Online shaming

Online shaming is a form of public shaming in which targets are publicly humiliated on the internet, via social media platforms (e.g. Twitter or Facebook), or more localized media (e.g. email groups). As online shaming frequently involves exposing private information on the Internet, the ethics of public humiliation has been a source of debate over Internet privacy and media ethics. Online shaming takes many forms, including call-outs, cancellation (cancel culture), doxing, negative reviews, and revenge porn.

Online shaming is a form of public shaming in which internet users are harassed, mocked, or bullied by other internet users online. This shaming may involve commenting directly to or about the shamed; the sharing of private messages; or the posting of private photos. Those being shamed are often accused of committing a social transgression, and other internet users then use public exposure to shame the offender.

People have been shamed online for a variety of reasons, usually consisting of some form of social transgression such as posting offensive comments, posting offensive images or memes, online gossip, or lying. Those who are shamed online have not necessarily committed any social transgression, however. Online shaming may be used to get revenge (for example, in the form of revenge pornography), stalk, blackmail, or to threaten other internet users.

Privacy violation is a major issue in online shaming. Those being shamed may be denied the right to privacy and be subject to defamation. David Furlow, chairman of the Media, Privacy and Defamation Committee of the American Bar Association, has identified the potential privacy concerns raised by websites facilitating the distribution of information that is not part of the public record (documents filed with a government agency) and has said that such websites "just [give] a forum to people whose statements may not reflect truth."

There are different philosophical perspectives on the morality of online public shaming. On the one hand, there is the view that public shaming imposes punishments that are not proportional to the offenses or alleged offenses. Martha Nussbaum similarly says that public shaming represents the "justice of the mob", but this alleged justice is not "deliberative, impartial or neutral". On the other hand, there are those who defend the value of public shaming as constructive, if done right; people who defend this view maintain that society often shames people counter-productively but that it can be tweaked or altered in order to be a valuable tool for people's improvement. For instance, holding people accountable for things that they have done wrong can be a powerful way of correcting bad behavior, but it has to be paired with a belief in the possibility of redemption. Some proponents of this approach agree with Plato’s view that shame can lead to moral improvements. Everyone in this debate agrees that it is important to avoid what Nussbaum calls a "spoiled identity": to have a spoiled identity is to have the public image of someone who is irredeemable and unwelcome in a community.

Online shaming has become more visible with the rise of social media platforms, where users can quickly share information and express criticism toward individuals or organizations. Platforms such as X (social media platform) allow posts highlighting controversial behavior to spread quickly through reposts, hashtags, and comment threads, enabling large numbers of users to participate in public discussions. Because social media content can be widely circulated and archived through screenshots or reposts, incidents of online shaming may remain visible long after the original event occurred. In some cases, widespread criticism on social media has led to professional or social consequences for the individuals involved, particularly when employers, institutions, or news organizations become aware of the controversy. Researchers studying digital communication have noted that the speed and scale of online networks can amplify these events, turning relatively small incidents into widely discussed public controversies.

Cancel culture or call-out culture describes a form of ostracism in which someone or something is thrust out of social or professional circles, either online on social media, in the real world, or both. They are said to be "canceled". Lisa Nakamura, professor of media studies at the University of Michigan, has defined cancelling as simply a "cultural boycott" in which the act of depriving someone of attention deprives them of their livelihood.

The notion of cancel culture is a variant of the term "call-out culture", and constitutes a form of boycott involving an individual (usually a celebrity) who is deemed to have acted or spoken in a questionable or controversial manner.