As you are likely aware, there's little I hate more than a dumb social media mob. So, needless to say, I was pretty annoyed last night when Jennifer Kim, a violinist with the Washington National Opera, was attacked by idiots on social media for stating that she was annoyed Amtrak wouldn't let her back on the train to get her violin.
Note: This is a woman who has just been in a deadly train derailment and was forced to leave behind an instrument that likely cost her thousands of dollars and with which she earns her living. How did the idiots on Twitter treat this victim?
@dcopera Classy @vinoviolin!!! Fire her! She cares more about an instrument than human life!!! pic.twitter.com/6nSTCrSIOk
— Dierks (@WhatADierk) May 13, 2015
Sorry @realDonaldTrump ,but @vinoviolin is the worst human being on Twitter tonight pic.twitter.com/6EsEp5yIXz
— Michael K™ (@moleloco) May 13, 2015
@kaimac @Thomas_Howden @aintnoseats08 @vinoviolin @mattdpearce @AmtrakNEC @Amtrak or she's fine and being a spoiled brat. — Bryan (@BryneSch) May 13, 2015
Yes, the woman who was just in the deadly train derailment is probably just a spoiled brat. You're the real hero, Twitter Man!
On the one hand, I wish everyone who angrily tweeted at Jennifer Kim would jump into a volcano. On the other, though, I was pleasantly surprised to see almost as many people defending her as lambasting her. I wonder if we've finally reached a tipping point on the social media outrage mob front: it may now be more valuable to signal your disapproval of a Two Minutes Hate than to signal that you belong to the in-group partaking in it. If we are nearing that point, it's a real boon for society.
Another annoying thing on Twitter last night was the way news outlets were harassing people in the crash on social media in order to get their permission to use photos and tweets in their news reports. New Washington Post style editor* Gabriel Malor kind of sums up my thoughts here:
The flood of reporters/producers asking for permission has happened to me before. Should all be punched in the face. pic.twitter.com/Q8Dx7cAwEP — Gabriel Malor (@gabrielmalor) May 13, 2015
As a journalist, I obviously empathize with reporters trying to do a tough job in trying circumstances. As a person with common sense, however, I have to wonder what on Earth these folks are doing. I realize that it's a tricky grey area, legally. But publicly disseminated tweets are embeddable in stories, are they not? Yes, I agree with the courts that wire services shouldn't be taking photos from photojournalists on Twitter and distributing them for profit without compensating the photojournalist. However, when you're taking about regular folks putting hastily taken shots on their feeds in a breaking news situation, the calculus shifts.
If you can embed a tweet with a photo in a story at CNN.com (or wherever) without first gaining permission from the tweeter—and you can do this, websites do it literally every day—then I'm not sure you need permission to run the photo on air. And if it's not necessary, should producers and writers really be harassing people who literally just endured a life-ending train derailment to get their okay?
I guess we need more guidance from the courts on the issue. That being said, I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that publicly available tweets can be used by the media unless the tweeter in question asks the material not be used. I do think it's unreasonable to flood the mentions column of a crash victim with annoying tweets, however. Don't do that, media people.
*Congrats Gabe!