This is a fine example of when “online shaming” backfires and actually benefits the person targeted in the shaming.
A manager of a Target store in Swansea, Massachusetts was recently the target of an online harassment campaign of someone trying to game the store of out nearly $90. The woman, who has been dubbed as “Target Tori” online, has now been gifted over $30,000 since a self-proclaimed journalist attempted to paint the woman as someone defrauding consumers at the store.
On January 17th, Twitter user David Leavitt decided that he would post the photo of Target manager Tori Perrotti online and claim that she broke the law by not honoring an advertised price for a toothbrush.
Leavitt, who claims to be an “Award-Winning Multimedia Journalist” in his Twitter bio, noticed a display model for an Oral-B PRO 5000 toothbrush that hosted a price of $0.01 on the planogram label. For those unfamiliar with what a planogram label is, it serves as a means for stores to account for inventory types that aren’t meant to be sold to consumers – like display items.
Leavitt had then thought he would attempt to purchase a complete, boxed unit for a penny by claiming that the affixed model used for display was a price advertisement. The item in question lists for $89.99, and Perrotti informed the “journalist” that the store would not honor the one-cent price match.
Essentially, he saw a mistake, tried to exploit it, then threw a fit when they wouldn’t honor it.
In an effort to turn the tables on Perrotti, Leavitt called the police on her and the store according to a post he made on Twitter:
“The police verified @target displayed the price of toothbrush for $0.01 The store manager Tori refused to sell me the toothbrush for displayed price. The police said I need to sue them and that they are making me a verified report take to court.”
— David Leavitt (@David_Leavitt) January 17, 2020
Many of people responded to Leavitt’s post, but not in favor of the man trying to make himself into a victim. One user responded by comparing Leavitt’s antics to that of the transgender who sued various waxing places for not performing bikini waxes on their male-genitals:
“You may want to give Jessica Yaniv a call – lots of experience for harassing hard working people. Just may have a few tips for you.”
You may want to give jessica yaniv a call
lots of experience for harassing hard working people .
Just may have a few tips for you pic.twitter.com/QTrKqJLDPS
— justme (@justmekimhere) January 18, 2020
Other responders were disgusted at the fact that his post contained a photo of Perrotti in his shame-campaign. When more complaints began to mount against Leavitt, a GoFundMe was created to send the Target Manager on a vacation.
Dude, please take her photo down. In what universe do you think it’s ok to shame a woman working at @Target because she didn’t sell you a toothbrush for 1cent? Calling the cops was bizarre, too. It’s an obvious labelling error, she did her job.
— Rita Panahi (@RitaPanahi) January 17, 2020
As of January 28th, the fundraiser has reached $34,815 – far surpassing its goal of $5,000. The organizer of the campaign, Carpe Donktum, has provided several updates detailing the gratitude of Perrotti. Photo’s featured within the GoFundMe campaign show that Perrotti now has access to the donated vacation funds.
Since the virility of Perrotti hit via the ill-attempt to paint her as a villain of retail, she created her own Twitter account under the name @RealTargetTori. According to her newly founded account, she intends to pay the generosity forward.
— TargetTori (@RealTargetTori) January 19, 2020
Considering that Target was also addressed in the series of tweets by Leavitt, a representative from the store chain spoke with the Herald news and delivered the following statement:
“At Target, we’re grateful for the hard work our team members put in each day to serve our guests in our stores. We’re working closely with our store team on this and appreciate the messages of support the team has received from guests.”
Leave the girl out of this and take down her picture. You’re a bad person for doing this to her.
— Bridget Phetasy (@BridgetPhetasy) January 17, 2020
According to Leavitt, the interaction left him shaken-up:
“No I can’t believe I had to actually call the police because the manager wouldn’t honor the price. I’m shaking still. The police officer verified the price tag and told me I could take them to court and that she’d be a witness.”
No I can’t believe I had to actually call the police because the manager wouldn’t honor the price. I’m shaking still. The police officer verified the price tag and told me I could take them to court and that she’d be a witness
— David Leavitt (@David_Leavitt) January 17, 2020
For those in need of a good laugh, the folks over at Turtleboy actually secured the police phone call that Leavitt made about the price not being honored. For those curious, yes, Leavitt’s voice sounds exactly how you think he would.
Speaking of ridiculous reporters, check out what this Vice journalist did.
A media personality for Vice News recently broke one of the essential rules of gun safety: never let a gun barrel face anything that you are not willing to destroy.
While doing a piece on “smart guns”, the reporter pointed a weapon at his own cameraman and pulled the trigger. While the “smart gun” worked as it was intended to, that had to be one of the most flagrantly dangerous manners to handle and treat a firearm, and further exposed the ignorance of people who are trying to ban guns altogether.
For those unfamiliar with what a “smart gun” is, it’s a firearm devised in a way that is intended to only discharge a bullet under certain circumstances. Often called the personalized-gun, most employ technology like RFID chips that function as proximity tokens. What those proximity tokens are meant to do is render a weapon useless unless the proper token is held by the person firing the weapon.
Employing technology into guns would obviously help to cut down on negligent accidents – except there are still several well-stated liability concerns.
Still, that didn’t stop this Vice News journalist and host from pointing a loaded weapon at one of his crewmembers and pulling the trigger.
While the motivations behind the creation and prototypes of “smart guns” are noble, since they aim to decrease accidental shootings, the data isn’t out yet on how reliable they actually are. Furthermore, while they’re aimed to deter accidental shootings, there’s nothing “accidental” about pointing a gun at someone and firing it intentionally. Had anything remotely failed, then that cameraman would’ve either been dead or seriously maimed by the blatant display of idiocy.
Former Marine turned writer, Julio Rosas, posted a clip on Twitter showcasing the demonstrably dangerous maneuver of pointing a weapon at a camera man and pulling the trigger:
“Still can’t get over that a Vice reporter, in a video on “smart guns” helping prevent accidental shootings, decided to it was a good idea to point a Thompson, that had a drug mag in, at his cameraman, pull the trigger, and then say, “I didn’t think it was going to do that.””
Still can't get over that a Vice reporter, in a video on "smart guns" helping prevent accidental shootings, decided to it was a good idea to point a Thompson, that had a drug mag in, at his cameraman, pull the trigger, and then say, "I didn't think it was going to do that." pic.twitter.com/O3M3kLd0Ag
— Julio Rosas (@Julio_Rosas11) January 23, 2020
No matter what safety measures are present on a firearm, that doesn’t mean someone should be frivolous with regarding the four essential rules of firearm safety. The rules are:
- Treat all guns as if they are always loaded
- Never let the muzzle cover anything that you are not willing to destroy
- Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on target and you have made the decision to shoot
- Be sure of your target and what is behind it and always secure your guns from unauthorized persons
The fact that the reporter essentially disregarded nearly all aspects of firearm safety is completely irresponsible. There are countless instances where people assumed the “safety” was “on” which then results in an accidental shootings.
LET has a private home for those who support emergency responders and veterans called LET Unity. We reinvest the proceeds into sharing untold stories of those patriotic Americans. Click to check it out.
“Smart gun” technology is nothing more than an elaborate “safety” feature, and vesting so much trust in that feature to point a loaded weapon and fire at someone is an example of a person who should never handle a weapon.
Even the technology publication TechCrunch is extremely skeptical of the effectiveness of these “smart guns”. Journalist Jon Stokes stated the dangers of adding smart-technology to a firearm:
“Whenever you attach software to some new category of things — especially software that has any kind of connection to the outside world, whether via RFID or an actual network — then in addition to whatever problems that thing had before, you’ve introduced a whole host of brand new security and identity problems.”
According to the CDC, there are approximately 487 unintentional gun deaths per year in the United States. Unintentional gun deaths are preventable ones more often than not, and the easiest way to not add to the statistics is to not point loaded guns at people. Remember – guns don’t kill people – it’s the folks operating them that kill people.