Article: Two FHM Writers Fired

Keeper said:
Facebook is not an official news source.

Your company should have no business what you say or do on your private facebook.
If a company can fire you for saying something they didn't like, where do you draw the line? It's a slippery slope.

What's next, getting fired because your boss doesn't like it that you support the conflict in Turkey? That you have "Atheist" ticked under religion? That you liked a pic supporting another election candidate?

It's a private matter, and should have nothing to do with being able to do your job.
You say "it's only writers and public voices" but if you get fired for posting something your boss doesn't like, is that any different, and should there be a difference?
Click to expand...

If a lawyer gets in trouble with the law, his license will be revoked and he will never be able to practice again, even if that happened in his private life. If an accountant steals, same thing. If Miley Cirus poses for playboy in her private time, disney will get rid of her.

When it comes to what we are paid to do, we are ambassadors "on and off the field."

I would have a tooth pulled from a dentist who happens to also be a hacker in his spare time, but I would never get a hacker to design me a website.

All that to say readers don't draw the line between a facebook post and an article. These people are being paid to provide an opinion, and when the public stop respecting their private opinion, they are going to stop respecting their public one too, and that's going to affect the readership.
 
RaptorSA said:
I don't think anyone's saying they didn't screw up a bit from their side.
At most the outrage should've forced some kind of apology from them (and I won't blame them if they didn't even mean it, I'd tell everyone to f-themselves in my head the moment I walked away from that podium)... but FIRING these people is just wrong. Maybe they're a-holes or whatever, but this isn't and never will be cool.
Click to expand...

You realise these guys work in the media, right? And not just that, they work for a Lad's magazine. Maybe they should have considered that making jokes about rape on a pbulic space on a social network is inappropriate in their position.

FHM can't afford the hit to their brand by keeping on morons like these. If I'm a well-renown pilot for SAA and I make jokes about flying planes into buildings on my public Facebook page, which then leads to a media outroar, do you think SAA is going to keep employing me?
 
ave said:
If a lawyer gets in trouble with the law, his license will be revoked and he will never be able to practice again, even if that happened in his private life. If an accountant steals, same thing. If Miley Cirus poses for playboy in her private time, disney will get rid of her.

When it comes to what we are paid to do, we are ambassadors "on and off the field."

I would have a tooth pulled from a dentist who happens to also be a hacker in his spare time, but I would never get a hacker to design me a website.

All that to say readers don't draw the line between a facebook post and an article. These people are being paid to provide an opinion, and when the public stop respecting their private opinion, they are going to stop respecting their public one too, and that's going to affect the readership.
Click to expand...

You are talking about a Lawer who breaks the law, an accountant that steals and breaks the law, or a hacker that breaks the law
Making a joke is not against the law.

I agree with your miley cyrus example, for sure, but she is a huge star with millions of followers - these guys were nobodies.
A huge Disney star posing naked for a widely read magazine like playboy, is a hugely different thing, than a small time writer making a single bad joke on his private facebook read by a few followers/friends.

You're comparing apples with oranges.
 
Keeper said:
Says who? the experts at FHM?
I don't remember them mentioning "FHM" when they made the comments? Yes they work at FHM but I didn't see them using their employer's name.

They broke down "the trust"? oh no, how exactly did they do that?
Click to expand...

When you work in the media, you represent your employers in anything you do during the day. This is true of most companies, but especially so in the media spheres. If you don't like this, don't work in the media.

You don't stop representing your company when you walk out of those office doors at the end of the day.
 
ave said:
If a lawyer gets in trouble with the law, his license will be revoked and he will never be able to practice again, even if that happened in his private life. If an accountant steals, same thing. If Miley Cirus poses for playboy in her private time, disney will get rid of her.
Click to expand...
The examples of lawyers and accountants are not comparable. Miley Cyrus would have to have a contract specifying such a restriction otherwise Disney would end up paying her off to cancel her contract. Have they terminated her contract because of her appearance in some of her music videos?

When it comes to what we are paid to do, we are ambassadors "on and off the field."
Click to expand...
This is fairly common bull**** that some employers like to pull. If they had their way they'd monitor their employees at all times and dictate their lifestyle. It's complete nonsense.

but I would never get a hacker to design me a website.
Click to expand...
And yet they're exactly the sort of people that get contracted as security experts. Because they are.
 
noxibox said:
This is fairly common bull**** that some employers like to pull. If they had their way they'd monitor their employees at all times and dictate their lifestyle. It's complete nonsense.
Click to expand...

Bull****. Employers are forced into this by the public. If this whole thing didn't blow up the way it did, these two buffoons would likely have retained their jobs. Instead, this made headlines even on international news sites, so FHM was forced into action.

You can't sit back and do nothing if the public is in an uproar. Anybody with any amount of sense would be able to see why, from a public relations standpoint, this is corporate suicide.
 
Also, is anyone really going to try and convince us that a guy who has 800 friends on Facebook posts something privately when he makes a post?
 
A Bus Driver got fired for posting this on his facebook page:
“A middle schooler got on my bus this evening and said mr johnny im hungry. I said why are you hungry buddy? Didn’t you eat lunch ? He said no sir I didn’t have any money on my account. I said they would let you charge it? No sir.
Huh! What! This child is already on reduced lunch and we can’t let him eat. Are you kidding me? I’m certian there was leftover food thrown away today. But kids were turned away because they didn’t have .40 on there account .
As a tax payer, I would much rather feed a child than throw it away. I would rather feed a child than to give food stamps to a crack head.”
Click to expand...

http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/06/06/georgia-bus-driver-fired-for-facebook-post/
 
...and? In this case the employer fired him because he was directly embarrassing his employers. Sacking him was unjustified because he was speaking out against an injustice committed by his employers.

How is that remotely the same as working for a men's magazine and making jokes condoning rape?
 
A teacher was fired for posting a picture of her holding a glass of wine and a beer.

sLeZQa4.jpg


Her lawyer, Richard Storrs, was quoted as saying: “It would be like I went to a restaurant and I saw my daughter's teacher sitting there with her husband having a glass of some kind of liquid.

“You know, is that frowned upon by the school board? Is that illegal? Is that improper? Of course not. It's the same situation in this case.”
Click to expand...

http://www.iol.co.za/news/world/teacher-fired-over-facebook-pic-1.1023313#.UevN0m21s1A
 
Keeper, are you now going to waste our time by posting every 'x got fired over y on Facebook' news article you can find? Because if so, what are you hoping to achieve?

Did any of us say we agree with it every time someone is fired for something they did on Facebook? It's about context. If you can't understand that, then it's clear that you've been wasting time of everyone who's tried having a discussion with you.

CONTEXT. There's a pretty big fukking difference between condoning rape and holding a glass of wine in a photo.
 
Keeper is always looking for a cause. If it's not bacon, it's Facebook related dismissals.
 
He wasn't condoning rape, it was a JOKE. Do any of you know what a joke is?

Do you think I'm condoning murder if I say "people who twerk should be shot"
 
How do we know it was a joke? We can assume it was a joke just as much as we can assume it wasn't. How do we really know that he doesn't want white twerkers to be raped?

I could say that all FHM readers should be castrated and wouldn't necessarily be joking although people would assume I am.
 
Once again, context.

If I, as a junior IT employee make a joke in a public space about flying planes into buildings, would the fallout be the same as when I, as a renowned pilot for SAA, make a joke in a public space about flying planes into buildings.

Why do you find this so hard to grasp? It's not exactly rocket science.
 
Because flying planes into buildings can be seen as a real threat of terrorism, especially if your a pilot.

Proposing correctional rape or sterilize for people who twerk on the other hand, is not.
If he was a lawmaker, you would have a case.
 
Zewp said:
Here's a slightly altered version of one of your earlier posts.
Click to expand...

Again,

Planes flying into buildings IS A REAL THING. raping/sterlizing people who dance a certain way, is not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X