Rockets GREAT Photographer Bill Baptist slurs Kamala on Facebook

If you are on facebook, you'll notice lots of people you know posting political statements

employers are DEFINITELY looking at your social media posts

as well as facebook because they want targeted ads revenue

True free expression, right or wrong, is probably not a good idea on the internet.

 

the NBA won't even let you have your own certain personalized jerseys anymore because of fear of an 'incorrect' statement that may affect the reputation or financial dollars

 

Diehard,

No disrespect... If the guy was like 11, 12 or even 16 I would say I agree... but this is a grown ass man in a professional position so he knew and understood the consequences...

He made a choice and now he has to live with that choice...

T_Man

 

I'm just presuming that due to the backlash he may not be given another opportunity to photograph Houston sports.

I think if it weren't 2020 and assuming the Rockets and other pro teams were happy with his prior behavior and performance, he'd likely be warned and maybe suspended.

I don't know his motive behind sharing the post, but I don't think it's as cut and dry as saying he's sexist/racist. I think it's possible his political views got the best of him and in a world where people are quick to slam the opposing party he used some very poor judgement.

I agree with this on the whole, but again this makes it sound very cut and dry that because he posted that image he is automatically an immoral sexist. I think it probably had more to do with slamming the Democrats and looking cool to his Republican circle on facebook than it actually did about being derogatory toward Harris. That doesn't make it right to share that post, it was stupid either way and I would certainly think less of anyone else who shared it, I just don't think he deserves to potentially lose his career over it.

 

Exactly! He had to know what time it is. Just a shockingly stupid act of self destruction.

 

@JuanValdez

 

if he questioned her track record as a prosecutor or senator you think he would have been fired just the same?

 

I agree. There is no connection whatsoever between this guy's ability to do his job and some stupid, sexist crap he posts on Facebook.

Almost every time Doris Burke calls a game for the Rockets, I read the same things on here about her. I can point to other examples of women being called disgusting names. I find it ugly and offensive. But it would be unthinkable for a poster who writes that stuff to get fired from his job over it.

This all stems from the "guilt by association" nonsense that people are constantly pushing. This guy is working an NBA game, and therefore he is "tainting" the NBA because of some dumb stuff he posted on Facebook. So, unless the NBA does something to punish him, they are tacitly endorsing what he did. This is just a terrible way of looking at things.

 

Judoka, centers the puck for Valdez....

 

I agree that the loss of a job or livelihood is extreme, but the dummy put it out in the open and made it a workplace distraction once word got out.

Os posted an op/ed about Cancel Culture being a middle-upper class cudgel. If he was highly influential, talented, or connected, a warning or hiatus would've probably been his punishment.

I don't think keeping silent is the best answer but I don't want to hear nasty guttertrash remarks from him or daily from the president, and it shouldn't be enabled either.

Maybe use his platform more responsibly?

 

I can see a poster here if their identity wasn't anonymous being fired for calling a woman a ho.

If your profile has your real name and picture you have to be a complete dumbass to post something like that while employed.

But at the same time we have to allow people to grow and change. Canceling them for life is draconian. His apology was pretty half assed and it seems like he's trying to pretend he didn't endorse the message. After he admits to his mistake, I'm all for the NBA giving him a other contract.

 

...icing

 

Honestly, I can see it too. But would you seek out the identity of such a poster and try to get them fired from their job over it? Would you be cool with someone else doing that?

 

No. I would never try to doxx someone with an anonymous account unless I sensed the individual was going to cause violence in the real world.

If an anonymous person wants to say bigoted or misogynistic things here, the only recourse is suspension or ban. Nothing more.

 

As someone who think cancel culture has gotten too far and lack any sort of nuance, I agree with your overall sentiment. But if calling(posting) someone a "hoe" on a very public arena is not enough to get you fired from a company where exactly should tolerance end? And considering the original offense and the jibber jabber of an apology that followed, what constructive dialogue can honestly be had from this with said person?

Its also lazy to throw this under the umbrella of political speech as a pass. Calling a woman a hoe has also been long time tradition and it has never had anything to do competence.

 

I just don't like the idea that he needs to apologize to get his job back. If he was using that language in the workplace, or towards a colleague, it's different.

People openly say insulting things about public figures all the time. When does an insult rise to the level of being a fireable offense? How do we decide this?

Suppose rather than him posting this thing on Facebook, someone took a video of him making these comments out loud and posted it on Facebook without his permission. Should his job be under threat for that as well?

 

@Os Trigonum

 

It's up to the private company to see if keeping him employed without addressing it or apologizing would be bad enough optics to lose revenue. If it is, I don't know why a private company would take a loss just to keep him employed. At that point it would almost be like charity because the company is not maximizing their profits with him and therefore he's a detriment to their company.

 

Well I do live in the State of Hockey..

 

Sure, I understand it from the company's standpoint. I'm not blaming them for being concerned with optics. My issue is with those who think that this should in any way reflect on the company rather than the individual. If that thinking didn't exist then optics wouldn't be an issue for the company.