This is the title of an interesting article in today’s Observer in the UK. It refers to the tragic death of the London nurse and the vindictiveness of the response about the two Australian radio station presenters who peretrated the hoax. It cites this as an example of how society’s views as a whole have changed in recent decades.

 

The late philosopher and psychologist Erich Fromm wrote in the 50s that if prevailing trends that put economic production before human engagement continued, we would all eventually occupy a dangerously unbalanced society, peopled by alienated individuals living atomised existences, lacking in empathy, quick to judge because judgment by others is always anticipated, equipped with "the greatest material power without the wisdom to use it". What might halt the march to misery, he argued idealistically in The Sane Society, was sharing experience, living by "love, reason and faith".

 

Certainly, in the decades since then, aided more recently by the instant opinionator Twitter, blogs and social networks, our inclination to judge, critique, analyse, blame and scorn, often on the basis of next to no knowledge, has grown incrementally. We are propelled like narcissistic toddlers in a permanent state of tantrum to place ourselves in the centre of the dramas, scandals and terrible tragedies of total strangers. We cannot bear to witness a set of circumstances that remain private and resistant to our obsessive compulsion to know all and pass judgment, no matter what the consequences to the sometimes random recipients of blame . . .

 

http://www.guardian....udge-slow-learn

 

There is a related article in which the Chief Executive of the Samaritans in the UK makes a very pertinent point –

 

Catherine Johnstone, chief executive of Samaritans, said suicide was complex and urged people to think before commenting on Saldanha's death. "Although a catalyst may appear to be obvious, suicide is never the result of a single factor or event and is likely to have several inter-related causes," Johnstone said.

 

http://www.guardian....cintha-saldanha

The common law of England (which we yanks largely follow) has wisely (my view) developed over the centuries the concept that we are responsible for consequential damages reasonbly caused by our acts; however, to be responsible for such "consequential damage", the actor either needs to intend to cause the specific harm or it must be a harm or damage that an average reasonable man would consider should have been reasonably anticipated (or, in the parlance, the particular injury or harm was "proximately caused" by the behavior).

 

In this particular case, the dj's pulled a humorous prank and I can't fathom that they intended anyone any personal harm nor do I think that any reasonable person could rationally suggest that their actions might reasonably have led to someone's personal injury or death. The fact that a tragic but totally unanticipated death occurred ought not re-characterize their behavior and I'm a bit dumbfounded by the people who are calling for action against the radio dudes.

 

England is currently in the heat of a battle deciding how to regulate the intrusive (and sometimes illegal - hello Mr. Murdoch!) behavior of the media and I suspect that this background is fueling some of the anger towards the dj's. But I don't believe in this case it's justifiable.

1. In this particular case, the dj's pulled a humorous prank and I can't fathom that they intended anyone any personal harm nor do I think that any reasonable person could rationally suggest that their actions might reasonably have led to someone's personal injury or death.

 

2. England is currently in the heat of a battle deciding how to regulate the intrusive (and sometimes illegal - hello Mr. Murdoch!) behavior of the media and I suspect that this background is fueling some of the anger towards the dj's.

 

I entirely agree on both counts. Yet, setting aside the anger, I think I can deduce from your post on another thread that we both agree the pouncing on assumptions by both media and individuals is untimely and wholly insensitive in the immediate aftermath of any desperately sad case of this nature.