Whether it’s better to give than to receive depends on what’s being transferred. If it’s advice or criticism, most people would prefer to be the donor rather than the recipient.
Or they would have preferred that, prior to the advent of cancel culture. Nowadays, it’s far safer to accept advice or criticism than it is to offer it because the person you offer it to – or anyone else who happens to hear or read what you had to say – is likely to take offense at the content of your comment, the way you expressed it, the hidden meaning it may or may not convey, the lack of a trigger warning at the beginning, or the absence of a smiley face at the end. LOL, right?
One person who won’t be laughing out loud any time soon is 24th Circuit Family Court Judge Sally Jackson.
On February 24, the Judicial Investigation Commission publicly admonished Jackson for comments she made on her own Facebook page about a Wisconsin pharmacist who was arrested for allegedly destroying multiple doses of the COVID-19 vaccine. This was not Jackson’s first “offense” on social media.
“Despite being warned, respondent repeatedly posted stories and/or inappropriate comments about the siege at the United States Capitol in Washington, D.C., on her Facebook page from January 6, 2021, through January 11, 2021,” the reprimand grumbled. “They included stories and negative statements about former Wayne County House of Delegates member Derrick Evans who allegedly participated in the siege and was the subject of federal criminal charges.”
Jackson deactivated her Facebook account and issued an abject apology, emphasizing that her page was “not accessible to the public but was viewable only by my friends and family.”
The commission demurred: “The concept of a ‘public comment’ applies to Facebook whether a judicial officer opens his or her personal page only to family and friends or to the public at large.”
Ouch! Now Judge Jackson knows how all the other victims of cancel culture feel. Maybe she should stick to private messages from now on.
