Roger Ebert Tweets Chastisement After Drunk Driving Death

[afbluebelle]

[So i'm clear, you don't think it would be rude if he'd tweeted "live stupid, die stupid"?

I think it would be rude, but it's not something I would be surprised to read. Tweets are not personal communications. Would they have been upset if someone had written an editorial that said the same thing in 100 times as many words?

But the conversation is about whether his words were rude, not whether they were surprising, right? To borrow my favorite Top Chef expression, this is Etiquette Hell, not Does It Surprise You That Someone Said This Hell. 

And we've said many times on here that the way you say something is, for etiquette purposes, as important as what you say.

So I dont understand how your comments - that they're lucky he didn't post "live stupid die stupid" or that someone could have written a long editorial with the same basic message - is relevant to the actual question of the rudeness of Mr. ebert's tweet.  It doesn't matter if its surprising. And an editorial - with a different tone and medium than Ebert's tweet - is not at all comparable.

Thank you.  You have said what I was trying to explain and failing horribly at. I've read so many phrases used in this thread that, if it had been any other thread, would have been locked in a second.  I know I've seen people get upset at the phrase "the truth hurts" or "the truth isn't pretty", and it should be the same way across the board for all things. I know I would get the ban hammer for spurting off that phrase as an answer to other people's threads pertaining to their lives. 

I'm not upset about the subject at hand, I have just been trying to write my posts on the thread topic.  And I've never been told that my opinion and arguments aren't valid and are interesting/baseless assumptions so many times in my life, even though I have provided reasons and articles and a back story to why I think this. 

[ydpubs]

I see the "interesting assumption" being used in cases where really, you have no idea what could be going on with the person. You don't know them or what is going on in their lives. Like a person has gained weight or has a fair amount of weight in their belly and someone says: When are you due?

I had this discussion of speculation vs. assumption in another thread.

Assuming any celebrity dying in a car crash was due to drugs or alcohol is just that, assuming, jumping to a conclusion. You don't know anything at all about the situation because maybe the celebrity in question has no history of using drugs or alcohol.

In the case of a person with a proven history of reckless behavior and actions and drug/booze abuse; it's not out of line or outrageous to think drugs or booze was involved.

[Twik]

Well, my opinion is that a tweet by a celebrity is a mass-market communication, not a personal message. A personal message to that effect directly to the mourners would have been rude, because it would have been clearly aimed *at them personally*. A public message, containing an important safety warning? No, not rude, unless it specifically attacked Mr. Dunn. The tweet did not.

[Brentwood]

I'm also still wondering how it "wasn't Ebert's place to comment."

Is it ours, then? Anyone's? Newsworthy events are open to comment, whether any individual likes any given comment or not.

[ydpubs]

I'm also still wondering how it "wasn't Ebert's place to comment."

Is it ours, then? Anyone's? Newsworthy events are open to comment, whether any individual likes any given comment or not.

I don't get that either.

Who has the "right" to comment then? Who decides when the time is "right?"

[nolechica]

I'm also still wondering how it "wasn't Ebert's place to comment."

Is it ours, then? Anyone's? Newsworthy events are open to comment, whether any individual likes any given comment or not.

Seriously and Twitter etiquette is different than regular due to the restrictions. You can use twitlonger, but most people won't read unless it's worth the time.