Something I do most mornings, is to check my statistics here. I like to know which posts people are reading and am sometimes surprised to see that there’s one or two out there, from a month or so ago, receiving some traction. I do this mainly because if I know what readers are interested in, I can tailor future posts to attract those same readers. I find there are some I think would initially receive more clicks, that don’t,and vice-versa. So it’s not always clear to me. Then there are those mornings that have me scratching my head.
I recently wrote a post, The Strange Case of Sarah Braasch, which was well received, but not to the extent I thought it would be. Now it’s getting reads that were unexpected and of course I wanted to discover why. I scanned my Twitter feed to discover that Sarah has been targeted by the mob again all because at her YouTube channel, she’s dared defend herself in a series of videos. The latest video, as of this writing, has received over 1.5K views. From what I can tell from what she’s tweeted, she’s received a lot of disparagement (that’s putting it nicely) including death threats. How dare she speak out and defend herself and her reputation! Doesn’t she realize she’s already been convicted in the court of public opinion?
What does this say about society that has made up it’s mind based on one side of a story? Was no one interested at all in Sarah’s side? Of course not because it spoils the narrative that was the entire point: White Woman Bad. White Woman Racist. That’s all anyone needed to know. It doesn’t matter that the original stories from 2018 caused the same kind of harassment that Sarah’s receiving currently. No one seems to be the least embarrassed that truth means nothing anymore as long as the initial bias is confirmed.
As I wrote in that first post linked above, and in a subsequent post, I performed my own research. I don’t readily take up a cause and when I do, I don’t do it lightly. There was something wrong with the entire story from the beginning and what needed to happen was the other side to come out. Enter Sarah and her video series.
Her first series details what is believed to be the genesis for everything that subsequently occurred 2.5 months later. It’s shocking but notice that is nothing in that series that would initially have anyone believe that she would eventually become the target she eventually became. There’s certainly signs there, and maybe in hindsight Sarah should’ve anticipated what may happen in the future. But who would have anticipated the level of antipathy against oneself?
Sarah scripts each video carefully. Some may claim because it gives her an opportunity to make up her story, so that it appears to be believable. A lot of people on YouTube do the same though and this is a terrible argument. In fact, in this situation, because the incidences she’s recalling happened a year ago, it’s actually what she should do to make sure she’s telling her side of the story without leaving it to memory alone. She also is recording these on an iPhone, as she states, holding the phone in one hand, referring to her script, to tell what is in my opinion, an egregious offense against her person.
As I wrote before, I don’t actually know Sarah. I’ve net met her, or spoken with her. My only contact with her has been dialogue over Twitter. So why would I take up the cause of someone I don’t know? I would ask the question but in the other way: Why would anyone condemn someone they’ve never met, never tried to interview before publishing a scathing article, not even over Twitter?
What happened to Sarah and what was perpetrated on the public is nothing more than a hoax, in this case a targeted one not against some amorphous person or persons, but a named individual. It’s not like we’ve never seen these before is it? In this case though, the targeting has caused real harm to someone and there needs be consequences for those that not only targeted Sarah initially, but those online that have made the threats. Where’s Twitter in all of this? People were suspended over tweeting to laid-off journalists that they needed to Learn to Code, as being targeted harassment but where are they when someone is actually receiving threats against their person?
I hope Twitter will step up and ban those that have made threats against Sarah. The bannings won’t prevent others from doing the same, but it would be a start. Some have suggested that Sarah change her Notifications so that at least some, if not most of the people she’s seeing there will basically be talking to no one. I think that’s a good, if not temporary, solution.
I’ve suggested to Sarah (I don’t think she’s seen it because she’s not looking at her notifications right now) that she start a new series: ‘I Won’t be Intimidated Into Silence’. Take them on in her videos. Naming names where it’s appropriate. Let everyone know who’’s an utter scumbag. There’s a time to sit back and hope that maybe, just maybe, the mob will eventually move on (they always do), but there’s also a time to stand up for yourself. Sarah need not engage these on Twitter, that’s a fool’s errand. On Youtube, she is the voice. Comments, if there are those that would want to attack her there, may be disabled.
I’m not asking anyone to take my word for anything. Not in this post, my initial one linked above, or the one I write subsequently, I Believe Sarah, that I wrote after continuing my research into all of this. I would ask that anyone reading this go to her channel, watch both video series, and come to your own conclusion. There will be those whose minds will not be changed at all; Others may find that the detail Sarah provides is intriguing in that in no other story that attacked her, is any of this available.
There’s no reason that anyone should refuse to give Sarah a fair hearing. Of course, for some reason there will always be those that wouldn’t believe someone’s story no matter the level of evidence that supported the story. There needs to be an evil person; someone we may all rally against even though we have no evidence to support any of our conclusions about that person. That needs to change.