So You've Been Publicly Shamed

I really liked this book. Gave insight into the why and hows. Will be reading more from this author.

I devoured this. Everyone should get a copy standard issue with their internet connection.

disappointed with this book. it started off as an interesting read, but as i read more, it started to fall off. didn't really get anything from it aside from it; just a recount of the cases. the topic of public shaming wasn't thoroughly discussed.

rating could be higher if the author wasn’t so self-absorbed lol

pretty insightful, but felt tangential sometimes

I can see why this was a step forward in 2015, but it didn't interrogate the power dynamics and the differences in consequences for the marginalized and privileged enough

This book expresses my views on public shaming perfectly. I think that people who use Twitter to destroy someone else's life under the guise of social justice are pathetic idiots. In a way I think these losers are seeking self-validation through taking other people down in the process. Nothing would make me happier than waking up one day to a Twitter-free world. We'd all benefit from a little less negativity and gossiping generated by that cesspool. Jon Ronson is brilliant for compiling a wonderful work that sheds light on this 21st century epidemic.

Investigation of what angry people are doing to jokers and liars and fools, generally on the internet, generally on political grounds. We send them death threats, we photoshop them into animal porn, we doxx them, we get them fired. If Ronson's shock and remorse at being part of this could spread, the most distinctive depressing part of modern life would evaporate. There is only one representative of the online shamers here (besides Ronson, who is reformed). You realise quickly that she is not especially hateful: she's just dim – she still thinks shaming is great, even after suffering it horribly and losing her job as a result of her own aggressive humourlessness and insensitivity. In her interview with Ronson, she shows no signs of empathy or learning. It is a tragic example of how addling identity can be. One essential passage - the payload inamongst Ronson's ordinariness and self-deprecation: a human-rights lawyer points out the emotional power of noncriminal acts: “Let me ask you three questions,” he said. “And then you’ll see it my way. Question One: What’s the worst thing that you have ever done to someone? It’s okay. You don’t have to confess it out loud. Question Two: What’s the worst criminal act that has ever been committed against you? Question Three: Which of the two was the most damaging for the victim?” The worst criminal act that has ever been committed against me was burglary. How damaging was it? Hardly damaging at all. I felt theoretically violated at the idea of a stranger wandering through my house. But I got the insurance money. I was mugged one time. I was eighteen. The man who mugged me was an alcoholic. He saw me coming out of a supermarket. “Give me your alcohol,” he yelled. He punched me in the face, grabbed my groceries, and ran away. There wasn’t any alcohol in my bag. I was upset for a few weeks, but it passed. And what was the worst thing I had ever done to someone? It was a terrible thing. It was devastating for them. It wasn’t against the law. Clive’s point was that the criminal justice system is supposed to repair harm, but most prisoners — young, black — have been incarcerated for acts far less emotionally damaging than the injuries we noncriminals perpetrate upon one another all the time — bad husbands, bad wives, ruthless bosses, bullies, bankers. (It has been claimed that this phase of internet social justice is on its way out - that the tactic is now to "call in"- that is, to correct an offender, but also to appeal to the offender's humanity, to try to bridge the gap. We can hope this will gain traction (3 years and counting...). In the meantime a roaring subculture has been founded upon the glorification of bad behaviour and utterly unpersuasive flames.) Ronson's possible solutions to finding yourself shamed: you can 1) refuse to feel bad (or at least refuse to show them you're bleeding), own the thing they're trying to shame you for, like Max Mosley. This only works sometimes. 2) You can hide from the internet, try to SEO the affair down to Google page 3, where no-one goes, like someone it would be counterproductive to name. 3) You can start over, asking for forgiveness like Jonah Lehrer. (There is none; the internet is not interested in you improving your behaviour.) [Theory #3, Values #1]

An alarming look at the power of the crowd, our preoccupation with schadenfreude (even when we think it's casual), and, as always, an eye opening investigation into the power and chaos the Internet gives over to the user when we reach for our computers/phones. This book made me re-think how I respond to the witch-hunts of the modern day (the Zuckerbergs of the world et al when we think about 2018) and challenged me to consider my own actions/involvement in such seasons.

This book shook me, so it's taken a bit of time to get my thoughts together about it. I decided about 2 years ago that I consider shame the worst human emotion, it seems much more hurtful and uncontrollable than worry, fear, even despair to me. Since then I've been repulsed by it, anger instantly boils up when I see shaming happen to even the worst kind of people, so this book had me in near-constant flux between a deep sadness for the world and a fury at many of the people in it, neither particularly productive reactions. Ronson's writing is a delight, he weaves together these story arcs delicately and without any firm judgement. I thought I'd get annoyed that he'd lean too heavily one way or the other but his commentary remains open and curious, deftly so. Honestly though, the primary reason this book captured me so intensely is that a few years ago I became embroiled in (and sat anonymously adjacent to) a public shaming scandal. While I've long made my peace with it and with those involved, I still harbour a great shame (irony!) for my actions and their consequences... reliving similar situations in this book felt like high voltage through my veins, and the alternate reality where Jon Ronson spends a hundred pages writing about the nuances of my incident didn't feel so far afield. And that's why I've put off reading this for so long despite genuinely wanting to, I've been afraid to confront those feelings again, but I'm firmly glad-and a little proud-that I did. This book does a fantastic job of describing what public shaming feels like for the 0.001% of participants that actually have to endure it. I suspect the world (but mostly the social internet) would be a much kinder and more pleasant place if the other 99.999% read this book.

Between 3.5-4 Stars.

3.5/5stars There is nothing I dislike more in the world than people who care more about ideology than they do about people. Definitely an interesting read. Just that it is very old and so much has happened since this book came out (in 2015, I believe?) that I really need to see a part 2 of this asap!

Extremely self-absorbed writing that is in no way compelling. Exhibit A (a real sentence from this real published book): “My joke was funnier than Justine’s joke. It was better worded. Plus, as it didn’t invoke AIDS sufferers, it was less unpleasant. So mine was funnier, better worded, and less unpleasant.” Between this type of narcissistic, repetitive garbage, name-dropping, and a complete lack of any insight, this book was pretty insufferable. In the tradition of radical honesty: I resent that this dude keeps making money off of long-form essays that are about literally nothing except himself.

A mixture of fascinating stories (the car crash kind—horrible, but gripping) and more serious pondering on the usefulness—or not—of shame. I found it really interesting and very easy to read.

Interesting.

I've been looking forward to reading "So You've Been Publicly Shamed" for a while as the toxicity of call-out culture and what to do about it has long been an interest of mine. Unfortunately, this book wasn't a particularly insightful or even a well-researched expose on the concept of public shaming. First of all, this is very pop sociology. I mean, I should have expected that, but as an academic it was grating to see unsubstantiated ideas getting a lot of play. Ronson wanders fairly aimlessly in many directions, trying to learn as much as he can about shaming. However, it doesn't really come together into a cohesive whole, nor do several of his meanderings. Some of them, like the odd chapter at the self-help group about embracing radical honesty, seemed to have no value at all. It's all unfounded opinions and conjecture. Not the most educational of readers :l Second, while I do think that public shaming can often be taken to extremes, Ronson didn't feel very objective in his presentations on the different people who had been shamed. He was very sympathetic towards Justine Sacco, stating several times that she never did anything wrong. I thought her public humiliation was far too extreme, but that doesn't mean she engaged in anything but a harmless joke. In trying to ensure that readers understood his subjects were people, Ronson neglected to really get into why their actions were problematic and hurtful. The focus was so much on the shaming without understanding why public shaming is being used. Without understanding the why, his attempts at trying to figure out how to fix things don't go anywhere. So, what could have been a really interesting and valuable exploration of a modern phenomena ended up being rather banal and pointless. Ronson comes to few conclusions other than to remind readers that those who are shamed are real people, but that could have been done in an article rather than an almost 300 page book.

Read this because it’s a book Harry Styles has been seen reading. Sorry bestie but you have horrible taste in literature!! The beginning was interesting but it just dragged on and on and on. Would not recommend unless you want to hear about the perils and misfortunes being a white male entails. Love you Harry, but wowza.

Very interesting. Crowd psychology has always fascinated me but the dynamics on social media—especially on Twitter—is even more interesting to me because you can hardly spend any time on it at all without seeing shaming happening. Sometimes people are in the right and it’s the only kind of Justice that can be obtained, other times it’s just the algorithm feeding you information it knows will incense you, and the fallout is a disaster without any accountability, ironically. This book does a good job of have a through line narrative and peppering in data and anecdotes and interviews to explore mob psychology online within a narrow framework. It’s hardly comprehensive or definitive, but in so far as getting a few perspectives it is useful and, as mentioned, very interesting (for me).

This book was good, but I feel like it couldn't decide what it wanted to be. It was a history of public shaming, a look at shaming vs. non-shaming in various modern contexts, psychological insight as to how shame affects people, case studies of shamees (and shamers) before and after a public shaming, and even some social commentary/feminist thought sprinkled in. Here is just a snapshot: it manages to fit the Stanford prison experiment, a porn filming, Justine Sacco, and a courtroom familiarization course with mock cross-examination into the same shaming narrative. Think of it as one long rambling editorial, wanting to cover all the ground it could. Anything even vaguely relevant is fair game. I did like it, but the synopsis led me to believe that it was going to be solely case studies, and that's not what I got.

It's incredible how fast things go on the internet. Even what I was reading about, which happened only four year ago, felt so dated. Crazy! So much has developed since. I am thinking mostly of the endless short blogs posts analyzing internet responses to news, or people. For example, I have seen so many posts about why and how people love and hate Greta Thunberg... Bur not so many actually loving OR hating her. It's fascinating and it makes me want to crawl into a cave.

This book was interesting. Technically I gave it a 3.5 rating but I rounded it up to 4 stars. The problem I had with this book was the pacing, I felt like the book could be shorter even though it was already short. It had really interesting topics that had never crossed my mind, for example, "What happens to people after they've been dragged online?"

*I was given an advanced readers copy of this book by Riverhead Books via GoodReads First Reads.* Absolutely one of my all-time favorite non-fiction books. I've never heard of Jon Ronson before reading "So You've Been Publicly Shamed," but now I plan on reading all of his work. I didn't really know what to expect when I entered this giveaway. I was curious to find out how people who had apparently been publicly shamed dealt with their situations. I never thought this book would end up becoming a case study very similar to those I spent hours having to pour over throughout my college career. As a journalist, I was interested in Ronson's investigations - or inquiries rather - into how plagiarists Stephen Glass and Jonah Lehrer responded to their subsequent shunning from journalistic society. How does one go about attaining a new job as a writer after anyone and everyone in the journalism world knows you lied...multiple times. And also, what does it say about us that we spend so much time obsessing over it when we've undoubtedly all lied at some point in our lives, even if it wasn't for "The New Yorker." I didn't expect to feel any remorse or guilt as a result of reading this, but wow, Ronson definitely hit me where it hurt. I was only one of millions who had something to say about Justine Sacco's unfortunate tweet about her visit to Africa in which she hoped she didn't get AIDS, but she's just kidding, because she's white. I remember being a young journalism grad who had studied PR as part of my curriculum and thinking that only an idiot could be a member of a PR team and say something so blatantly stupid. Then I realized she only had 170 followers and a history of having a very dry sense of humor before the tweet went viral. I'm not saying what she did was smart, but I'm also willing to admit I've shared worse on social media before. Luckily, no one cares what I say and none of it ever went public. The moral here is that we as social media users, and really, as people in general, seem to think life is all about us. When we take the time to shame and degrade other people, do we do it because we honestly think we're helping them or the world become a better place with better people. No. We do it because it makes us feel better to think someone will always be dumber, more racist, more sexist, etc. than we are, and as Ronson pointed out, it's pretty messed up. After reading, you'll be sure to think twice before pressing send on that next tweet.

This should be mandatory reading for anyone planning on using social media

I expected much more from Ronson and a book about this subject. Maybe Ronson tends to be better with short form stuff this kinda peels over on itself with the repetition and the circularity.