Just as March 2022 comes to an end, Malaysians were shocked to encounter a now viral video of a local university professor reacting to news that one of her students did not have a laptop to attend class.
She grew more irate as she badgered the student about his family status before continuing to berate him and his family for not prioritising his university education. She ends her rant by exclaiming her overall displeasure with teaching “B40” students (a local shorthand for working class or those living in poverty).
The video has become an overnight sensation, dividing Malaysians into two camps: those who support the student and those who support the professor.
Malaysians in support of the student were critical of the professor’s lack of professionalism, decorum, compassion and empathy. Those who came to the support of the professor highlighted the fact that students these days are too easily affected by “tough love” or a talking down. Some argued that the video should not have been circulated on social media, especially when it lacked proper context.
Within 24 hours, the university released a public statement that they were addressing the issue and taking “appropriate action” against the professor. It further stressed that it would not compromise its values and reasserted its own dedication in providing care and support to B40 students, although, to the best of their knowledge, this was what every lecturer in the said university generally strived for.
It is commendable that the university has taken a proactive step to protect its reputation and stay ahead of this issue.
Later that day, however, a supposedly internal report by the university on the incident was leaked and circulated on social media. Called the “Chronology Report”, the three-page report presented the details of the students in the class as well as specific details of the student in the video (with full name, phone number and home address).
A task force that facilitated a meeting between the two parties and interrogated the student found the student had misrepresented some facts in his responses and indicated he did not record nor release the video. The report recommended that either no action be taken as the two had met and an amicable solution was found or that the professor’s contract be revoked. There was no mention of anything from the professor’s perspective or justification for her behaviour.
As the issue is still evolving, the release of this report further deepened the public divide on the issue as those in support of the professor felt vindicated - that the professor was right in being “harsh” as the student had lied. Others considered this internal report a calculated effort to discredit the student, protect the professor (or at least the reputation of the university), and deflect from the real crux of the matter: regardless of the student’s response, the professor’s impropriety and callousness in handling the situation was uncalled for and unbecoming of an educator.
A form of whistleblowing
The public outcry, in this case, has similar parallels to Ain Husniza Saiful Nizam’s case a year back where a student called out her teacher’s poor behaviour which was met by a divided response from Malaysians on social media. Where Ain became famous over a TikTok video that became viral on its own, the people behind this viral video were more strategic in their approach: Even though this video was recorded last year, the people behind it only released it once the student in question had completed his studies (to avoid any retaliation) and was released through a dummy Twitter account, which was later deleted.
The need for secrecy in the release of this video suggests that there is an element of fear of repercussions from the university. Videos like these are essentially a form of whistleblowing to highlight deep-set issues in an institution that require outside intervention or a public outcry.
Despite the whistleblower taking precautions, everyone in that class ended up being doxxed (where one’s personal information is released online) through that leaked internal report. While the university obviously deny they released it, one might believe that there were people within the institution who felt the need to leak the document with these private details exposed. The obvious intention would be to attack the student and protect the professor’s actions.
While the dust settles on this issue, one thing has become abundantly clear, being a whistleblower against the establishment in this country is a frightening affair. The internal report from the university did not need to insert the full details of these students and there doesn’t appear to be any response from the university over the leaking of private information in this way, a stark contrast to its initial response when its reputation was on the line.
Doxxing a common feature
When public institutions fail those under their care so easily, this leads to a further reduction in public trust in them and that such actions are actually condoned and normalised in public discourse.
Doxxing has become a very common feature in any contentious debate on Malaysian politics with opponents doing deep dives into social media (or other forms of social engineering) to find any incriminating personal details to use to shame or denigrate their opponents.
There have been numerous past cases where Malaysian vigilantes take it upon themselves to pressure employers, criticise businesses or just harass their targets through phone calls, texts and even physical visits.
It appears that if someone is seen to have crossed a moral line, then all of these forms of cyberbullying are morally acceptable and even necessary. Based on some responses on social media, these actions are often commended and applauded, signifying that it is somewhat normalised in our society.
As an educator myself, I can understand the challenges that both professors and students alike have had to overcome during these pandemic years. With everything going digital, it can be easy for both sides to disassociate with other humans on their screens. But it must continue to be central for all educators that their role grants the responsibility of authority in this relationship and there must be an element of nurture, care and empathy to students.
The collapse of decorum by this professor is deplorable, but more worrying is the atmosphere within the university where students fear they could not report the matter and felt compelled to use viral video as their only avenue.
Our laws on cyberspace are in serious need of an update, especially to address rampant cyberbullying that often goes unpunished. Given enough time, the bullies will dominate the discourse as everyone is forced into silence for fear of retribution that could affect their livelihoods and loved ones.
Until legislation on cyberbullying is passed, it is up to the people and our institutions to do the right thing and protect people’s privacy and information and limit the damage done by these cyberbullies. Public discourse must not be controlled by provocateurs and Malaysians must make a firm stand that such behaviours are no longer acceptable. - Mkini
BENJAMIN YH LOH is a senior lecturer in the School of Media and Communication at Taylor's University Malaysia and an associate with the Asia Centre in Bangkok.
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.