forums
People REALLY getting in Marcus Tate's ear on twitter.
- Thread starter Midlo Cane Fan
- Start date
- Status
Advertisement
Suhrthing
Recruit
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2016
- Messages
- 15,102
All of this. Likely a dumbass hanging with his young dumbass friends. About to learn a life-lesson...
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2012
- Messages
- 20,976
Murder is illegal of course but lynching in itself was not identified as means of murdering. I had to do research myself because I recently learned of this. Also there are states that don't require consent when in police custody. Sometimes when its seems truly unimaginable its true sad to say. Or at least there is some truth hidden inside of it.
Suhrthing
Recruit
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2016
- Messages
- 15,102
Indeed. The problem is too many people use it to converse as if they're sitting around bull****ting with their friends... and make passing small-talk remarks: "what? She said that? Nawww... f that b!" = Canceled from life.
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2012
- Messages
- 20,976
Not sure why but there were government officials who opposed to making it illegal. Shannon Sharpe was actually the one that shed light on it a couple weeks back on Undisputed.
Advertisement
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2016
- Messages
- 10,812
So, "burden of proof" just means the standard by which a party must prove any fact in a legal proceeding to legally establish that fact. In criminal law, it's the more famous "beyond all reasonable doubt". In a civil context, it could be (less frequently) "clear and convincing evidence," or (most frequently) by a mere "preponderance of the evidence" (i.e, more likely than not). Importantly, nobody here is talking about arresting this kid, or even holding him accountable in civil court. But I can appreciate using legal standards of proof to "convict" individuals of "bad acts" in the "court of public opinion," so I'll follow you down this road for a minute.
If the fact people are trying to establish is "that kid made a racist post," then there certainly is evidence such that a reasonable person could come to that conclusion. Specifically, there is evidence of racism in the form of a photograph of the alleged kid in front of some offensive and racist graffiti smiling with a thumbs up. Now, if we were in a courthouse, a party might raise an objection to the introduction of evidence, including authentication issues. The issue here (and where the analogy fails) is there doesn't appear to be anyone raising those objections without actual support (because the court of public opinion doesn't follow the same rules as a court of law). If there was an expert here with the photograph that could do an analysis to determine whether it was doctored or not, that could certainly be used to make the photo inadmissible (and end this whole thing).
But here in the court of CIS, the only evidence that we have to support that the photograph could potentially be fake is a couple of poster's suggestion that there is a material that appear to be granite that would be odd to find on an exterior ledge near a garage door.
On the flip side, there is some shadowing in the photo that some posters believe would be difficult to duplicate. And contrary to your post, we do know (because Clemson confirmed it here) that there was a student by the name of Austin Hobson enrolled at the school and that he is no longer enrolled there (because, at they state, "the student who posted the message is no longer enrolled at the university," as opposed to having never enrolled, or saying something like "the individual who posted the message is not enrolled at the university"). Additionally, the Tweet itself appears to confirm that, if the student they are referring to is, in fact, Austin Hobson, than he "posted the message".
Peripherally, there does also exist a woman named Agnes Hobson (purported mother of Austin) who is listed as a teacher at an elementary school in South Carolina, and who does own a home together with her husband in that same county. So that part of the post appears to check out, too.
Additionally, there appears to be a response to an inquiry circulating online from someone named Angela Nixon at Clemson, apparently the Director of Presidential Communications (Clemson's website confirms this individual does exist and that is her title at Clemson). In the e-mail response captured in the image below, Ms. Nixon states, "Clemson's leadership strongly denounces the sentiments expressed in the post by Austin Hobson. I can confirm that he is no longer enrolled at Clemson." Again, if true, this seems to confirm that: (1) Hobson was enrolled at Clemson; (2) Clemson is under the impression the post was generated "by Austin Hobson"; and (3) Hobson is no longer enrolled at Clemson. This could also be a fabrication, but it seems like a lot of trouble for nothing.
If you look into it a little more, you'll learn this kid was allegedly exposed over a month and a half ago. But, about two weeks ago an author named Tom Ross, who wrote a book titled "Black Lives Don't Matter," provided some additional confirmation. Ross claims Hobson gave his book a bad review several weeks before actually ordering the book, which made him decide to look into the kid. This is potentially corroborated by the Amazon reviews for the book (Link), which contains a June 14, 2020 1* review of the book by "Austin" with the note "scumbag writing." According to Ross, he remembered the bad review and when the book order later came in July, he looked into it (because it would evidence an unfounded review) and found the same photo online. It's possible that, too, is a fabrication, but it seems like a lot of trouble.
I am a person who very much believes in establishing facts (whether through a legal burden of proof or otherwise) before making claims about people. Nonetheless, and with all due respect, it seems to me that burden has been carried here, at least by the preponderance of the evidence and probably by clear and convincing evidence (though probably not beyond all reasonable doubt), to establish that the kid made a racist post.
Beyond that, I won't pretend to know what is in his heart, but I generally judge people by their actions. Make racist posts, then you're a racist. Obviously, everyone is free to come to draw their own conclusion.
Last edited:
NorthEastCane
Freshman
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2011
- Messages
- 3,443
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2015
- Messages
- 16,126
This is the heart of the matter. Calling a person a racist is something that will follow them for life. You have employers that do social media searches and if they came across a doctored photo, they might ask for an explanation or more likely pass on the person because its not worth their time to dig into it. Someone could have ruined this kids life either maliciously or as a bad prank. This isnt a Polaroid, it's a digital photo and they can be very easily edited. I worked in cyber operations for a long time so believe me when I say its really easy for an amateur to alter images with current technology. If I saw the metadata on the image I would be able to say for sure. Because the photo can't be authenticated and the implications are so damning, I will give the benefit of the doubt to the person. There are really ****ty and vindictive people who would do something like this out of revenge or cyberbullying.
My default- just as fundamentally decent human being - is to assume a person is not racist until, as you indicated, the preponderance of the evidence showed they are. If you passed this photo around and it turns out to be fake, you have intentionally contributed to ruining an innocent person's life and possibly the lives of his parents and family members. You can't unring that bell. If you assume it isn't true and withhold judgment until more facts come out, then what have you really lost? The ability to score some quick virtue points? After establishing the facts, you can retweet to your hearts content and make him and his extended family miserable.
In terms of the corroborating proof- how would the author figure out the kids last name from the Amazon review? Did he subpoena him for their review records? "Austin" lives in Connecticut according to the Amazon profile. I thought this happened in Clemson? Could you provide me with the link where the author said this? Even with a book sale- unless he is direct publisher I don't see how he would figure out who it was. I'd be interested in looking into this further if you showed me where you saw the author (Ross) said this.
Lastly- there is always the question of context. I don't know why the kid would do that if the photo is real- but do you remember this picture
Just look at that smug Trump supporter disrespecting that innocent native American man. Surely this photo speaks for itself and no further investigation is required.
Last edited:
Advertisement
PittsburghCane
Redshirt Freshman
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2017
- Messages
- 2,302
Actually heard that he’s got staying home heavily on his mind.
Wow thats lame AF! U know there going to be talking SOOO much **** when they lose him. I hope it becomes VERY visible for recruits to see and keeps affecting their class
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2012
- Messages
- 13,128
He'd be instantaneously in the two-deep discussion. OT has been by far our weakest position for years. Somehow McDermott and Darling didn't turn out the way we thought, so you have to go back to Winston and Henderson for decent tackles on this team. I like Walker, Washington and McGluaghlin. But we desperately need more quality there.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2016
- Messages
- 10,812
This is the heart of the matter. Calling a person a racist is something that will follow them for life. You have employers that do social media searches and if they came across a doctored photo, they might ask for an explanation or more likely pass on the person because its not worth their time to dig into it. Someone could have ruined this kids life either maliciously or as a bad prank. This isnt a Polaroid, it's a digital photo and they can be very easily edited. I worked in cyber operations for a long time so believe me when I say its really easy for an amateur to alter images with current technology. If I saw the metadata on the image I would be able to say for sure. Because the photo can't be authenticated and the implications are so damning, I will give the benefit of the doubt to the person. There are really ****ty and vindictive people who would do something like this out of revenge or cyberbullying.
My default- just as fundamentally decent human being - is to assume a person is not racist until, as you indicated, the preponderance of the evidence showed they are. If you passed this photo around and it turns out to be fake, you have intentionally contributed to ruining an innocent person's life and possibly the lives of his parents and family members. You can't unring that bell. If you assume it isn't true and withhold judgment until more facts come out, then what have you really lost? The ability to score some quick virtue points? After establishing the facts, you can retweet to your hearts content and make him and his extended family miserable.
In terms of the corroborating proof- how would the author figure out the kids last name from the Amazon review? Did he subpoena him for their review records? "Austin" lives in Connecticut according to the Amazon profile. I thought this happened in Clemson? Could you provide me with the link where the author said this? Even with a book sale- unless he is direct publisher I don't see how he would figure out who it was. I'd be interested in looking into this further if you showed me where you saw the author (Ross) said this.
Lastly- there is always the question of context. I don't know why the kid would do that if the photo is real- but do you remember this picture
Just look at that smug Trump supporter disrespecting that innocent native American man. Surely this photo speaks for itself and no further investigation is required.
Context can be critical, sure. And digital images can be doctored, of course. But, in this particular instance, where two separate times Clemson acknowledged it was his post, that is far less important to me. Having worked with and among inhouse counsel for a large public university, I am familiar with the way they operate and investigate potential issues among their student body. For Clemson to state (twice) that he posted it most likely means either there was an investigation into the matter, or they have arguably opened themselves up to a defamation action. I find the former for more likely, based on my experience with similar institutions. And if he posted that image, I think it is more likely than not that he is a racist, regardless of the context.
On some of your questions, I'm on the phone now and it is more of a pain in the a$$ to link, but there is a short YouTube video by the author discussing the review and his response. The author (Ross) seems like a suspicious character as well. It appears the author is publishing direct based on the name of the publisher, so I imagine that is how he was able to get the information to track the kid down.
Advertisement
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2017
- Messages
- 8,620
oh snap
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2015
- Messages
- 16,126
If you go back a little further, the same exact posts were 1st attributed to Conor Blackmon, "a student at Clemson." Turns out he doesn't exist. Heres what Clemson's investigation revealed.
Statement on racist posts attributed to “Conor Blackmon”
The accounts on Twitter and Instagram claim to belong to a “Conor Blackmon.” There is no one of that name registered at Clemson, either as a current student or incoming student. Clemson deeply regrets any pain and concern these posts have caused, especially to our students and alumni of color...
newsstand.clemson.edu
"The accounts on Twitter and Instagram claim to belong to a “Conor Blackmon.” There is no one of that name registered at Clemson, either as a current student or incoming student.
Further, the University asked two Clemson faculty members who are national experts in the identification and tactics of so-called social media “trolls” – Patrick Warren, associate professor of economics, and Darren Linvill, associate professor of communication – to analyze the accounts.
They discovered unusual posting patterns and additional inconsistencies in the account details that led them to conclude these accounts have been set up and are being operated under false pretenses."
Then on barstool it claims the person supposedly posted this on his Facebook 4 years ago, which if he is a freshman or sophomore puts him between at age 13-15 at the time of the photo.
If he is responsible for his own actions and consequences, why is everyone posting where his mom works? What's she have to do with his actions?
Lastly let's suppose it's all true- someone took that photo of him and he's a Clemson student. But the context is that he's laughing at the stupidity of the graffiti and in disbelief that someone would actually write that. Photo is taken at an inopportune time and it turns out the photo is wildly misleading. Think that is a stretch? Again- tell me your honest impression of what you see here.
Calling him a racist based on a suspect photo, which has led to people threatening to kill him (read the tweets) is a pretty serious matter.
Is it really that hard to say, "If true, the person is a racist but I want to know more" and then investigate the incident to get a full understanding of what happened before making the judgment the person is racist (and putting the burden on him to disprove it)?
If true, the kid deserves to face the consequences. But i don't agree with someone reposting and labeling a person as a racist based on a single questionable photo. As said above it has already been established by Clemson University that someone made up false accounts and created a fictional Clemson student using the exact same photo, so I think there is ample reason to be skeptical.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2016
- Messages
- 10,812
If you go back a little further, the same exact posts were 1st attributed to Conor Blackmon, "a student at Clemson." Turns out he doesn't exist. Heres what Clemson's investigation revealed.
Statement on racist posts attributed to “Conor Blackmon”
The accounts on Twitter and Instagram claim to belong to a “Conor Blackmon.” There is no one of that name registered at Clemson, either as a current student or incoming student. Clemson deeply regrets any pain and concern these posts have caused, especially to our students and alumni of color...
"The accounts on Twitter and Instagram claim to belong to a “Conor Blackmon.” There is no one of that name registered at Clemson, either as a current student or incoming student.
Further, the University asked two Clemson faculty members who are national experts in the identification and tactics of so-called social media “trolls” – Patrick Warren, associate professor of economics, and Darren Linvill, associate professor of communication – to analyze the accounts.
They discovered unusual posting patterns and additional inconsistencies in the account details that led them to conclude these accounts have been set up and are being operated under false pretenses."
Then on barstool it claims the person supposedly posted this on his Facebook 4 years ago, which if he is a freshman or sophomore puts him between at age 13-15 at the time of the photo.
If he is responsible for his own actions and consequences, why is everyone posting where his mom works? What's she have to do with his actions?
Lastly let's suppose it's all true- someone took that photo of him and he's a Clemson student. But the context is that he's laughing at the stupidity of the graffiti and in disbelief that someone would actually write that. Photo is taken at an inopportune time and it turns out the photo is wildly misleading. Think that is a stretch? Again- tell me your honest impression of what you see here.
View attachment 123943
Calling him a racist based on a suspect photo, which has led to people threatening to kill him (read the tweets) is a pretty serious matter.
Is it really that hard to say, "If true, the person is a racist but I want to know more" and then investigate the incident to get a full understanding of what happened before making the judgment the person is racist (and putting the burden on him to disprove it)?
If true, the kid deserves to face the consequences. But i don't agree with someone reposting and labeling a person as a racist based on a single questionable photo. As said above it has already been established by Clemson University that someone made up false accounts and created a fictional Clemson student using the exact same photo, so I think there is ample reason to be skeptical.
The fake social post I saw falsely attributed to Conor Blackmon was of a white guy with his knee over the neck of another white guy under a caption mocking black lives matter lives matter. I have not seen this "exact same post" attributed to Blackmon by Clemson. If you have a link, please provide it, as that could be relevant.
The argument by example and plea for context are not persuasive to me. There is a difference between someone taking a photograph of a scene and blasting it out of context, and a person uploading their own photograph with clearly racists words and drawing in the background (and a smiling thumbs up). You can conjure any circumstance of the Hobson having the photo taken at an "inopportune time" or imagine it was taken during an impassioned speech when he was rallying his classmates against the evils of racism. But if he posted that horrible, overtly racist photo of himself to his own social media account, there is simply no context where that is socially acceptable behavior.
Otherwise, as I have previously alluded, I agree with your general premise people should be more skeptical of things they see online and do some investigation before arriving at a conclusion. I did precisely that. I found enough to satisfy myself that this was more likely than not true. You may have a higher standard of proof for such things. That's fair. My initial comment was simply to point out that a person can believe in ideals such as "burden of proof" and apply them outside the courtroom, and still reach an opposite conclusion.
Advertisement
NC_Canes_11
All American
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2017
- Messages
- 20,707
While it seems like y’all are having a decent discussion on the matter, the only thing that matters in 2020 is the court of public opinion. This kid’s life is already ruined whether it’s real or not.
Plzwork4
Worldbeater
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2012
- Messages
- 2,640
Its a fake troll account. Gotta love the outrage of some of you guys without actually looking at facts...but sure...PROCEED with the mob rule tactics based on conjecture. Our society is really moving forward in such a positive way lately.
And I hope you all remember what's going on...because its all fun and games until that same giant hammer you all are flailing around with gets swung your way. And one day it will.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2017
- Messages
- 8,620
Its a fake troll account. Gotta love the outrage of some of you guys without actually looking at facts...but sure...PROCEED with the mob rule tactics based on conjecture. Our society is really moving forward in such a positive way lately.
And I hope you all remember what's going on...because its all fun and games until that same giant hammer you all are flailing around with gets swung your way. And one day it will.
Actually I didn't just post it without thought. There was some confirmation from Clemson or something. Another poster dug harder, above. Do you have a link to proof that this isn't accurate?
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2016
- Messages
- 10,812
Is that your opinion, or have you seen an official statement from Clemson or some other credible source claiming it is a fake? If the latter, please provide the link, as that sort of information should be disseminated with at least as much enthusiasm as any "fake troll" posts out there.
On my end, I did find a Media Release (link) from Clemson specifically calling the alleged Blackmon post a "social media 'troll'" account, but nothing similar for the Hobson FB post. I purposely did not include a link to the Blackmon post because I did not want to continue spreading a post that has already been objectively determined to be a fake, but suffice to say it is a different photograph with a white male with his knee on the neck of another white male laying prone, and some anti BLM language.
There may be some confusion out there (even more than usual) because these two postings happened somewhat close in time, and there was also (apparently) a third post by a Clemson student via IG Story (link here; the IG Story student was exonerated). Additionally, local news outlets (the previous link, as well as this link) indicate Clemson investigated these social media posts, resulting in the previously-listed student exoneration (and the Blackmon post being deemed a fake), and a response from Clemson that the other student (later identified by Clemson's Twitter account as "Austin") is no longer enrolled.
Evidence (especially circumstantial evidence) is rarely ever definitive, but if you look at the way Clemson is handling these two situation, it suggests the one is much more likely to be credible than the others. Whereas Clemson affirmatively stated the Blackmon post was a fake about 7 weeks ago with an official media release (link above), Clemson has repeatedly responded to the Austin Hobson situation by stating, "Federal student privacy laws limit what details we can share, but we can confirm that Austin is no longer enrolled at the university." (link to Clemson Twitter response). So what we know for certain is: (1) Hobson was enrolled at Clemson; (2) a FB post (allegedly from his FB account) of someone purporting to be him in front of a racist image was circulated; (3) Clemson investigated the post; and (4) Hobson is no longer enrolled at Clemson.
Of course, you are free to arrive at your own conclusion, but those are the pertinent facts as have been reported (at least that I could find). Again, if you have found something different, please share. Getting at the truth can be difficult in an age where the dissemination of "information" has greatly outpaced our ability to determine its veracity.
- Status
Advertisement