Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that it's entitled behavior. But should her BOOK be cancelled as a result?

Presses are private entities. They can do what they want.

Sure, they can do what they want. But this is about what they should do, not what they can do. Why should they decide to take on the role of thought police?

I get cancelling her book if she started shrieking racial epithets on twitter. But for this?

Anonymous wrote:
No, I do not think anyone should eat on the underground public transport in a city full of rats.

This author was not in the wrong in calling an employee out.

I do not know the reason for the publication cancellation, but if the tweet is really the reason, then it's deplorable. And really weird.

DC is OVERRUN with rats. They should ban eating in the streets, because the RATS are FAT like CATS.

She was wearing her full metro uniform.

Anonymous wrote:I agree that it's entitled behavior. But should her BOOK be cancelled as a result?

Presses are private entities. They can do what they want.

This is political correctness run amok. All the woman did is tweet a picture of an employee flouting Metro's own rules. And now the employee is the victim? Ridiculous.

I thought the metro stopped enforcing its no-eating policy after the student was arrested for eating French fries on the metro platform years ago. You aren't supposed to eat on the metro but the metro police won't arrest you for it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, let's stipulate that her tweet (for which she has apologized) was unnecessary and thoughtless. Let's even go further and say that her tweet reeked of racial and class entitlement.

Stipulate all that. But: Why has her book contract been cancelled?

In exactly what way is social justice enhanced by preventing her novel from being published?

That's the kind of sick sh*t that happens in totalitarian societies. Twitter mobs go after you; your friends and colleagues instantly desert you and condemn you; you become a non-person.

This does not advance racial justice. It just adds another injustice on top of the first.

I dispute the bolded. People go on social media all the time to complain about service. I have no issue with her tweet.

Except the woman wasn't in service. She was a fellow rider, probably heading to her early morning shift.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
No, I do not think anyone should eat on the underground public transport in a city full of rats.

This author was not in the wrong in calling an employee out.

I do not know the reason for the publication cancellation, but if the tweet is really the reason, then it's deplorable. And really weird.

The author is in the wrong because she was a COMMUNICATIONS PROFESSIONAL. How can that be your job and you don't know when to keep your mouth shut?

Just like Justine Sacco and her AIDs tweet.



https://www.vox.com/2018/1/19/16911074/justine-sacco-iac-match-group-return-tweet

The woman saw a Metro employee eating and tweeted about it. What leap of logic leads you to believe it's analogous to Sacco's behavior?

Hmm let's see - the heads of corporate communications for two international aid organizations both are found to share the common characteristic of derogatory actions or opinions about black people. What could the connection be Sherlock?

It's derogatory to tweet that a Metro employee is eating on Metro, which was the truth? You seem confused.

Anonymous wrote:
No, I do not think anyone should eat on the underground public transport in a city full of rats.

This author was not in the wrong in calling an employee out.

I do not know the reason for the publication cancellation, but if the tweet is really the reason, then it's deplorable. And really weird.

This. It's unfortunate for her that she posted a photo on social media because now it can never be about a Metro employee breaking a Metro rule that passengers must follow. It can now only be talked about re: the employee's race.

I've lived in several big cities and the reason DC's Metro is nowhere near as disgusting, smelly and rat-ridden as other subway systems is the no-eating policy. Metro workers who violate it in front of passengers give passengers the idea that it's fine to flout the rules. But that's no longer what this is all about, and that's a pity.

Social media sucks. If the woman had just directly emailed Metro a complaint with the details of time, train line, etc., her book deal would not be in jeopardy. But posting on social media for all the world to see instantly, with a photo, will be her ruin, unfairly. She saw a Metro worker and the rest of the world insists she only saw a black woman and any criticism automatically must be about race, not the uniform. Of course she can't defend herself or say it's still wrong for a Metro worker of any color to break the rules--if she does she'll only be accused of denying her supposed racism. If Metro disciplines this worker that will be deemed racism, I'm sure.

Anonymous wrote:Again, let's stipulate that her tweet (for which she has apologized) was unnecessary and thoughtless. Let's even go further and say that her tweet reeked of racial and class entitlement.

Stipulate all that. But: Why has her book contract been cancelled?

In exactly what way is social justice enhanced by preventing her novel from being published?

That's the kind of sick sh*t that happens in totalitarian societies. Twitter mobs go after you; your friends and colleagues instantly desert you and condemn you; you become a non-person.

This does not advance racial justice. It just adds another injustice on top of the first.

I dispute the bolded. People go on social media all the time to complain about service. I have no issue with her tweet.

I don’t know why this woman decided to be the metro food enforcer today, but...

1) eating food is expressly forbidden on metro
2) a metro employee who knew the rule was eating a plate of food with a fork (so not a nutrigrain) on the metro while in uniform.

I don’t understand how this is a racist situation. The metro employee was absolutely breaking a known rule that metro enforces on riders.

Again, let's stipulate that her tweet (for which she has apologized) was unnecessary and thoughtless. Let's even go further and say that her tweet reeked of racial and class entitlement.

Stipulate all that. But: Why has her book contract been cancelled?

In exactly what way is social justice enhanced by preventing her novel from being published?

That's the kind of sick sh*t that happens in totalitarian societies. Twitter mobs go after you; your friends and colleagues instantly desert you and condemn you; you become a non-person.

This does not advance racial justice. It just adds another injustice on top of the first.

Just to clarify:

If the employee wasn't black, would this still be an issue for the publisher?

The answer to this question will tell you what it's really about.

I do not think this woman should have tweeted the employee’s picture. I also think the employee should not have been eating on the train. Everyone’s wrong.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
No, I do not think anyone should eat on the underground public transport in a city full of rats.

This author was not in the wrong in calling an employee out.

I do not know the reason for the publication cancellation, but if the tweet is really the reason, then it's deplorable. And really weird.

The author is in the wrong because she was a COMMUNICATIONS PROFESSIONAL. How can that be your job and you don't know when to keep your mouth shut?

Just like Justine Sacco and her AIDs tweet.



https://www.vox.com/2018/1/19/16911074/justine-sacco-iac-match-group-return-tweet

The woman saw a Metro employee eating and tweeted about it. What leap of logic leads you to believe it's analogous to Sacco's behavior?

Hmm let's see - the heads of corporate communications for two international aid organizations both are found to share the common characteristic of derogatory actions or opinions about black people. What could the connection be Sherlock?