Never heard of the women before this opinion piece, but it appears that she got up the nose of Dictator Dan for "breaching" one of his sacred health orders. Hooray!

Shaming? Shame is not a weapon to be wielded by the sanctimonious against people they disapprove of. Shame is like offence: it has to be felt, it can't be given. This woman is highly unlikely to be ashamed of what she did. She is also highly unlikely to give a shite what Dan and his enslaved Victorians think about her either.

What an indictment of our society that there are people refereed to as an influencer. From what I have seen in media, it appears they are good looking women, who like getting in front of cameras wearing very little. Is there a male version of the above?

It amazes & saddens me that there are obviously a lot of young ladies who think that wearing or owning the same gear as some airhead bimbo will maker them more attractive. Correction I guess it is not such an airhead action to earn a living from just a few photographs, it is those influenced that are the air heads.

I have only heard, or seen the term recently, is this activity another disastrous result of the eternal lock downs? Are the kids trying to find some sort of life in following the activities of these people?

God help us.

Agree with most of the article and hope that the apology is sincere and not another PR campaign.

One notes that this (good time) lady and her previous attitude, was not alone, but accompanied by thousands of repeat offenders who seem to believe, our rules and public health orders, don't apply to them!

And wander around as Asymptomatic super spreaders, infecting hundreds of others.

Some of who will die as surely as if they'd been shot by some Ahole just discharging a lethal weapon without regard where the rounds go! Others who may spend months in hospital fighting for their very lives!
Alan B.

I’m with the mob on this one.
As a comparison, I’m acquainted with a boy looking into the eyes of a twenty year jail sentence for a crime of passion.
Not too much sympathy for him or his anguished Mother, coming their way.

Now for the subject matter of this article. For the arrogant and elitist behaviour, why not some jail time, just a small bit of it, maybe twelve months behind bars.
And a question not addressed by the author showing care and concern for the welfare of the deserving, why not raise the subject of the white powder she was consuming through one nostril.
Oh, but that’s OK, the description points to the acceptance by him of the snorting habits of the Cocaine Cowboys of elite sport.

All good there is it?

Dan

This dopey academic is obviously more attuned to the behaviour of assorted bogan trollops but not on anyone important. If you want a real pile on take it to Boris Johnson and the other world leaders including Morrison who attended the recent gabfest. Social distancing, masks and elbow bumps for the camera. Once the camera was averted then hand shakes, back slapping and all the fun of the fair. Have a go at them first.
Alan B your so-called vaccine (As repeated by the so-called Victorian Health Minister today) neither stops you getting Covid or passing it on. So do you suggest the death penalty if you catch and then pass on the Covid lol? Asking for a friend.

For the basic overall concept that it's ok for Nadia Bartel be shamed.
Yes I agree.

As for "have an added ethical responsibility to the community-not only because they are content creators privileged by a large following"

She doesn't necessarily have an ethical responsibility to anyone.
She can act however she wants to act, but if she's in the public eye, people will form opinions about the things she does.

"That shaming, however, should not be understood as a call for large members of the public to engage in a mass pile-on of hate, anger and condemnation."

Why not? That doesn't make sense.
So some people can have a say but not all people can have a say.
Only privileged people can have a say?

She's in the public eye, if she screws up the public have a right to respond.
What gives you the right to try to dictate how others should and shouldn't act?