So You've Been Publicly Shamed

In these chapters, Ronson explores Justice and Redemption in depth. His analysis here is primarily focused on redemption within the criminal justice system, but he connects it to the possibility for redemption from public shaming via reputation management. In his discussion of reputation management, Ronson also digresses to meditate on the nature of traditional reporting, such as the kind he and Moynihan do, and how it is ambiguously related to public shaming.

The story of McGreevey is particularly important as a case study of public shaming and the possibilities for redemption within Ronson’s framework. Ronson only provides McGreevey’s side of the story. As presented by McGreevey, the former New Jersey governor gave a “concocted job” in his cabinet to an Israeli man named Golan with whom he was having an affair. When the story was reported by the traditional local press, Golan threatened to sue for sexual harassment, leading McGreevey to resign his position and come out as gay. In a later interview with Haaretz, Golan portrays the situation differently. He claims that McGreevey subjected him to “physical and verbal” sexual harassment while governor and that he was fired when he rejected McGreevey’s advances. He notes that the incident ruined his reputation: “I was portrayed as a ridiculous character” (Haaretz, August 19, 2004) After these events, McGreevey reentered the story running a therapeutic prison center in New Jersey, helping inmates overcome shame and low self-esteem in order to re-enter society. While this is not explicated in Ronson’s discussion of the case, it is implied that McGreevey has a unique understanding of the pain of being publicly shamed as a result of one’s actions and therefore it is particularly fitting that he has a position helping others who have faced similar circumstances.

Ronson notes that many of these therapeutic prison centers have been shut down, as the criminal justice system is more often interested in perpetuating shame in others rather than overcoming it. In society, shame is often viewed as a tool for encouraging people to change their behavior. In his interview with psychiatrist James Gilligan, Ronson learns that shame is often the cause of criminal behavior rather than an effective deterrent of it. Gilligan notes that the shame caused by secrets leads people to act out. While Ronson does not explicate this, it is implied that this analysis has possible bearings on McGreevey’s circumstances: Was he driven to make poor ethical choices as a result of the pressure and shame he felt living and working in an antigay environment?

Ronson’s coverage of Raquel’s redemption arc as a result of participating in the therapeutic community indicates that he feels the criminal justice system can rehabilitate people in a way that mob justice cannot. However, unlike in the other cases of shaming Ronson covers, where he presents both sides of the story, in the cases of McGreevey and Raquel, he only provides their accounts of the facts. Further, as Ronson’s participation in the expert witness workshop demonstrates, the criminal justice system typically uses shame as a tool. Ronson does not comment on his decision to cover these cases one-sidedly, which means he is not focusing on whether McGreevey and Raquel deserve a chance at redemption. Rather, he is looking at the ability or inability of the justice system to use its resources for redemption rather than shaming.

Next, Ronson explores reputation management as a mode for achieving redemption after public shaming as a result of social media and/or criminal activity. Like in the traditional criminal justice system, the possibilities for redemption are wildly unequal based on class. In the traditional justice system, wealthy people can hire sophisticated lawyers who are solely focused on their cases while lower-income individuals may have to use public defenders or not have a lawyer at all. Similarly, wealthy people are able to afford the expensive services of reputation management firms, whereas middle- or lower-income people cannot. Ronson learns that these services cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and describes them as “a shaming-eradication service that only the super-rich could normally afford” (217). Ronson’s exploration here shows that the possibilities for any kind of redemption are limited to those with privilege, be it gender-based or socioeconomic. Those with neither, like Lindsay Armstrong, are subjected to shaming that can have live-ending consequences even if they are innocent.