The question that I'm trying to ask is whether public shaming, especially to such a large audience, is really a civilized response. The consequences are also devastating, and reduce the possibilities of getting a second chance at life, something that I strongly believe in.
This concept is also often referred to by it's more common name: "journalism"
It's a matter of degree and intent, of course, but there's an awfully blurry line in-between.
Journalism is newsworthy and has the intention of informing people in the public interest, doxxing is typically not newsworthy or in the public interest and has the intention of harassment or intimidation.
[0] http://nymag.com/thecut/2015/07/gawker-slammed-for-story-out...
If 'Fly' isn't going to be put to death (I don't think you are arguing for that?), there's a likelihood that someday he will emerge from jail and be expected to re-enter society. Pierre's question is whether the treatment of 'Fly' now puts the world in a better or worse position at that future point.
I think it's a legitimate concern, although I think the 'public shaming' is going to have much less impact than the years spent in foreign jail living only among other criminals. It doesn't strike me as likely that he will be in a position to re-enter society having seen the flaws of his ways.
At worst Krebs raised the guy's profile a bit. But when he gets out of prison in 20 or 30 years it won't make much difference.
After all, they messed with his family by sending the flower arrangement to his door. A public warning not to mess with him would seem to be appropriate.
Maybe he should find a career that's less likely to offer tempting access to other peoples' private information next time?
"The people who conduct this type of crime often think of it as justified. After all, Americans are rich aren’t they? How could it hurt them to lose some money? We are poor, if they won’t share, we’ll just take it. We will make them share!
They think of it as a game. A lucrative game in which they get to win over and over again. Even those of them who may be kind to their friends and even generous with those they love, don’t really see their victims as people. Not being a member of their group makes the rest of us not quite human.
This type of tribal thinking isn’t as uncommon as you might want to believe. I’ve seen it here in the US over and over during my lifetime. Most people who suffer from it don’t consider themselves evil. They just consider the rest of us their lawful prey.
We tend to feel otherwise. Thanks for the great work Brian."
What I find a bit crass is the sensationalistic complete disclosure of identity employed - going all the way to the classical mugshot. All of this will certainly not help for Fly's later reinsertion, say, when he decides to get a job in IT. And I'm not playing devil's advocate here, it just seems to me that the author is pushing aside his inner moral voice in order to write a more viral article. Justice is taking care of prosecuting the criminal, but let's push him further down if it can attract some pageviews. I suppose I'm simply being bitter about journalism, though.