This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Does Stupidity Deserve an Apology?

Does Stupidity Deserve an Apology? - Comments

jel's Avatar Comment 1 by jel

They should maybe apologise for having let someone post this online but that's about it. By suing she is drawing attention to herself, if that had been me, I would have wanted to keep quiet about it.

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 15:57:51 UTC | #588279

locutus7's Avatar Comment 2 by locutus7

The mall should print an apology, in small-sized letters, on the bottom of the fountain. That way, she would have to lean over the edge to read it.....

OR the mall could simply text her an apology...

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 16:03:12 UTC | #588281

Laurw's Avatar Comment 3 by Laurw

It might be considered a violation of her privacy.

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 16:05:01 UTC | #588282

Richard Dawkins's Avatar Comment 4 by Richard Dawkins

It might be considered a violation of her privacy

She was not injured, she is not identifiable on the film, and her name is not mentioned. In my opinion, anybody as opportunistically litigious as she is deserves to have her name publicised and mocked. It is the fact that she was texting that makes it so much funnier than ordinary banana skin humour. Otherwise it would just be an unfortunate accident.

Incidentally, talking of banana skin humour, an Argentinian friend once summed up for me what he called 'South American humour': it is not enough that somebody slips on a banana skin; to be really funny he must break his leg.

Richard

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 16:17:50 UTC | #588289

Stewart's Avatar Comment 5 by Stewart

Did this get posted here because if the fountain had been deeper she might have qualified for a Darwin Award? Do I correctly understand that her name is only known because she decided to sue? Streisand Effect, anyone?

By the way, speaking of what South Park refers to as Barbura, and more closely connected to a religiously relevant theme (though the fountain lady was texting a friend from church), it seems her cousin has been refused permission to immigrate to Israel because of his belief in Jesus (reportedly discovered by Israeli authorities who peeked at his Facebook page, though there's also evidence elsewhere).

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 16:41:25 UTC | #588299

Alan4discussion's Avatar Comment 6 by Alan4discussion

Does Stupidity Deserve an Apology?

Yes, but the stupid rarely offer one.

..............-------............

I would suggest a very qualified apology.

" We are sorry for using your photograph without your permission", BUT;-....... That was hilarious! Are you looking to have it discussed in court so the the media can report and circulate it, - giving you some named, self inflicted, public ridicule?

Claim kill!

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 16:43:45 UTC | #588301

mirandaceleste's Avatar Comment 7 by mirandaceleste

Comment 3 by Laurw :

It might be considered a violation of her privacy.

But she's the one who decided to make her name public and to be interviewed (many times) on television after she filed her lawsuit. Here's a hilarious and spot-on video of the wonderful Anderson Cooper (who was attacked while reporting in Egypt this week (video)) discussing her case in the "Ridiculist" segment of his nightly CNN program.

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 17:11:38 UTC | #588308

rsharvey's Avatar Comment 8 by rsharvey

Comment 4 by Richard Dawkins :

Incidentally, talking of banana skin humour, an Argentinian friend once summed up for me what he called 'South American humour': it is not enough that somebody slips on a banana skin; to be really funny he must break his leg.

Reminds me of the famous Mel Brooks comment:

"Tragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you walk into an open sewer and die."

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 17:33:03 UTC | #588318

-TheCodeCrack-'s Avatar Comment 9 by -TheCodeCrack-

Did she sue for damages caused to her phone? And the washing-powder needed to clean her clothes?

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 17:54:01 UTC | #588325

mirandaceleste's Avatar Comment 10 by mirandaceleste

Someone let me know that the link to Anderson Cooper's "Ridiculist" video might not work if you're not in the US. If that's the case, and you do want to see it, try this or this instead.

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 18:24:44 UTC | #588332

Eldorado's Avatar Comment 11 by Eldorado

The falling in the fountain is accident. The suing for accident which are your own fault is stupid. so no stupidity does not deserve an apology.

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 18:38:27 UTC | #588335

Eldorado's Avatar Comment 12 by Eldorado

http://failblog.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/2d3d30d5-a601-46f4-b910-21c9458f4dc6.jpg just add this.

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 18:48:35 UTC | #588339

The Berzerker's Avatar Comment 13 by The Berzerker

no way, this was total ULTRAFAIL, no apology, her effin fault, watch where your going next time the streisand effect has already taken place anyway now

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 19:05:01 UTC | #588345

Stevehill's Avatar Comment 14 by Stevehill

OK, a contrarian view. Firstly I'm not sure where we are, but I guess America?

Someone with access to the mall's security camera footage chose to publish film of the incident on YouTube (where it went pretty viral), presumably because he thought it was funny. People are entitled to assume that security camera, which are there for their benefit, will not be used in this way - though they might be used as evidence in say criminal proceedings.

The employee concerned broke the trust between the mall and its customers, and undoubtedly broke his own employment contract in releasing property (the footage) which belonged to his employers without consent. So I have no sympathy for him getting fired whatsoever. We're all on film a lot of the time these days. We need to underpin our rights - and they are our rights - not to have the film abused without our consent. If e.g. a passing TV station had taken this film they would (at least in the UK) have required the woman's written clearance to use the footage (with various get-outs if it was incidental to a major news story or something - which it isn't).

Yes, it's slightly amusing. But if I'd been present at the scene I'd like to think my first response would have been concern and to ask her if she was alright.

Whether it's worth a court case and massive damages is an entirely different matter. If I were the mall proprietor, I'd offer fulsome apologies and maybe some shopping vouchers and a family meal at the mall's best restaurant. The apology is not due because the mall is responsible for the accident: clearly it was not. The apology would be because the mall's employee illegally invaded her privacy.

And if she was not gracious enough to accept that, then (and only then) I'd conclude she was a greedy, opportunistic, profiteering bitch.

But one who nevertheless has a right to privacy.

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 19:56:30 UTC | #588361

Eldorado's Avatar Comment 15 by Eldorado

Hmmmm you sound like a lawyer Stevehill.

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 20:36:56 UTC | #588372

Stevehill's Avatar Comment 16 by Stevehill

I'm not confirming or denying anything!

The fact is that the mall allowed one of its staff to turn a silly accident into a ritual, global, unethical humiliation of the victim.

Since apparently they refuse to apologise or otherwise make amends, they deserve what's coming to them.

Years ago a pilot flew his light aircraft into the side of a mountain and died. His widow successfully sued Cessna for $10 million on the grounds that it should not have been possible to pilot the plane without having your seatbelt fastened.

Whoever runs this mall needs a good lawyer. Quickly.

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 21:03:10 UTC | #588378

josephor's Avatar Comment 17 by josephor

Some people will do just about anything for money. She should be charged with "being a danger to herself and others" (public order offense)stupidity is not against the law unfortunately.

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 21:11:32 UTC | #588380

Starcrash's Avatar Comment 18 by Starcrash

I wonder... did she actually ask for an apology first and get refused, or did she take this to court first in order to get the apology?

I don't think an apology is a terrible thing. If it prevents her pain and suffering (humiliation, I would think in this case) then it is the moral thing to do. I'm personally quick with apologies when demanded, because it's such an easy fix at no cost. Why not?

However, the litigation seems needless and opportunistic (yeah, Richard, I know you already said it). She shouldn't get any money for it, because we still have to the protect the right to free speech. Yeah, even YouTube-ing this thing is just digital gossip.

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 21:25:26 UTC | #588385

Steve Zara's Avatar Comment 19 by Steve Zara

I hope this will put an end to the commonly expressed belief that we only use 10% of our brains. Our brains are easily overloaded. People often slow down while walking if they answer a mobile phone, as walking and phoning is too much for the little grey cells.

As for privacy, I have always thought that what happens when you leave your property isn't private. Anyone can photograph and film you. I can be seen walking my dog on one of the Google StreetView images.

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 21:34:16 UTC | #588391

DocWebster's Avatar Comment 20 by DocWebster

Whether or not the lady was known when the video came out the time it would have taken to produce her identity would have been trivial once somebody got a burr under their saddle. The mall should apologize for the guard releasing the footage and the guard should be slapped upside the head for being an insensitive moron and asshat.

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 21:55:36 UTC | #588396

locutus7's Avatar Comment 21 by locutus7

I was almost hit recently by the car in the adjacent lane, whose driver had her right hand on the wheel and her left - the one nearest me - busily texting on her cell (mobile) phone.

She was holding her phone hand high and almost out the window, apparently for better lighting (this was in Florida where it was warm). As she veered towards us, I reached over (I was not driving) and honked the horn to awaken her from her text trance.

I would speculate that her smart phone had a higher IQ than she.

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 22:00:46 UTC | #588400

mirandaceleste's Avatar Comment 22 by mirandaceleste

Comment 16 by Stevehill :

The fact is that the mall allowed one of its staff to turn a silly accident into a ritual, global, unethical humiliation of the victim.

I certainly agree that the employee shouldn't have leaked it and should face whatever consequences their employer sees fit. However, the woman's name and identifiable image would not have been made public had she not taken this to the media. She isn't identifiable in the video. She is the one who gave up her anonymity/privacy.

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 22:10:48 UTC | #588403

guyver_dio's Avatar Comment 23 by guyver_dio

Fire the staff member and send her a formal apology is as far as it needs to go.

Fire the staff member because I'm pretty sure leaking security footage to the public would have violated their code of conduct not to mention I think it's illegal. Write an apology because a good business takes responsibility for all their staff member's actions.

Falling into the fountain was her fault, putting the video on youtube wasn't.

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 22:24:33 UTC | #588410

areeves's Avatar Comment 24 by areeves

That woman's stupidity should not deserve an apology. Many people die each year in car accidents because stupid people text on their phones while driving. That woman is lucky she fell into a fountain. If she'd fallen on someone instead, say a child in a pram and caused injury, would she still be asking for an apology?

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 23:00:00 UTC | #588417

Misfire's Avatar Comment 25 by Misfire

I'm not a lawyer, but this does seem a twisted case if we have Menloves suing Vaughns, on the grounds that unreasonable imprudence can be embarrassing: Vaughn v. Menlove

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 23:28:03 UTC | #588422

ZenDruid's Avatar Comment 26 by ZenDruid

Did 'Fountain Lady' learn anything from the experience? Probably not.

Sat, 05 Feb 2011 23:54:08 UTC | #588428

guyver_dio's Avatar Comment 27 by guyver_dio

Comment 24 by amreeves :

That woman's stupidity should not deserve an apology. Many people die each year in car accidents because stupid people text on their phones while driving. That woman is lucky she fell into a fountain. If she'd fallen on someone instead, say a child in a pram and caused injury, would she still be asking for an apology?

Agreed, her stupidity doesn't warrant an apology. However the stupidity of the staff member who uploaded the video does. She isn't asking for an apology because they put a fountain in her way, she's asking for an apology for being intentionally humiliated by another persons actions. And please, you're telling me you've never just not paid attention where you're walking for any reason and tripped or walked into something?

Sun, 06 Feb 2011 00:01:23 UTC | #588429

bachfiend's Avatar Comment 28 by bachfiend

I don't think that she deserves an apology.

Also, I don't think that the employee should be sacked, who is probably on minimum wages. Seeing something like this is the compensation for a lousy job.

Sun, 06 Feb 2011 08:10:44 UTC | #588477

mmurray's Avatar Comment 29 by mmurray

I'm with Steve Hill. Stupidity doesn't deserve an apology but putting a security video up on youtube definitely does. There is also the question raised in this report of why the security people didn't go and ask if she needed help instead of just laughing at her. Very unprofessional.

There are also questions about the safety of that fountain. It's very low and might well be unsafe for children.

Michael

Sun, 06 Feb 2011 08:57:04 UTC | #588487

Richard Dawkins's Avatar Comment 30 by Richard Dawkins

I probably would not have uploaded the video, although I would have been tempted, and I would certainly have roared with laughter the moment it became clear that she was unhurt. It is the fact that she was TEXTING that makes it so extremely funny. A great Inspector Clouseau moment. And if I had succumbed to the temptation to upload the video, I would have felt a tiny bit guilty until the moment she went to a lawyer, at which point I would have felt vindicated in spades. She lost all my sympathy, every last tiny drop of sympathy, the moment she went to a lawyer.

Richard

Sun, 06 Feb 2011 09:40:35 UTC | #588494