Is Massachusetts the Capital of Public Shaming?

From scarlet letters to hashtag campaigns, Massachusetts has dominated the art of public scorn.

“The Scarlet Letter,” 1926

Boston and Massachusetts are the originators of many things: basketball, peanut butter and fluff, America. Are we also, though, the founders of a darker strain of American culture? Are we the first and best practitioners of public shaming?

A perusal of the week’s journalism suggests that we are, at the very least, partly to blame for America’s fascination with publicly punishing those who have done wrong. In the New York Times magazine, Jon Ronson writes a very good excavation of what happens after a person becomes the object of the entire internet’s scorn. He follows the saga of Justine Sacco, a P.R. professional who wrote a poorly considered tweet about the AIDS epidemic in Africa, then watched her life implode. Ronson notes that public shaming isn’t an advent of the internet age. No, as Nathaniel Hawthorne could tell you, it started long before that. His reading of colonial Massachusetts newspapers found plenty of examples:

On July 15, 1742, a woman named Abigail Gilpin, her husband at sea, had been found “naked in bed with one John Russell.” They were both to be “whipped at the public whipping post 20 stripes each.”

Marriage disputes were, apparently, a frequent cause for public shaming. At, Hilary Sargent tells the bizarre history of airing one’s spousal grievances in newspaper classified ads. (Just in time for Valentine’s Day!) She writes:

For more than 300 years, newspapers ran advertisements from men publicly announcing their wives had left them, and that they would no longer “be responsible for her debts.”

Sargent reports that the first known example occurred in, you guessed it, Boston, when Christopher Lawson posted notices warning others that “none should trust” his wife, as she had plans to “blemish my name…and ruine my estate.”

Though whipping, classified ads, witch hunts, and scarlet letters have more or less fallen into history, our state’s contribution to public shaming hasn’t. In Ronson’s study of internet shaming in The Times, several Massachusetts examples arise. Perhaps you even remember them. There was Lindsey Stone, a 32-year-old Massachusetts woman who lost her job after flipping off the camera in a photo with Arlington National Cemetery’s Tomb of the Unknowns. “She barely left home for the year that followed, racked by PTSD, depression and insomnia,” Ronson writes. There was the woman who dressed as a Boston Marathon survivor for Halloween. She lost her job, too.

If you write about Boston on the internet, you know that there are plenty more examples where that came from. There was the Harvard professor who overzealously pursued a Chinese restaurant for advertising the wrong prices this December. There was the BMW driver who parked his car in front of a fire hydrant in November. There are any number of T riders who have been photographed breaking the social contract.

It’s easy to see why Twitter-shaming has caught on as a national past time. None of these people’s offending action was particularly defensible. It feels good to point to bad behavior and call it out as wrong. It feels great to see justice done to someone who does something insensitive. But Ronson’s point, and Hawthorne’s before him, is that there isn’t much due process in the act of public shaming. Worse, his portrait of women like Sacco and Stone suggests that the sheer, Titanic-weight force of shaming the internet usually outweighs the original crimes … by a lot.

It makes sense that we’re particularly good practitioners of public shaming in Boston, where we’re known for our loud mouths and moral stridency. But Massachusetts, of course, didn’t actually invent public shaming. It’s an impulse much older than colonial America. In the writing about the practice, though, there’s no shaking the fact that our Commonwealth’s name comes up an awful lot. If we didn’t invent public shaming, we’ve certainly embraced its practice throughout our history.

  • Richard B.

    I guess a writer has to have a local angle, but I find this a silly twist on Ronson’s piece. It links past history with the coincidence that a couple of the examples of those shamed on the world-wide stage of Twitter have been from this state. There are two components to this: Public and shaming. In the past, those shamed were often exposed against their wills and then locally shamed. Those who chose to be in the public eye — celebrities and politicians — received wider shaming, but again, mostly against their will (the hidden recording of Mitt’s 47% gaffe). Today, however, the publicly shamed bring it upon themselves by narcissistically or naively sharing their follies with the whole world. In other words, all shaming is no longer local, but universal. On the other hand, most of the shaming seems to be about foolish self-aggrandizing acts. Personally, I’m happier in a world where the insensitive tweet or photo brings on shame, rather than the one in which trying to love the color or gender of a person brought down the attack.

  • Jane Genova

    If leveraged aggressively, public shaming could replace the need for law enforcement – and lawyers.

  • janice8720

    what Pamela explained I am impressed that you can profit $5024 in one month on the internet . see this site -> to know more click here right now!!! <-

  • pittmanclementine

    like Judy answered I cant believe that a single mom able to profit $6025 in 1 month on the internet . look at more info -> to know more click here right now!!! <-

  • RightNow9435

    Of course, the “shame” crowd has to have something to leverage. If the person they are trying to shame does not have to work, getting them fired is meaningless. And if their spouse supports their original action, nothing’s gonna change there either, heh.