By: Eric Winsberg
The question is inevitably arising as to whether there is, at present, a phenomenon of internet shaming going on on the various blogs and other social media. I think we should take seriously the concern that there is. That's one thing I like a lot about this post by Simon Cabulea May. He makes it perfectly clear what are and what aren't the issues that are worthy topics of discussion. I would go further and say that nobody in the profession's moral character should be a topic of public discussion.* What is a suitable topic for discussion is whether or not the profession as a whole believes it is being well-served by having Brian Leiter as its de facto spokesperson and the orchestrator of its de facto official ranking system. Or whether, contrarily, those things are harming the profession. Whether or not he would admit it, Professor Leiter chose to fuse together for himself the roles of editing the PGR and being the de facto spokesperson for the profession. And we members of the profession have the right to try to remove him from that role if we think it is harming the profession. No viable theory of academic freedom guarantees him the right to maintain that role. But we do all of ourselves a dis-service if we let the discussion wander away from that narrow topic and engage online in activities that legimate a concern about internet shaming.
*In cases, such as the ones we have seen recently, where members of the profession have been alleged to have acted in ways that would provide obvious evidence of bad character, my claim holds so long as bad acts that they are alleged to have engaged in are being addressed by the relevant agents in their relevant institutions. I agree with Professor Leiter on this issue that not much is gained when the community piles on after the fact.
Recent Comments