@BFMradio :: The letter is addressed to members of the media. Not to members of the public. Regardless of good intention, fwding the letter to those other than intended reader is to violate the writer’s agency. If you want to help, don't start by disregarding what the writer intends.
@BFMradio The writer is already aware of the high cost s/he may face for disclosing this. Exposing wrongful power practices - and sexual harassment is a form of wrongful practice of power - is always risky.
@BFMradio Sexual harassment has its own set of risks - linked to reputation, well-being, employment, threat of litigation - we know that defamation is often used as a way to silence whistleblowers.
@BFMradio This is probably why it was written anonymously, & to the media. When an anonymous informant writes to the media, the assumption it is an institution that can conduct investigative journalism with integrity, & in trust on behalf of concerned citizens & whistleblowers.
@BFMradio This includes the assumption that the media will adhere to sound journalistic ethics and practices when reporting. This includes independent and unbiased reporting, on a matter of public interest, and paying careful attention to consent and potential harm when reporting.
@BFMradio Writing to the media is also a way for the whistleblower to be able to uncover a serious issue when they are facing individuals and an institution who have much more power over them.
@BFMradio The media as an institution can act as a way to balance this power. & support to whistleblowers is an important indication of a healthy democracy supported by a functioning media (whether our media institutions are healthy or functioning is the subject of another conversation)
@BFMradio The letter contains personal information about individuals who definitely did not consent to *you* - interested member of the nameless public - to read, pass judgement, and fwd (with no mandate and no accountability)
@BFMradio Everyone named in the letter must be feeling very vulnerable right now. Unsure who has read it, feeling exposed. You are directly contributing to this harm by sharing it on. Yes, I am primarily concerned about the survivors.
@BFMradio If you really want to help, this is what you can do instead:
Extend your support to the author, and survivors. In this specific case, as well as to all the other silent survivors who are witnessing this unfold. Let you stance against sexual harassment be clear and known.
Extend your support to the author, and survivors. In this specific case, as well as to all the other silent survivors who are witnessing this unfold. Let you stance against sexual harassment be clear and known.
@BFMradio Respect principles of privacy and consent. This is not an ethical quandary. At the heart of violence - especially gender based violence - is a violation of consent. Don’t add to it.
@BFMradio Talk about sexual harassment w/ ppl around you. Find out more about its dynamics. Understand why it happens, and what we can all do to take collective responsibility to stop it. Don’t be a popcorn-eating bystander.
@BFMradio Check your/our own practices - are we complicit (intentional or not) in contributing to a culture and society where sexual harassment is pervasive and so damaging to individuals affected.
@BFMradio Media practitioners and institutions who received the letter, please take on this responsibility with integrity and sound journalistic ethics.
@BFMradio Your role is to report in an independent and unbiased way, on a matter of public interest, adhering to sound journalistic ethics and good practices.
@malaymail - your “poison pen” headline is an abhorrent failure of your duty as a media institution. Retract and apologise.
@malaymail - your “poison pen” headline is an abhorrent failure of your duty as a media institution. Retract and apologise.
@BFMradio @malaymail To all who have not only shared the letter but posted it on your social media. Take it down. Now.
//
//
Statement issued w/ former guests of @BFMradio:
Investigation must have confidence of its employees and stakeholders.
Investigation must have confidence of its employees and stakeholders.
