Sports Media discussion

[Jack Parkman]

This is a candyland answer for those who want to live in anarchy with no consequences. The first thing you teach a child is that their actions have consequences. The attempt to try to link the private sector to government here is almost as bad.

Where did I say that there are no consequences for one's actions? Of course I know that actions have consequences, whether positive or negative. You don't mess with people's livelihood over petty s*** like political disagreement. Laws are there for a reason. If you're not breaking laws, there is zero reason for one to be fired for having personal beliefs. If businesses can't separate a person's personal and professional life, and you think it is okay to not have them be two completely separate entities, then I can't help you. What my employees do in their free time is none of my business.

[Jack Parkman]

A bunch of the torch carrying guys in the Charlottesville rally got fired afterwards because they weren't smart enough to wear white hoods while doing it.

Nazis are unacceptable to 99.99% of people. That is a different case all together. Nazism has no place in a just society.

Edited December 20, 2017 by Jack Parkman

[Kyyle23]

I have a problem with this statement. You only represent your company when you are performing your job, at work or a business meeting or whatever. If companies think that every aspect of a person that they hire "represents their values" when not on the job then that is an invasion of privacy and opens up a whole new can of worms. Your job is your means of providing yourself income. It is not your entire existence. The fact that companies may believe this is, again mind control. When you're in your suit handing out your business card, yeah, you're representing your company. When you're at home shooting the s*** with your buddies, you're not representing anyone but yourself.

 

Going online and talking politics isn’t shooting s*** with your buddies. If someone I worked with went home and was a white supremacist on his own time and talked about ethnic cleansing on twitter I wouldn’t be like “OMG THE USA IS FASCIST BECAUSE THAT GUY GOT FIRED AFTER TALKING ABOUT REMOVING ALL PEOPLE OF COLOR FROM THE UNITED STATES”.

 

 

[Kyyle23]

Nazis are unacceptable to 999/1000 people, different case all together. Nazism has no place in a just society.

 

It’s not different at all, it just doesn’t fit your narrative

[Jack Parkman]

Going online and talking politics isn’t shooting s*** with your buddies. If someone I worked with went home and was a white supremacist on his own time and talked about ethnic cleansing on twitter I wouldn’t be like “OMG THE USA IS FASCIST BECAUSE THAT GUY GOT FIRED AFTER TALKING ABOUT REMOVING ALL PEOPLE OF COLOR FROM THE UNITED STATES”.

Preaching hate =/= mainstream politics. I already said that preaching hate is the lone exception that I thought it was ok to fire someone for their beliefs. That isn't ok under any circumstances. There are certain lines you don't cross, and that is one of them.

[Chicago White Sox]

Where did I say that there are no consequences for one's actions? Of course I know that actions have consequences, whether positive or negative. You don't mess with people's livelihood over petty s*** like political disagreement. Laws are there for a reason. If you're not breaking laws, there is zero reason for one to be fired for having personal beliefs. If businesses can't separate a person's personal and professional life, and you think it is okay to not have them be two completely separate entities, then I can't help you. What my employees do in their free time is none of my business.

So you’d be ok with your employees posting hateful rhetoric on social media?

[Jack Parkman]

So you’d be ok with your employees posting hateful rhetoric on social media?

Lone exception to the rule, see post above yours. I wouldn't really care about anything else. That is the one line that one shouldn't cross, other than that, have at it.

Edited December 20, 2017 by Jack Parkman

[ptatc]

I have a problem with this statement. You only represent your company when you are performing your job, at work or a business meeting or whatever. If companies think that every aspect of a person that they hire "represents their values" when not on the job then that is an invasion of privacy and opens up a whole new can of worms. Your job is your means of providing yourself income. It is not your entire existence. The fact that companies may believe this is, again mind control. When you're in your suit handing out your business card, yeah, you're representing your company. When you're at home shooting the s*** with your buddies, you're not representing anyone but yourself.

This is where you are wrong. Anytime you do anything public you are representing everything about you, including work and family. The first thing all employers, for me it's applicants to school, do is look at facebook twitter and all forms of public representation to see if you will represent well. It's not an invasion of privacy if you put it out for the public to see. If you are at home and shooting the s*** with your buddies you're good. But as soon as you make it public, you're not.

 

You can't honestly expect to blast and criticize your employers and expect their to be no consequences.

[Jack Parkman]

This is inherently wrong. You should be able to voice your private political views, when not at work, without being fearful that you could lose your job. This is thought control to the nth degree. If organizations are so incredibly "image concious" that speaking publicly( whether on social media or calling into a political show on the radio) about politics, when not at work, is such a workplace "no-no" that you can lose your job there is something really really wrong with US corporate culture in general. The ramifications are incredible. The only thing that should matter is whether or not you are doing your job, not political ideology when off the job. I mean, this is your employer saying "shut up and do what you're told, otherwise starve to death" The only thing that should matter is whether or not you do your job. Obviously, extremely hateful ideology is an exception,(think Nazis) but just voicing reasonable political viewpoints on the web and losing your job is a slippery slope that leads to bad places, somewhere that we don't want to go in this country.

My first post in the thread. I already spoke about my feelings.

[ptatc]

Where did I say that there are no consequences for one's actions? Of course I know that actions have consequences, whether positive or negative. You don't mess with people's livelihood over petty s*** like political disagreement. Laws are there for a reason. If you're not breaking laws, there is zero reason for one to be fired for having personal beliefs. If businesses can't separate a person's personal and professional life, and you think it is okay to not have them be two completely separate entities, then I can't help you. What my employees do in their free time is none of my business.

I think it's the other way around. If you can't see that what you do in a public manner doesn't reflect on your company or business, we can't help you.

 

Any public critique of your company superiors will have consequences. It's not just politics, it's a black eye to the company that it's own employees don't like the company. That isn't good for business and will get you in trouble.

 

[Jack Parkman]

This is where you are wrong. Anytime you do anything public you are representing everything about you, including work and family. The first thing all employers, for me it's applicants to school, do is look at facebook twitter and all forms of public representation to see if you will represent well. It's not an invasion of privacy if you put it out for the public to see. If you are at home and shooting the s*** with your buddies you're good. But as soon as you make it public, you're not.

 

You can't honestly expect to blast and criticize your employers and expect their to be no consequences.

Social media is a form of communication now, where most people converse and discuss ideas. I try to keep my facebook account private, but I have no idea how my boss got into it. I don't post stuff on twitter other than what I want my public image to be. There have to be public/private groups. I know that the world works this way but I think it is bulls***. My facebook is between me and my friends, or at least I try to keep it that way with privacy settings. People don't discuss things in person as much anymore, but they converse every day online. People shouldn't have to go to anonymity among their friends to discuss politics online.

 

[Chicago White Sox]

Jack, what exactly did you do on social media that caused you to get fired? Did you rip your company or bosses at all?

[Jack Parkman]

Jack, what exactly did you do on social media that caused you to get fired? Did you rip your company or bosses at all?

No. I made a post, that I thought was among my friends only, that grilled corporations for not paying living wages to their employees, elaborating that government assistance is paying for corporate profits off the taxpayers backs, and that whatever welfare was worth in a state was the minimum amount needed to survive due to cost of living in that state, so therefore the state minimum wage should be slightly more that whatever government assistance is worth. I named no names of individuals and businesses, just a general sweeping statement. I wasn't even criticizing my boss, I was criticizing retail chains/big banks but didn't clarify.

Edited December 21, 2017 by Jack Parkman

[ptatc]

Social media is a form of communication now, where most people converse and discuss ideas. I try to keep my facebook account private, but I have no idea how my boss got into it. I don't post stuff on twitter other than what I want my public image to be. There have to be public/private groups. I know that the world works this way but I think it is bulls***. My facebook is between me and my friends, or at least I try to keep it that way with privacy settings. People don't discuss things in person as much anymore, but they converse every day online. People shouldn't have to go to anonymity among their friends to discuss politics online.

Sorry, that's just the way it is. If it gets back to your employers you will get in trouble. In the old days when people actually talked, someone just leaked it out to the company and it was a rumor. Your facebook is not just between you and your friends (unless one of them sent it to your company). Obviously, someone else was able to see it. Now, they can provide proof you said it because it's in writing. If you don't want it to get back to the boss, don't write it. You can discuss politics but don't berate your boss or your company. I don't you would have gotten fired if it was a general political comment. Bringing in the employer was the issue.

[Jack Parkman]

Sorry, that's just the way it is. If it gets back to your employers you will get in trouble. In the old days when people actually talked, someone just leaked it out to the company and it was a rumor. Your facebook is not just between you and your friends (unless one of them sent it to your company). Obviously, someone else was able to see it. Now, they can provide proof you said it because it's in writing. If you don't want it to get back to the boss, don't write it. You can discuss politics but don't berate your boss or your company. I don't you would have gotten fired if it was a general political comment. Bringing in the employer was the issue.

What actually happened to me was an indirect firing; My boss somehow found out my political views and started harassing me about them, I spoke up and said: "Can we just leave politics out of this, it has zero to do with my ability to do a job for you." My boss then chewed me out and I was subsequently dismissed.

Edited December 21, 2017 by Jack Parkman

[ptatc]

What actually happened to me was an indirect firing; My boss somehow found out my political views and started harassing me about them, I spoke up and said: "Can we just leave politics out of this, it has zero to do with my ability to do a job for you." My boss then chewed me out and I was subsequently dismissed.

I can't imagine talking to my boss like that. I did get "my contract not renewed" by an MLB team when I drunkenly teased a superior (in position only) at a company picnic.

[Chicago White Sox]

What actually happened to me was an indirect firing; My boss somehow found out my political views and started harassing me about them, I spoke up and said: "Can we just leave politics out of this, it has zero to do with my ability to do a job for you." My boss then chewed me out and I was subsequently dismissed.

How was your boss harassing you exactly?

[Kyyle23]

This “firing by way of social media post” story is kinda falling apart

[southsider2k5]

Where did I say that there are no consequences for one's actions? Of course I know that actions have consequences, whether positive or negative. You don't mess with people's livelihood over petty s*** like political disagreement. Laws are there for a reason. If you're not breaking laws, there is zero reason for one to be fired for having personal beliefs. If businesses can't separate a person's personal and professional life, and you think it is okay to not have them be two completely separate entities, then I can't help you. What my employees do in their free time is none of my business.

 

 

Nazis are unacceptable to 99.99% of people. That is a different case all together. Nazism has no place in a just society.

 

Way to contradict yourself. Again.

[Jack Parkman]

Way to contradict yourself. Again.

I never contradicted myself. Mainstream politics =/=Hate Speech. If you don't understand that I can't help you. I believe they are two separate things, hate speech is unacceptable under every circumstance; in that aspect I don't believe I am contradicting myself.

[Jack Parkman]

How was your boss harassing you exactly?

He was purposely antagonizing me by making disparaging comments about politicians he thought I liked, and views that I may have agreed with. He was trying to bait me. I didn't think I did anything wrong by asking if he could leave politics out of it and let me do my job. I was getting these snide comments during almost every interaction with the guy.

Edited December 21, 2017 by Jack Parkman

[southsider2k5]

I never contradicted myself. Mainstream politics =/=Hate Speech. If you don't understand that I can't help you. I believe they are two separate things, hate speech is unacceptable under every circumstance; in that aspect I don't believe I am contradicting myself.

 

You absolutely did. You first said never, then you started making exceptions. So you are OK with exceptions but only if you deem them OK. That would be contradictory.

 

The reality is that you 100% don't under the idea behind freedom of speech. There is no where in our constitution that protects you from the consequences of your own actions. No one else is obligated to suffer because of your beliefs. What you are asking for is the right to be an asshole, and then everyone else has to accept the consequences of your assholery. That isn't how this works. I don't have to suffer loss because of your recklessness and stupidity on social media, and neither does anyone else. It doesn't stop your right to be stupid, only the rights of others to not have to suffer because of it.

 

Your leap from the private sector to the public sector is a whole other ball of wrong.

[Jack Parkman]

I can't imagine talking to my boss like that. I did get "my contract not renewed" by an MLB team when I drunkenly teased a superior (in position only) at a company picnic.

OMFG, if a boss is such a flake that they can't handle that without wielding their authority, then they have insecurity problems, need to see a shrink and probably shouldn't be in management. Is there no place for common sense and free exchange of ideas in the workplace? If that is how workplace culture is I can't imagine fitting in with anyone. No wonder I haven't been able to hold a job other than the specialized one I have. If that is how superiors expect you to treat them(like their s*** doesn't stink) then I don't know if I'll ever fit in.

[southsider2k5]

OMFG, if a boss is such a flake that they can't handle that without wielding their authority, then they have insecurity problems, need to see a shrink and probably shouldn't be in management. Is there no place for common sense and free exchange of ideas in the workplace? If that is how workplace culture is I can't imagine fitting in with anyone. No wonder I haven't been able to hold a job other than the specialized one I have. If that is how superiors expect you to treat them(like their s*** doesn't stink) then I don't know if I'll ever fit in.

 

Yet you couldn't handle him telling you what he thought... I mean if you are free to have your opinions, why isn't he free to have opinions about your opinions? Your logic is so faulty.

[Jack Parkman]

You absolutely did. You first said never, then you started making exceptions. So you are OK with exceptions but only if you deem them OK. That would be contradictory.

 

The reality is that you 100% don't under the idea behind freedom of speech. There is no where in our constitution that protects you from the consequences of your own actions. No one else is obligated to suffer because of your beliefs. What you are asking for is the right to be an asshole, and then everyone else has to accept the consequences of your assholery. That isn't how this works. I don't have to suffer loss because of your recklessness and stupidity on social media, and neither does anyone else. It doesn't stop your right to be stupid, only the rights of others to not have to suffer because of it.

Your leap from the private sector to the public sector is a whole other ball of wrong.

I completely disagree with that. It absolutely does move from the private to the public sector, because the private sector can indirectly control political discourse and opinion by socioeconomic ostracism. The private sector can make it nearly impossible to support oneself and provide basic needs for one's family based on political views/affiliation. If you may starve to death if you don't comply with what "the machine" wants you to believe, then you are more likely to adopt those beliefs. Mind control by socioeconomic ostracism. If people aren't allowed to exchange ideas because people could lose their job, then it becomes a form of censorship.

 

I disagree with the bolded. I have to deal with the consequences of "stupid people" voting all of the time, and you do too. You and I probably have different ideas on who the "stupid people" are, and that is my point. People suffer because of other people's stupidity at the ballot box. But if you start to weed out "stupid people" voting only the people in power will vote so I hope you get where I'm going with this.

 

This is no different than the above.

Edited December 21, 2017 by Jack Parkman