98
tptacek wrote: post #63

Just a reminder that Newsweek ceased publication back in 2013, and the rights to its brand were purchased by an odd Christian sect, somewhat along the lines of The Washington Times and the Reunification Church. The new "Newsweek" capitalizes on the brand reputation of the old one, but has no connections to it; a good thing to do with Newsweek pieces is to check the byline and look up what their background is.

I’m old fashioned. I judge articles not on whether they are published by “an odd Christian sect”, but how accurate and well-sourced they are. But hey, I’m a Boomer.

Pretty sure "old fashioned" people still judge the claims of people and organisations based on their past history.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#252

Post by user-the-name »

vergessenmir wrote: post #229
vidarh wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These platforms are seen as far right and extremist by a lot of people. Whether or not that assessment is accurate, it will distress a lot of people who do agree with that assessment. Depending on the demographics of the authors they represent, it may well be a significant negative for their business to be associated with those platforms.

A lot of people being the media in the US that pushes the narrative to the extreme. You could make the argument ( perhaps weakly for Parler now) that they are right leaning social platforms that contain extremes. The same way Twitter is left leaning and contains left and right extremes. Companies in the states appear to wear their political allegiances as a badge of honour eliciting an us-or-them reaction. Left and R…

> It's worrying and baffling that someone's source of income can be severed when there has been no evidence of misconduct.

You have zero idea what evidence there is and isn't. The evidence has not been revealed by those involved, and it certainly hasn't been published in this short article you just read.

You just assumed that "she used two sites" was the absolute entirety of the story.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#253

Post by user-the-name »

inglor_cz wrote: post #165
mhh__ wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What percentage of Republicans are the stereotype Parler user? If you were a rabid QAnon nut, why should I hire you? Saying republican is this context is just driving the wedge in too far.

In other words, stereotypes are obviously fun if it is me, an enlightened person, doing them... I had a Parler login since July. Mostly out of curiosity and just to read/lurk. There was a very vocal loony subset, but that is the Internet for you. Kicking people out of work for visiting a hacking forum is about same. After all, for the general public, hacking sounds like crime and sometimes actually is. People who del…

> There was a very vocal loony subset, but that is the Internet for you.

No. This attitude has to stop. Having nazis and far-right extremists being vocal on your site is not "the internet for you".

It is a deliberate choice by whoever runs the site to be a welcoming home for the vilest voices.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#254

Post by deadbunny »

roenxi wrote: post #179
D13Fd wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly don't know why people use "post what you're thinking" style social media at all at this point. With employers being so sensitive, how can the cost/benefit analysis ever really result in a determination that it's a good idea to be active on Twitter/Facebook (or Gab, Parler, TheDonald.win, etc.)? Maybe that's part of what makes things get so extreme on those sites. The most reasonable people know enough not…

Technically; people can't post to thedonald.win either. It has been closed down too.

It was closed due to their single financial backer pulling out, not due to being "cancelled" though.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#255

Post by sokoloff »

iso1631 wrote: post #195
filmgirlcw wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m very much against people being fired for their social media posts (unless we’re crossing way over a line that delves into calls for violence or is doing something illegal), but that situation was a bit more complicated. That author, who was PR professional and verified on Twitter, was using her account and her blue-checkmark to shame a worker on a train for eating on her break. She literally tried to get that emp…

Thanks for this, it's this reason why I find it hard to believe people's summaries as they rarely tell the complete picture, and that itself is dangerous. In this case, the original post didn't pass the sniff test to me. If I tweeted: "Hey $operator, the person manning the gate at the station at James Street this morning was really rude, yelling at people and telling them to f-off" I can't see any situation where the…

While I agree with your logic, I am open to the point of view that some people would preferentially report someone’s behavior depending on the race of the person involved.

Perhaps a black employee is more likely to get a complaint about rudeness. If so, the race wasn’t made available but still changed the interaction.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#256

Post by iSnow »

throwawayboise wrote: post #61
D13Fd wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly don't know why people use "post what you're thinking" style social media at all at this point. With employers being so sensitive, how can the cost/benefit analysis ever really result in a determination that it's a good idea to be active on Twitter/Facebook (or Gab, Parler, TheDonald.win, etc.)? Maybe that's part of what makes things get so extreme on those sites. The most reasonable people know enough not…

Never could see any positives from the "stream of consciousness" type of particpation in social media. I myself have gone farther and have never participated at all on Facebook, Twiter, et. al. Closest thing I've ever had to a social media presence is here on HN, where I deliberately remain anonymous.

I actually like Reddit as well. You can remain pseudonymous there if you so choose and still have meaningful interactions with people. And (depending on the sub) people don't form mobs as easily as on Twitter/Facebook.

Social media without moderators was a really bad idea, as we learn now.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#257

Post by iSnow »

roenxi wrote: post #179
D13Fd wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly don't know why people use "post what you're thinking" style social media at all at this point. With employers being so sensitive, how can the cost/benefit analysis ever really result in a determination that it's a good idea to be active on Twitter/Facebook (or Gab, Parler, TheDonald.win, etc.)? Maybe that's part of what makes things get so extreme on those sites. The most reasonable people know enough not…

Technically; people can't post to thedonald.win either. It has been closed down too.

Only technically. They moved to another domain to dodge the FBI investigation post-Capitol. It's just a rebrand.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#258

Post by lqet »

polka_haunts_us wrote: post #2

I feel like my choice to not participate in non-anonymous social media in any but the absolute most bland and uninteresting ways is the best long running decision I've ever made. The end of anonymized internet is the end of my participation in it and sadly I think that day is fast approaching.

> the best long running decision I've ever made

I feel exactly the same way, although initially, this wasn't a conscious decision. I just did not understand the hype and ignored it. For me, as a 90ies kid, social media was IRC, messengers, and email. It still is. When I first read about Twitter, I thought that technologically, it was only one step away from a Hello World web application.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#259

Post by dmingod666 »

I just find it comical that liberals went from being happy peace loving hippies, to being uptight ultra-orthodox in their thinking and have this deep urge everyone must just comply. I jokingly like to call it the ultra-orthodox church of the right.

Everyone should be "good" with my exact definition of good, in thinking, feeling, actions and reactions to things.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#260

Post by zo1 »

_o0rc wrote: post #121
snicker7 wrote: post #73

At this point, companies might as well just have an explicit policy of not hiring anyone registered as a Republican. Party affiliation is not a protected class, after all.

As pointed out below, there are some states where politics are protected. I looked it up because I do plan to use that information in hiring decisions going forward. I wouldn't surprised if I get downvoted for this, but I intend to ask anyone I interview in the future (not currently in a role that involves hiring) if they voted for Trump in 2020. And a yes will be a disqualifying answer on the basis of poor judgement…

You should probably put that on your job-listing ads!

Also, how do you plan on phrasing the question? And if you're not fully within the power to "disqualify" the candidate, what other steps are you planning on taking to prevent them from being hired by your employer? Have you discussed it yet with your employer's HR department yet?

Post reply on HN