Is this photo worth getting fired for?

[NJMaverick]

Update she was fired

Quote:Lindsey Stone, a non-profit employee in Massachusetts, posted a photo on her Facebook page she claims she meant as a joke among friends. Little did she know that thousands of people would be offended by her pose in front of the Tomb of the Unknowns, even creating a Facebook page called, "Fire Lindsey Stone."
And sure enough when her employer found out, she was put on unpaid leave pending an internal investigation.
Stone's photo shows her flipping off a sign and appearing to shout at the tomb in Washington, D.C., that asks for "Silence and Respect" at the Arlington National Cemetery. Stone and her co-workers were on a work trip last month when the photo was taken.
After people posted comments critical of Stone, she posted: "Whoa whoa whoa... wait. This is just us, being the douchebags that we are, challenging authority in general. Much like the pic posted the night before, of me smoking right next to a no smoking sign. OBVIOUSLY we meant NO disrespect to people that serve or have served our country."
Stone, who is around 30-years-old, could not be reached for comment.
Over 18,000 people have "liked" the "Fire Lindsey Stone" Facebook page, which was created earlier this week.

http://news.yahoo.com/prank-photo-tomb-u...money.html

[azmouse]

The pic doesn't show up in your post.

To comment on what she did: I think it's incredibly insensitive, stupid, and immature. What does this behavior have to do with "challenging authority"?

I don't think she should be fired over something dumb she did on her own time away from her job.

[SeattleGirl]

(11-23-2012 02:31 PM)azmouse Wrote:  I don't think she should be fired over something dumb she did on her own time away from her job.

Quote:Stone and her co-workers were on a work trip....

She wasn't exactly on her own.

[azmouse]

(11-23-2012 04:00 PM)SeattleGirl Wrote:  

(11-23-2012 02:31 PM)azmouse Wrote:  I don't think she should be fired over something dumb she did on her own time away from her job.

Quote:Stone and her co-workers were on a work trip....

She wasn't exactly on her own.

But it doesn't sound as though the photos were taken as part of any work duty or with someone her boss was doing business with. I meant that while what she did was tasteless and clueless, it had nothing to with her job responsibilities or clients.

[There Is No Spoon]

Weird, my parents were just telling me about this when I saw this post.

Nowhere can anybody do anything dumb without an internet mob at the ready to tar and feather the person.

Drones circling over our neighborhoods - can't wait for the first photos to be secretly released of a drone looking through a bedroom window of some celebrity or politico.

Seriously, this was dumb but I don't think we ought to be ruining a person's life for being over-the-top.

So we're going to ruin people's lives now for being disrespectful? Really?

[azmouse]

In thinking about this story some more, what I don't understand the most is this insane need by people to document every stupid little thing they do on Facebook. That may puzzle me the most. Having never even been to the Facebook site, and obviously having zero desire to have an account there or the need to use whatever the site offers, maybe I'm not in a position to criticize those who find the site to be the best thing since sliced bread. But when I hear stories like this woman's, whose job probably would not have been effected if she didn't feel some incomprehensible desire to parade her stupidity before the world, I have to shake my head in amazement. Why risk so much for so little?

[There Is No Spoon]

(11-23-2012 05:31 PM)azmouse Wrote:  ... I have to shake my head in amazement. Why risk so much for so little?

I only share my account with friends, but a lot of people just upload photos from their phone to their Facebook account without a second thought - it's so damned easy. If I take a photo on my phone, in 2 clicks it will be on my Facebook account. Since many only share with people on their friends list, it might not occur to people that their friends might then share that photo outside one's circle of friends. Others just aren't aware that anybody can see their stuff if they don't use the Facebook privacy controls, which are difficult to understand at best (you may have heard of the issues people have been having with Facebook over the years.) In the article you can see that she had no intention of this being a big deal and noted that her friends know her as this sort of person. So, don't assume she had any idea that this would blown out of proportion like it was.

[Born_A_Truman]

The 30-year-old Massachusetts native, who gained overnight infamy for posting a Facebook photo of herself mock-disrespecting the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier while on a work-related trip to Arlington National Cemetery, was unceremoniously fired by her employer yesterday after it was reportedly inundated with angry emails and calls.

==

If this was done while she was on her job she really had no business doing what she did whether she put it on FB or not.

[Hekate]

I have worked for both a major university and a county, and there are provisions at both places for an employee to be disciplined up to and including dismissal for bringing shame, notoriety, and a general bad name to their employer by their public conduct. That's why cops can be demoted or dismissed for firing weapons at pictures of the President and posting the photos online, right?

This young woman did something you'd expect of an ill-behaved and immature kid of between 13 and 21 years old (i.e. junior high school through part of college). At her age, there really is no excuse. She's over 30, she's employed by a non-profit that whatever they do depends on the public thinking well of them, and she was on the job. And she posted it all over creation.

Her employer has every right to discipline her -- such as leave without pay -- or even fire her. It's up to them to decide how much she managed to hurt them by her behavior, and whether they still want her around.

Hekate

[There Is No Spoon]

(11-24-2012 12:33 AM)Hekate Wrote:  I have worked for both a major university and a county, and there are provisions at both places for an employee to be disciplined up to and including dismissal for bringing shame, notoriety, and a general bad name to their employer by their public conduct. That's why cops can be demoted or dismissed for firing weapons at pictures of the President and posting the photos online, right?

Well, this isn't equivalent to an officer of the law firing a weapon designed to kill at a photo President of the United States - a dangerous precedent that could imply that they are promoting a copy-cat to do same.

Hekate Wrote:... And she posted it all over creation.

"posted a photo on her Facebook page she claims she meant as a joke among friends."

article Wrote:Robert Johnson, army veteran and military and defense editor at news site, Business Insider, wrote an op-ed, saying he felt "compelled to defend her."

"More importantly, if Lindsey Stone wants to rip on the Tomb of the Unknowns, me, my service, or the hundreds of mutilated troops I served with at Walter Reed Medical Center, she should be able to do so without fear of retribution," Johnson wrote. "Freedom like that is what we fought for, and respecting other opinions is part of what the militray tried to teach all of us who served."

Stone and another employee issued an apology on Wednesday, saying, "We sincerely apologize for all the pain we have caused by posting the picture we took in Washington DC on Facebook. While posted on a public forum, the picture was intended only for our own amusement. We never meant any disrespect to any of the people nationwide who have served this country and defended our freedom so valiantly. It was meant merely as a visual pun, intending to depict the exact opposite of what the sign said, and had absolutely nothing to do with the location it was taken or the people represented there."

Hekate Wrote:Her employer has every right to discipline her -- such as leave without pay -- or even fire her. It's up to them to decide how much she managed to hurt them by her behavior, and whether they still want her around.

No question her employer has a right to question her judgement and fire her if it interferes with their operation - at will employees can be fired for any reason at all. But let's not assume employers are angelic - my boss at my former employer actually tried to convince me to go to get a "massage" in Asia while I was there on business (I hope I don't have to explain what this entailed.) I think we can surely admit that what is "unacceptable" is somewhat arbitrary and in the eyes of the beholder. She posted a single photo and said it was a joke among friends, but as we all know, there is no privacy on the internet - her mistake for not understanding how Facebook works and that many people have been electronically lynched over what they've posted on Facebook. Personally, I'm with Robert Johnson and every other soldier I've heard defend freedom of expression on MSNBC over the years (remember Bushco?). This is what they fight for - our ability to be outrageous if we want to be - this isn't Myanmar or Communist China.

[janedrake]

TINS, I just have to say to the last of your remarks that while I understand where you're coming from, it seems to me freedom of speech doesn't grant one freedom from the civilian consequences that may arise from one's free speech. Unlike in China or Myanmar, is no "long arm of the law" reaching out for this woman or "show government trial" set in motion by what she did. Some of her fellow citizens and her employer took offense to what she did, and she is paying the price for her spectacularly bad judgement. Her legal right to do what she did -- that many have fought for, as you mentioned -- remains intact -- she could even go back now and do it again -- but that right doesn't shield her from personal accountability for the choice she made.

[There Is No Spoon]

The company responded to the lynch mob on Facebook even though she had already apologized for said remark. Possibly ruining someones life over a mistake that they admitted and had already apologized for seems excessive to me. My objection stems from the defending of this lynch mob mentality - it seems nationalistic to me - thus my comment.

[janedrake]

I'm really not sure it was a matter of the company being goaded by the Facebook reaction. If she works for a non-profit, they cannot be seen in any way by their donors and grant organizations to approve of her behavior -- but I still took your overall point. Just disagree with it a bit.

[There Is No Spoon]

(11-24-2012 01:09 PM)janedrake Wrote:  I'm really not sure it was a matter of the company being goaded by the Facebook reaction. If she works for a non-profit, they cannot be seen in any way by their donors and grant organizations to approve of her behavior -- but I still took your overall point. Just disagree with it a bit.

You might be right, though an entire Facebook page was created to see that this woman was fired. 18,000 people may have been too much for the company to ignore. Seems just a little too much like an Internet lynching to me.

[Fire1]

(11-24-2012 02:36 PM)There Is No Spoon Wrote:  

(11-24-2012 01:09 PM)janedrake Wrote:  I'm really not sure it was a matter of the company being goaded by the Facebook reaction. If she works for a non-profit, they cannot be seen in any way by their donors and grant organizations to approve of her behavior -- but I still took your overall point. Just disagree with it a bit.

You might be right, though an entire Facebook page was created to see that this woman was fired. 18,000 people may have been too much for the company to ignore. Seems just a little too much like an Internet lynching to me.

Surprised by your response. Cyber pile-ons and lynchings are done everyday on websites, so why not on "Facebook?"

[72ptheriot]

Companies including my wife's check Facebook pages before hiring. This I a common thing today.