Mark Shea and Simcha Fisher Fired from National Catholic Register

[ToeInTheWater]

I don’t really know much about either of these two writers but if they were fired over social media it’s not surprising. Many people are let go of jobs based on what they post on Facebook and other places. There are soldiers, police, fire fighters, EMTs, CEOs, teachers, and even factory and fast food workers fired over what they put on Facebook. Why would well known Catholic writers be any exception? Apparently most people know who these people are paid by, and if what they post causes a negative reaction, their employer has every right to terminate them.

Great point. If people who have jobs that have nothing to do with the media can be fired or disciplined by employers for Facebook postings, then paid writers shouldn’t be exempt from such disciplinary policies. But maybe some of the posters defending these two, also think it’s wrong for any employer to fire people over what they post on their personal Facebook sites.

I also wonder, do people also think it’s wrong, if a Catholic writer or TV host got caught in some personal scandal and gets fired over that. Note that often, professional sports teams and leagues to suspend athletes, often without pay, for actions that occur off the field, in their private life. Few people seem to think that’s inappropriate. Indeed, most of the criticism is that they don’t go far enough in discipline.

 

[gracepoole]

I also wonder, do people also think it’s wrong, if a Catholic writer or TV host got caught in some personal scandal and gets fired over that. Note that often, professional sports teams and leagues to suspend athletes, often without pay, for actions that occur off the field, in their private life. Few people seem to think that’s inappropriate. Indeed, most of the criticism is that they don’t go far enough in discipline.

I wonder if Shea had let loose on those who are pro-choice, would he have been fired? What if he had pointed his sharp tongue at those who are in favor of same-sex marriage?

 

[bitterhope]

I wonder if Shea had let loose on those who are pro-choice, would he have been fired? What if he had pointed his sharp tongue at those who are in favor of same-sex marriage?

I don’t wonder about that at all. People are fired everyday over Facebook and Twitter. Anything you wouldn’t feel comfortable having your employer see, and if you work for them as a writer you should know what they are comfortable with, you should only post knowing it could put your job in jeopardy. Quite honestly, after reading most of what was written by him, I think it has more to do with what he says and how he says it than it does with who he says it about.

Think about how many times people are fired over Facebook quotes. People that are private citizens with mundane, everyday jobs in resturants, factories, mechanic shops, and other low paying positions. They do not hold any influence over society at large. Why should their public internet posts (and at times they are fired over PRIVATE postings) be held to a higher standard than well known, influential CATHOLIC writers?

I’ve noticed a lot of people point out that Simcha Fisher is a mom of 10 as if that should shield her from any type of criticism or job loss. That makes no sense to me. I saw the way she (and her husband) spoke of tax payers relating to receiving food stamps. That is wrong of them. I’m sure her employer would not be happy to see posts like that. When sarcasm is used to shame others you’ve gone too far. And I say this as a mom of soon to be 9 who also has lived below the line of poverty for most of my life. Having a laugh at someone else’s expense is wrong. A mother of 10 should know better. And it really doesn’t matter when you are a public figure who fired the first shot.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

I don’t wonder about that at all. People are fired everyday over Facebook and Twitter. Anything you wouldn’t feel comfortable having your employer see, and if you work for them as a writer you should know what they are comfortable with, you should only post knowing it could put your job in jeopardy. Quite honestly, after reading most of what was written by him, I think it has more to do with what he says and how he says it than it does with who he says it about.

Think about how many times people are fired over Facebook quotes. People that are private citizens with mundane, everyday jobs in resturants, factories, mechanic shops, and other low paying positions. They do not hold any influence over society at large. Why should their public internet posts (and at times they are fired over PRIVATE postings) be held to a higher standard than well known, influential CATHOLIC writers?

I’ve noticed a lot of people point out that Simcha Fisher is a mom of 10 as if that should shield her from any type of criticism or job loss. That makes no sense to me. I saw the way she (and her husband) spoke of tax payers relating to receiving food stamps. That is wrong of them. I’m sure her employer would not be happy to see posts like that. When sarcasm is used to shame others you’ve gone too far. And I say this as a mom of soon to be 9 who also has lived below the line of poverty for most of my life. Having a laugh at someone else’s expense is wrong. A mother of 10 should know better. And it really doesn’t matter when you are a public figure who fired the first shot.

Simcha and her husband were referring to the comments and criticisms they received about using food stamps. She was being ironic

We are Catholic. I’m sure people read or have read Simcha because she is Catholic. Catholics should not refer to other Catholics in the way she was referred to.

I won’t post, they are easy to find.

 

[Gordon_Sims]

Sorry. But this is ridiculous. NO ONE has an obligation to be anything on Facebook except to be truthful, and to be charitable.

I have to disagree with this. He likely had a clause in his contract that required him to present himself publicly in a manner that wouldn’t counter or embarrass NCR. My company has extremely clear and detailed social media policies. They basically say that anyone employed by Spacely Sprockets cannot identify themselves as a Spacely Sprockets employee without the expressed, written consent of the HR department. Doing so can result in termination. If you do get that permission and then out yourself as a Spacely Sprockets employee, any time you express an opinion of a product, whether produced by Spacely Sprockets or one of their competitors, you must make it clear that you are a Spacely Sprockets employee, that your views don’t reflect the views of Spacely Sprockets, and you have to submit your comments to HR before posting them. Failure to do so could result in termination. Having identified yourself as a Spacely Sprockets employee, any post you make that could be construed as offensive to any group, whether based on religion, politics, race, gender, etc. could result in termination. On the bright side, if you never identify yourself as a Spacely Sprockets employee online…you’re still considered a public representative of the company and doing any of the above can still result in your termination. That doesn’t mean anyone has or will lose their job over posting a negative review of Cogswell’s Cogs, but it does mean that anything you post online could be used as justification for letting you go, should someone need justification to fire you.

 

[Yeoman]

I have to disagree with this. He likely had a clause in his contract that required him to present himself publicly in a manner that wouldn’t counter or embarrass NCR. My company has extremely clear and detailed social media policies. They basically say that anyone employed by Spacely Sprockets cannot identify themselves as a Spacely Sprockets employee without the expressed, written consent of the HR department. Doing so can result in termination. If you do get that permission and then out yourself as a Spacely Sprockets employee, any time you express an opinion of a product, whether produced by Spacely Sprockets or one of their competitors, you must make it clear that you are a Spacely Sprockets employee, that your views don’t reflect the views of Spacely Sprockets, and you have to submit your comments to HR before posting them. Failure to do so could result in termination. Having identified yourself as a Spacely Sprockets employee, any post you make that could be construed as offensive to any group, whether based on religion, politics, race, gender, etc. could result in termination. On the bright side, if you never identify yourself as a Spacely Sprockets employee online…you’re still considered a public representative of the company and doing any of the above can still result in your termination. That doesn’t mean anyone has or will lose their job over posting a negative review of Cogswell’s Cogs, but it does mean that anything you post online could be used as justification for letting you go, should someone need justification to fire you.

Beyond that, in certain lines of work their private lives are, quite frankly, so strongly identified with their professional ones that anything they write will be identified with them professionally.

That’s in part why I never respond to any of the numerous political threads that some of my Facebook friends put up on Facebook. As somebody in one of the traditional professions, anything I say is going to have that attached to it in some fashion.

And Facebook is open. A person in private correspondence would be fairly free to say anything they want. So, if any of these folks said anything in their private emails, that’s one thing. But Facebook isn’t private email. It’s published. There’s no practical way to separate the published writings of a writer and claim that they weren’t to be taken the same way as a published column.

Which is why, you might note, that some columnist have very restrained Facebook pages, limited purely to uncontroversial pursuits. They know that. I’m sure Fisher and Shea knew that as well.

 

[PRmerger]

I have to disagree with this. He likely had a clause in his contract that required him to present himself publicly in a manner that wouldn’t counter or embarrass NCR. My company has extremely clear and detailed social media policies. They basically say that anyone employed by Spacely Sprockets cannot identify themselves as a Spacely Sprockets employee without the expressed, written consent of the HR department. Doing so can result in termination. If you do get that permission and then out yourself as a Spacely Sprockets employee, any time you express an opinion of a product, whether produced by Spacely Sprockets or one of their competitors, you must make it clear that you are a Spacely Sprockets employee, that your views don’t reflect the views of Spacely Sprockets, and you have to submit your comments to HR before posting them. Failure to do so could result in termination. Having identified yourself as a Spacely Sprockets employee, any post you make that could be construed as offensive to any group, whether based on religion, politics, race, gender, etc. could result in termination. On the bright side, if you never identify yourself as a Spacely Sprockets employee online…you’re still considered a public representative of the company and doing any of the above can still result in your termination. That doesn’t mean anyone has or will lose their job over posting a negative review of Cogswell’s Cogs, but it does mean that anything you post online could be used as justification for letting you go, should someone need justification to fire you.

All of the above is irrelevant, even if he did have a clause in his contract to that effect (which I doubt).

He still has NO OBLIGATION on Facebook to post Catholic apologetics.

That’s just absurd.

Mark Shea on Facebook: “Look at these cute little kitties!” “Haha! Patrick Madrid looks like this guy with a mustache!” “Donald Trump [blah, blah, blah]”

NCR: “You did not post anything about apologetics today. Bad, Mark. Very, very bad.”

#ridiculous

 

[edwest2]

As my boss has told his employees:

“Anything you post on the internet can and will be used against you.”

If a writer or other employee of a publishing company posts anything, it may reflect badly on the company. So whatever gets posted by a real name person may cause problems. Professional (real name) people have been fired over a tweet. I’m speaking generally, of course.

Ed

 

[Gordon_Sims]

All of the above is irrelevant, even if he did have a clause in his contract to that effect (which I doubt).

He still has NO OBLIGATION on Facebook to post Catholic apologetics.

That’s just absurd.

I never said he had an obligation to post apologetics on Facebook. I said he had an obligation to not behave in a way that is contrary to the beliefs and image of NCR. In other words, don’t post anything to embarrass or scandalize them. Pretty much everyone I know has a social media clause either written into their contract or has to agree to their corporate policies (the ones who don’t are unemployed). I’ve personally known people who have been fired for violating or abusing their employer’s social media policy. I know other people who either haven’t been hired or who have refused to hire someone because of what they’ve posted on social media. This isn’t 1995 so I really don’t have any sympathy for adults who can’t grasp the idea that what they post publicly can and will be used against them.

 

[PRmerger]

I never said he had an obligation to post apologetics on Facebook.

Then please follow the segue.

The position was offered that anyone who is a professional apologist must wear his “apologist hat” on Facebook. (see below)

I countered that this was ridiculous. No one MUST provide Catholic apologia on Facebook, whether he’s a professional apologist or an amateur one.

Yes he does have an obligation to wear his apologist hat on Facebook esp. when he refers to himself as an apologist on Facebook and Facebook is not a reason to leave your Catholic identity.

 

[AbideWithMe]

Then please follow the segue.

The position was offered that anyone who is a professional apologist must wear his “apologist hat” on Facebook. (see below)

I countered that this was ridiculous. No one MUST provide Catholic apologia on Facebook, whether he’s a professional apologist or an amateur one.

To be fair to saintjohnxxiii, I don’t think he is saying a Catholic apologist must always do the work of an apologist regardless of the venue, but that he should always be mindful that most people will remember him as a professional apologist even though they understand he’s not “at work” on Facebook.

That’s the downside of being given a degree of fame and an audience through apologetic work. It’s wise for an apologist to remember in a public place like FB how he came to have any sizable audience to begin with.

 

[Gordon_Sims]

Then please follow the segue.

The position was offered that anyone who is a professional apologist must wear his “apologist hat” on Facebook. (see below)

I countered that this was ridiculous. No one MUST provide Catholic apologia on Facebook, whether he’s a professional apologist or an amateur one.

No, you said, “Sorry. But this is ridiculous. NO ONE has an obligation to be anything on Facebook except to be truthful, and to be charitable.” That is an incorrect statement. Most people have a contractually mandated obligation to not do anything on social media that could reflect negatively on their employer. If one chooses to violate that, they have to live with the consequences.

 

[Expatreprocedit]

So according to both bloggers, Mark Shea and Simcha Fisher have been fired by the NCRegister. They both wrote opinion pieces for the newspaper. It would seem their social media presences have much to do with it, but that’s speculation (from me) based on this: stream.org/pro-life-catholics-deserve-better-writers-national-catholic-register/

More attacks on Shea:
lifesitenews.com/opinion/mark-shea-would-lie-to-attack-pro-lifers-but-not-to-save-anne-frank-or-babi

I’ve never been an enormous fan of either but it strikes me as sad that anyone who is pro-life but doesn’t line up politically and see the GOP as a truly pro-life option is shot down.

Unfortunately my experience with Lifesite and similar internet “prolife and pro family sites” is that they are simply fronts for the right wing. If you don’t think Obama is the devil and American capitalism is the epitome of Christianity, and if you don’t believe Francis I is a dangerous subversive, you are not a true Catholic. I’m dumping them forthwith. I haven’t followed Mark Shea that much, but he is one of the few RC apologists I can stomach.

 

[pnewton]

Unfortunately my experience with Lifesite and similar internet “prolife and pro family sites” is that they are simply fronts for the right wing.

I did not know that. I have noticed that they are only sometimes pro-life and frequently go off into areas unrelated to pro-life issues, like how bad the Catholic Church is. I have also found them unreliable when it comes to telling the truth, that is, using sensational headlines contrary to the truth. Criticizing Mark Shea for being political (specifically, different than them politically) seems hypocritical.

 

[PRmerger]

No, you said, “Sorry. But this is ridiculous. NO ONE has an obligation to be anything on Facebook except to be truthful, and to be charitable.”

What was that in response to?

Go back one post to see what I was addressing. Click on the little arrow by my post.

 

[PRmerger]

Unfortunately my experience with Lifesite and similar internet “prolife and pro family sites” is that they are simply fronts for the right wing. If you don’t think Obama is the devil and American capitalism is the epitome of Christianity, and if you don’t believe Francis I is a dangerous subversive, you are not a true Catholic. I’m dumping them forthwith. I haven’t followed Mark Shea that much, but he is one of the few RC apologists I can stomach.

Agreed, although I do “stomach” a whole lot of other apologists.

 

[Gordon_Sims]

What was that in response to?

Go back one post to see what I was addressing. Click on the little arrow by my post.

You’re still incorrect. As an employee, especially one who represents their employer to the public, on social media most people now have an obligation to be responsible representatives of their employer in one fashion or another. I’m not saying that every employer will terminate people for their social media activities, but most if not all reserve that right. The NCR may not have expected him to act as an apologist on Facebook, but they certainly expected him to behave in a manner that wouldn’t cause scandal or bring them embarrassment and I guarantee he knew that, or at the very least signed off on a policy that spelled it out (whether one reads all the work policies they agree to is another matter).

 

[PRmerger]

You’re still incorrect. As an employee, especially one who represents their employer to the public, on social media most people now have an obligation to be responsible representatives of their employer in one fashion or another. I’m not saying that every employer will terminate people for their social media activities, but most if not all reserve that right. The NCR may not have expected him to act as an apologist on Facebook, but they certainly expected him to behave in a manner that wouldn’t cause scandal or bring them embarrassment and I guarantee he knew that, or at the very least signed off on a policy that spelled it out (whether one reads all the work policies they agree to is another matter).

I think you must have simply read post #92 in isolation, without considering what I was responding to.

That leads to all sorts of non-sequiturs, like the above post. While I don’t really have a position on what you have posted above, it’s otiose as it applies to my post, and in response to saintjohn’s.

Suffice it to say that you agree with me that saintjohn’s comment here was incorrect:

Yes he does have an obligation to wear his apologist hat on Facebook

I never said he had an obligation to post apologetics on Facebook.

 

[AbideWithMe]

I think you must have simply read post #92 in isolation, without considering what I was responding to.

That leads to all sorts of non-sequiturs, like the above post. While I don’t really have a position on what you have posted above, it’s otiose as it applies to my post, and in response to saintjohn’s.

Suffice it to say that you agree with me that saintjohn’s comment here was incorrect:

Since you started using “apologist’s hat” rather than saintjohnxxiii, it might be helpful to ask him if he means the same thing by the term as you do. Taking the whole of his posts, I think he may simply mean “identity” by “hat”, instead of meaning “doing the actual work of an apologist right at that time”, which is my description of what I think you mean by it. ( Your meaning is the more correct one by common usage, but it would be fair to ask saintjohnxxiii to clarify what he meant when he went along with your term.)

 

[Maximilan_Kolbe]

So according to both bloggers, Mark Shea and Simcha Fisher have been fired by the NCRegister. They both wrote opinion pieces for the newspaper. It would seem their social media presences have much to do with it, but that’s speculation (from me) based on this: stream.org/pro-life-catholics-deserve-better-writers-national-catholic-register/

More attacks on Shea:
lifesitenews.com/opinion/mark-shea-would-lie-to-attack-pro-lifers-but-not-to-save-anne-frank-or-babi

I’ve never been an enormous fan of either but it strikes me as sad that anyone who is pro-life but doesn’t line up politically and see the GOP as a truly pro-life option is shot down.

Why did you go from speculation in paragraph one to asserting they were fired for not towing the GOP line, which by all accounts had as much to do with this as they fondness for cantaloupe.

So much for you not speculating (and in this case, being wrong too). Let’s not make everything a political swipe at conservatives, please.