Designer & Fashion Insiders Behavior [Read post #1 before posting] - Page 58 - the Fashion Spot
How to Join
the Fashion Spot / the Sidewalk Cafť / Rumor has it...
FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Rules Links Mobile How to Join
Thread Tools Display Modes
1 Week Ago
tapenerd's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Gender: femme
Posts: 3,551
I guess all I'm saying is that neither of these things should ever happen. And no one should ever have to worry about if it will happen. Whoever is behind the account definitely could've gone about this in a different way, and specified what each individual did.

If fashion is your trade, then when you're naked, I guess you must be unemployed, yeah?
  Reply With Quote
1 Week Ago
Mea Culpa's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: The Left Coast
Gender: femme
Posts: 11,830
Fashion’s ‘Blacklist’ Has Been Taken Down
By Emilia Petrarca - MARCH 6, 2018

Just one week after the Instagram account @ShitModelMgmt published a “Blacklist” naming photographers, agents, and stylists who allegedly “acted sexually inappropriate” toward models and others in the fashion industry, the account’s moderator decided to take the list down on Monday at midnight.

“I need to stay safe and go under the radar for a little bit,” the Blacklist’s publisher told the Cut Monday evening. “It’s been a lot.”

Per emails and DMs reviewed by the Cut, she was sent messages not only threatening legal action but also making threats against her safety and the safety of her family. @ShitModelMgmt and the Blacklist are both run anonymously, but the publisher feared her identity would be revealed, with some saying they were working to track her down.

“It’s just sad because this is what happens when people speak up about abuse,” the publisher said of the backlash she received. “I feel like things will never change because every time people try to speak up, they get threatened. Now, I’ve experienced it firsthand how angry people can be. Clearly, they’re scared, too.”

Those with their names on the Blacklist felt similarly attacked. Lanny Zenga, a longtime professional model scout who said in an email that his “conscience is clear,” claims that he found himself on the list with someone who had once abused him. Seeing his name on the same page as those of “actual known monsters,” he told the Cut, lead to “one of the darkest, lowest points of [his] life.”

In addition to personal fears, the responsibility of managing the Blacklist also became too much for its publisher. “I feel like the police at this point, and that’s not my job,” she said. In some ways, she wishes she had just “posted [the list] and just disappeared.”

Instead, the Blacklist’s publisher felt she had to keep adding names to the list, which continued to pour in until the final hours, and also respond to the concerns of those being accused. She said she took down “five to ten” names for various reasons.

According to Zenga, the Blacklist’s moderator did not respond to his inquiries via email or direct message. His lawyer also sent a cease and desist with no response. (The Fashion Law has written more about the legality of the Blacklist here.)

Despite the Blacklist publisher’s alleged efforts to be thorough, respond to everyone, and gather as much “proof” as possible, she is not, as she said, the police. Similarly to Moira Donegan, who created the “Shitty Media Men” Google spreadsheet in October, the publisher intended, perhaps naively, for the Blacklist to be used only within the modeling community as a way to keep themselves safe. Needless to say, with the help of @ShitModelMgmt’s over 140,000 followers, the Blacklist grew into something much bigger than any one person could or should have to moderate — further proving that there are more stories of sexual harassment out there than we know what to do with.

“I 100-percent agree that predators should be called out and held accountable for their actions,” said Zenga of the Blacklist’s intentions. “I also believe that victims of said predators should have a safe place in which to report. However, I think it is important that this type of reporting is handled in a responsible and critical setting — not a witch hunt–style arena of free-flowing information from anywhere and anyone with an Instagram handle. This is both dangerous and takes away from the actual problems trying to be solved.”

“I’m very sorry if anyone is on the list and they shouldn’t be,” the Blacklist’s publisher said in response. “I did the best I could to make sure it was factual and that every name was accurate. I’m trying to listen to both sides, but I have to stand on the side of the victims. I can’t flip-flop. If [some of those on the list] are innocent, that’s my mistake. It’s my mistake for believing people and thinking that they have good intentions.”

In the end, the Blacklist’s moderator says she has “no regrets.” If her intention was to raise awareness, she’s done it. We know these stories are out there — and that there are a lot of them. The question now is, what do we do with them? What’s the best way to collect and investigate the claims of the abused within the fashion industry?

Clearly, the traditional reporting process is flawed if so many are turning to Instagram direct messages. The Model Alliance has already proposed a “neutral, nonprofit arbitrating entity that will guarantee accountability” to help solve this issue, but they’ll need the industry to get behind it.

“It’s time for change,” the Blacklist’s author said matter-of-factly. That, we can all agree on.

"there's no design, your flaws are fine"
  Reply With Quote
1 Week Ago
Mea Culpa's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: The Left Coast
Gender: femme
Posts: 11,830
Interesting article about the legality of the Blacklist

UPDATED: Is the Fashion Industry's Newly-Published Blacklist Legal?
March 6, 2018

The anonymous individual behind "**** Model Management" is moving beyond memes that poke fun at the long hours, little pay, and near-constant critique endured by the faces of the fashion industry. The account’s operator has created a “blacklist” – one that has been likened to fashion’s version of the “Shitty Media Men” list – that contains nearly 300 names, ranging from well-known photographers, like Mario Testino, Olivier Zahm, and Bruce Weber to big-name designers like Tom Ford and Jeremy Scott. All of the individuals on the list have allegedly “acted [in a] sexually inappropriate” manner towards models and others in the fashion industry.

According to the site’s creator, "I asked my followers to message me the names of any photographers that acted sexually inappropriate towards them. My DMs immediately blew up. I was receiving thousands of messages from different models." Unlike the “Shitty Media Men” list, which was meant to be shared amongst women in the industry and not published in a public capacity, the **** Model Management founder compiled the submitted names into a list and published it on the newly-created site.

Certainly anticipating legal backlash (likely as a result of the publication of what appears to be unverified information), the creator – who told The Cut’s Emilia Petrarca that she is trying to keep the list as accurate as possible by amending it if "a photographer DMs me saying he didn’t do anything wrong, begging me to take him off the list" – includes an interesting note in connection with the list. It reads: “The names on this list were sent to me, and I am simply publishing what was sent to me. Section 230 in the U.S. Code says that ‘No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.’”

The post quotes language from the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which referred to Section 230 of the U.S. Code – the Communication Decency Act of 1996 – as “protecting bloggers when they publish information sent by a third-party.”

**** Model Management’s founder goes on to try to make her case, “I am reporting and reposting content that was sent to me, and I am not editing or changing the content.” In short, her rationale is that because she is merely posting content that is being sent to her, she is immune from legal action, namely, defamation – or more specifically, libel, since the potentially inaccurate and reputation-harming statements at issue are written.

Is it really that simple, though? Almost certainly not, as Petrarca noted yesterday. This is at least in part because the site’s founder may be able to be construed by any of the individuals on the list as more than merely a service provider, and more accurately, an author, i.e., the author of the fashion blacklist, and thus, liable for any defamatory content.

Typically, we see the Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act cited when lawsuits are filed against website operators over content that is included in the comments section of their websites. For instance, several years ago, Sarah Jones, a former Cincinnati Bengals cheerleader sued Arizona-based gossip website, The Dirty, alleging that anonymous comments erroneously posted on the site stated that she had slept with numerous players and as a result, contracted sexually transmitted diseases.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit sided with Nik Richie, the founder of the website, holding that Richie did not develop or create the content and thus, was immune from liability. But that case centered on statements that were posted in the comments section of Richie’s website by third parties. That is different, one could argue, from the instance at hand.

One noteworthy takeaway from the the Jones v. The Dirty case – especially given some of the factual differences between that case and the **** Model Management blacklist – comes from a a joint brief filed (in favor of Richie) by the Kentucky branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, along with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Center for Democracy and Technology, Digital Media Law Project and Public Participation Project.

In their amicus brief, the groups stated, “Federal courts have consistently held that website operators may be held responsible for developing unlawful material only if the facts demonstrate that the operator unambiguously solicited or induced content that is itself unlawful.” While the groups argued that “no such facts have been found in [the Jones v. The Dirty] case," there seems to be some evidence of **** Model Management soliciting content, namely, the operator's call for her followers to send her the names of any photographers that "acted sexually inappropriately."

Moreover, there very well might be a reasonable argument that by issuing this call for user submissions and then publishing that information as part of a larger narrative (i.e., a blacklist of “people in the fashion industry that [the site’s creator] suggests [that] models avoid”), the site’s operator is acting more as an author or dissemintaor of content than merely “a provider of interactive computer services," something that would made her ineligible for s. 230 protections.

The question remains: Is the content at hand unlawful? Assuming that the information is inaccurate, and thus, libelous – which a number of representatives for individuals on the list have argued to TFL, arguably making this a matter most appropriate for a fact finder (i.e., jury), as opposed to the decisions of the media or individuals in a non-jury capacity – the wrongfully accused just might be able to make a case, even if the founder's intentions are noble and aimed at making the fashion industry a safer place for models (which they appear to be).

UPDATED (March 6, 2018): Just a week after its publication, the list is no more. After receiving threats of litigation, as well as "threats against her safety and the safety of her family," the blacklist's author opted to unpublished the list. The existence of the list, itself, while inherently problematic from a legal perspective, paired with the threats that its author says she received as a result of posting it, sheds light on the at-times very ugly underside of the fashion industry (and its not infrequent attempts to keep bad behavior under wraps) and the backlash that those attempting to stand up against its alleged abuses face.

This list, itself, sheds light on the many unaddressed allegations of sexual harassment. The Cut's Emilia Petrarca notes that New York-based organization The Model Alliance has a better idea of how to deal with such claims, which continue to run rampant in the fashion industry, proposing a “neutral, nonprofit arbitrating entity that will guarantee accountability” to help solve this issue.****-model-management-fashion-industry-blacklist-legal

"there's no design, your flaws are fine"
  Reply With Quote
1 Week Ago
fashion icon
Lola701's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: france
Gender: femme
Posts: 3,264
Originally Posted by Mea Culpa View Post
ďIím very sorry if anyone is on the list and they shouldnít be,Ē the Blacklistís publisher said in response. ]
I just canít with that response.
Itís just too easy to wash-up things like that...

This just prove to me that that list didnít add anything to the conversation and neither helped the alleged victims and those who are fighting against sexual harassment/abuse.

  Reply With Quote
1 Week Ago
Littleathquakes's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: NJ
Gender: homme
Posts: 5,629
Of course not. It's akin to the racial divide in fashion. You'll get a few movers and shakers here and there, the industry responds for a bit, then you're back to square one.

  Reply With Quote
Previous Thread | Next Thread »

#1, behavior, campbell, designer, fashion, insiders, naomi, post, posting, read, russian, sergeenko, slams, ulyana
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:14 AM.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. is a property of TotallyHer Media, LLC, an Evolve Media LLC company. ©2018 All rights reserved.