Shaming on social media has the opposite of the intended impact, new research has found.
Those who are targeted online by moral crusaders gain sympathy rather than disdain from internet users, the Stanford University research says.
Those in the so-called ‘moral mob’ end up looking like bullies, despite potentially calling out discrimination.
Participants were shown a picture real story of Lindsey Stone, who posed in for a picture at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at Arlington National Cemetery in 2012
Research looked at 3,400 internet users and asked how they felt about public outcry towards offensive or controversial posts.
Participants were shown a picture of Lindsey Stone, who posed in for a picture at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at Arlington National Cemetery in 2012.
She was making an obscene gesture next to a sign that read ‘Silence and Respect’.
Ms Stone, and her colleague that took the picture, both lost their jobs following an ardent online campaign. She also was inundated with death and rape threats on Facebook.
The study found that that participants saw the post with only one comment thought the reaction was just a single comment condemning it, they found the reaction was worthy of praise, but disagreed when many piled in.
Psychology professor Benoît Monin, said: ‘There is a balance between sympathy and outrage.
‘The outrage goes up and up but at some point sympathy kicks in. Once a comment becomes part of a group, it can appear problematic. People start to think, ‘This is too much – that’s enough.’ We see outrage at the outrage.’
US filmmaker James Gunn was recently fired from Disney over historic tweets joking about paedophilia and rape.
There is now a campaign for Mr Gunn, who produced several blockbusters including The Avengers and Guardians of the Galaxy movies, to be rehired.
US filmmaker James Gunn was recently fired from Disney over historic tweets joking about paedophilia and rape
Researchers also tested people’s sympathy levels based upon whether people felt differently depending on the ‘victim’s’ pre-existing status – for example whether or not they were well-liked celebrity or considered loathsome, such as someone on the far-right.
They found even those who were hated, such as white supremacists, were still sympathised.
Graduate student Takuya Sawaoka who helped to conduct the experiments, said: ‘Our findings illustrate a challenging moral dilemma.
‘A collection of individually praiseworthy actions may cumulatively result in an unjust outcome. Obviously, the implication is not that people should simply stay silent about others’ wrongdoing.
‘But I think it is worth reconsidering whether the mass shaming of specific individuals is really the best way to achieve social progress.’
The research was published in the journal Psychological Science.