New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

#shameonshamers: Virtual Shaming Breaks Real Lives

When online shamers cast vicious attacks and threats based on incomplete or false facts, the damage to a person’s reputation is long-lasting, and sometimes irreparable

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This month, my Scientific American column addressed the growing frequency and intensity of online shamings—massive outpourings of threats and vicious hate showered on people whose judgment lapses make them internet targets. Often the victims pay for their mistakes in horrific, life-shattering ways, far out of proportion for the crimes—losing their jobs, homes, marriages and any shred of self-worth.

Equally often, they pay this steep price because of missing context—because the public misunderstood the original story and, too impatient for nuance and complexity, man the torpedoes without fully grasping the situation.

The story of Jennifer Connell is a classic example. In 2011 she attended her nephew Sean’s eighth birthday party at his home in Connecticut. As she arrived, Sean ran up to her and gave her a jumping hug—and knocked her over, breaking her wrist.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Sean’s family’s homeowners insurance company refused to pay for the three surgeries required to fix it—and in Connecticut, you can’t name an insurance company as a defendant. So her lawyer recommended a roundabout way of getting reimbursed: Sue the nephew. If the jury went her way, hisfamily’s homeowner’s insurance would haveto pay the $127,000 medical bill.

Clearly, those legal technicalities were too much for the online mobs (or even the mainstream media) to process. They descended in a fury, calling her “the auntie-Christ.”

“He should have broken her neck!” went a typical tweet. “She is disgusting and vile. I hope someone breaks her other wrist…and maybe her legs as well.” “Die, Jennifer Connell, Die.” “What a horrible b___. #auntfromhell.” “Since it’s illegal to flog her, we can all do our best to shame her to death.”

And so on.

Connell lost her suit. Worse, like many shaming victims, she began having trouble getting work (she’s a consultant). One potential employer after another Googled her, saw that she had a toxic backstory, and rescinded their job offers or canceled her interviews.

She has now changed her hair color and taken other steps to “refresh” her identity, as she puts it.

At no point was there any ill will between her and Sean’s family. (“I felt like everybody was saying stuff that they didn’t know,” Sean, now 12, told the Today show. “I love her, and she loves me.”)

And at no point was the intention to get money from Sean or his familyonly from their homeowners’ insurance. The public got the story wrong, and destroyed a woman’s life in the process.

Connell’s story is typical—and instructive. In example after example, online lynch mobs go after someone without knowing the whole story. And life after life is broken.

David Pogue is the anchor columnist for Yahoo Tech and host of several NOVA miniseries on PBS.

More by David Pogue
Scientific American Magazine Vol 315 Issue 4This article was published with the title “#shameonshamers: Virtual Shaming Breaks Real Lives” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 315 No. 4 ()
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican102016-52Xsz4aQqw2BEICcFsWFon

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe