From how many jobs tho. This happened in 2017. The problem is there's no statute of limitations on moral outrage, so if acting on it is justified, the punishment would effectively be a jobless life.
And I think that's a little excessive.
To make this discussion easier, lets consider just the comments in isloation, and assume they're all verified (like most would as an employer, to do otherwise would bring extra risk on yourself)
If you're employing Muslims, then in this case, she's probably unemployable by you until she can demonstrate reform of some kind to an extent where both she and others in the workplace can collaborate effectively.
However, as a journalist it depends on your outlet.
Some may look at her conspiracism, and decide that to get to that point alone she's probably not a very good journalist and would again need to demonstrate some sort of pivot in her decision making that lead her to that point.
On the other hand, there are probably some right wing outlets that would look at her and decide she's a great journalist based on those comments, and that her decision making is on point.
Whether this is good or ideal is another matter.
It comes down to how much you want the government involved in businesses ability to freely associate.
that is a very good point and I don't know why you're being downvoted for it.
still, is the business freely deciding not to associate with the person, or is the mob forcing the business hand?
I'd hope that there was some formal process her employer undertook in order to meet their own bar, wherever that was set, rather than letting an external party set the narrative entirely.
That aside, I think your initial comment may have been a tad dismissive of the idea that such an investigation could have taken place, especially considering she was fired a year after the controversy started.
> I don’t agree with her statement, but academia is poisoning free speech under the guise of righteousness.
I could create an account on a multitude of services call “TOMDM” Top of your bio, and say some truly horrible things. Your job or employer comes to you and says why would you say these things and you say hey that wasn’t me, someone took a name that I was using on another service. Well I’m sorry, we have to let you go. Now it’s up to you to pursue civil litigation probably in order to identify the person who was actually using that handle, so you could then go back to your former employee and say your termination of me was unjustified.
That’s what I’m seeing here, a claim without proof Which has led to someone’s loss of employment. I’m bothered by that and I think we all should be.