Lots of colleges and universities are public ones. Also, private ones may be constrained by their previously stated policies on such.
Doxing is entirely appropriate. As others have said, free speech does not mean consequence-free speech.
If a university student, who is an adult, says something, then they should stand by their words and not hide behind anonymity. Then if private employers want to take action by rescinding offers then, well, that is the consequence.
2 Likes
If you feel the need to protest with your face covered, you should probably just stay home.
6 Likes
I fully agree with that statement, but social media is a wild place where truth gets distorted very quickly and doxing can bring real harm to people. So Iâm definitely against doxing.
For example, one of the articles up thread mentioned a pro Palestinian protest in Princeton that seems to have involved students peacefully calling for a ceasefire. I donât see anything wrong with that - but itâs very easy to post a video of that group and claim they were shouting pro-Hamas slogans or calling for the destruction of Israel.
So yes, doxing crosses a line for me.
6 Likes
My guess is that you have never spent much time in China or Russia.
Unfortunately, I disagree regarding protests in the US that may result in retribution or other action by a private entity which do not have to tolerate free speech to the same level as do government entities.
Raises the issue as to whether doxing isâor should or should not beâalways protected. As shown by responses in the US by private employers, doxing is a threat to free spech.
1 Like
Neither are on my bucket listâŠbut Iâm talking about the United States.
Whatâs that saying? If you canât do the timeâŠ
I question the convictions of the masked. If you donât have the intestinal fortitude to own it, stay on the sidelines.
1 Like
But you miss the pointâfree speech/freedom of speech is not a crime (so there is no time to do).
1 Like
You get my point. Itâs why I didnât finish the well know sentence.
Own it or get out of the way. Agitators wear masks.
Why? If a company hired a KKK member and they make racist comments, they could be sued for a hostile work environment.
And if it was shown that person had belonged to a hate group and the company failed to do their due diligence, that could be used against them in a claim.
Students have a right to protest. They shouldnt be crying afterwards about not being hired.
1 Like
Situations, circumstances, and facts varyâand they matter.
Being identified for holding a political viewâsuch as oneâs stance on any controversial issue of the day or supporting a candidate for office not supported by oneâs bossâcould get an individual fired. Yet, while the US prides itself on freedoms, exercising any one of those freedoms may result in severe consequences from a private entity.
Consider the issue of abortion versus right to life or supporting a candidate from a political party that the boss opposes. Environmental laws/regulations can also result in action by oneâs private employer. Gay marriage might be another hotbed issue as could support for or against the legalization of marijuana.
@CFP: Your examples are extreme. As I wrote: Situations, circumstances, and facts varyâand they matter.
1 Like
Im pretty sure companies dont want to hire students who scream âDeath to Jewsâ.
And they shouldnt have to.
2 Likes
And they donât have to!?
But someone who does NOT scream âDeath to Jewsâ still should not need to reveal their face for caring about people in general (incl. Palestinians.)
Because of intentional distorting (some of it already discussed here), there are very valid reasons for a reasonable person with a perfectly acceptable viewpoint not to wish to be identified!
After all - why are good people using âhandlesâ in public forums? 
Says âHelicoperParent1â? 
So just maybe, it can also be an appropriate choice?
6 Likes
Nor should they. Plus, it raises the issue as to whether or not such speech is protected under the US Constitution or whether it is unprotected speech because it is threatening.
Imagine an employee of ExxonMobil protesting in favor of regulations designed to protect the environment or telecom workers protesting against construction of an unsightly and harmful cell phone tower.
1 Like
Doxxing goes beyond influencing employment decisions, since it is often intended to expose the doxxed persons to potentially violent extremists looking for targets to harass. An example was that of doxxing abortion providers in order to provide a hit list for violent extremists.
Also, doxxers sometimes hit people other than their intended targets, due to use of inaccurate information or exaggeration of actions into what they consider âwrongâ.
5 Likes
Absolutely!
But what if the students shown in an online photo never did that? Or what if they werenât even part of a protest, but were passing by and stopped to see what was going on and got photographed? Or if they were in fact trying to ask questions or debate with the protestors, not support them?
I have no sympathy for those actually engaging in hateful speech or behavior, but itâs so easy to distort things on social media!
6 Likes
Employers who have made employment decisions are not basing it on random pictures but students who have openly made comments like Ryna Workman who said Israel bears âfull responsibilityâ for loss of life.
Thatâs fine then. They should face the consequences.
Iâm talking about doxxing where peopleâs identities are being publicized without context.
1 Like
I suppose the term âdoxingâ by definition implies that the context is deliberately misconstrued. I donât think anybody would suggest thatâs ok.
But in principle, I believe those exercising free speech should stand by their convictions and be prepared for the consequences. Hiding behind anonymity is cowardly.
4 Likes
I agree. But again, unrelated to doxxing.
1 Like