<p>Who knew Facebook was this important to running things. Next thing seems to be your credit score will be based on who your facebook friends are.</p>
<p>[Facebook</a> friends could change your credit score - Aug. 26, 2013](<a href="Facebook friends could change your credit score)</p>
<p>It seems silly to spend valuable education resources on something parents should be doing . Perhaps the money is better spent educating people on the public aspects of their online personas .</p>
<p>However I do not understand the free speech concerns. There is free speech but not freedom from the repercussions of your speech. When it comes to employees, take this example. Employee A indicates on Facebook he is employed by company X. Employee engages in inflammatory posts about sexual orientation, race, religion, or political affiliation. Customer of Company X reads post and is upset and contacts the company. What is the appropriate course of action? Company serves the public, relies on community good will, sees itself as an organization above such nonsense. Does this employee remain emotes in accustomed service role ? </p>
<p>This is a real issue that companies face regularly .</p>
<p>race , religion, or political affiliation. Customer of c</p>
<p>Sorry for the above. The cc iPad application is the pits.</p>
<p>
That one’s easy - company fires employee for being stupid.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This one scares me. How is a blue state employer gonna view someone criticizing Obama or promoting gun rights, in a non-inflammatory way? Where is the line?</p>
<p>^^^The line is between private and public. It’s a pretty clear, fat, un-dotted unambiguous line.</p>
<p>Again, if you wouldn’t say it at the company party…don’t say it publicly on a social media site.</p>
<p>And frankly, given the very specific, block level target marketing (based on personal information) done by the name brand mentioned above, and the subsequent snooping into PRIVATE areas I think you may just looking to the right for the oncoming train while it hits you from elsewhere.</p>
<p>Half of the schools job is doing things parents should be doing.More in some areas.</p>
<p>There is no problem with this because it is entirely legal and fair. Public content is available to all.</p>
<p>It’s not the monitoring that is the free speech problem–it is the inevitable reaction by school administrators to “offensive” posts that will be the free speech problem. When the school takes action against speech, the First Amendment is implicated because that is state action–contrary to what is suggested in post 18 above, the First Amendment applies to actions by state and local authorities as well as the federal government. History suggests to me that school administrators will not be able to resist using this tool to punish students who criticize them. That will be a violation of free speech rights.</p>
<p>^^^</p>
<p>Exactly.</p>
<p>How will schools address teenage girls taking very ‘provocative’ pictures, or couples taking ‘intimate’ pictures, or teens taking pictures drinking alcohol outside of school and off school property.</p>
<p>All inappropriate images, but frankly none should elicit the involvement of a school.</p>
<p>As soon as the school decides to address such issues, then they’re going to be paying a lot more defending a lawsuit when that money should be spent educating their students.</p>
<p>^^^^
If these students are stupid enough to post these things publicly then they deserve everything they get.</p>
<p>If a student shows poor judgement and criticizes a teacher in a public manner, yes, they will probably face some consequences. If a teacher showed poor judgement and criticized a student on their public facebook, there would also be consequences. I am not taking a side on whether the school should be doing what they are doing. I am just saying I don’t see consequences as violating free speech in these cases. </p>
<p>People can’t just write what they want and expect no consequences. This goes for adults, too. I have seen terrible on-line behavior by the parents of a local school district, making claims about a faculty member that were not true. They potentially destroyed a career. And where are the consequences for the parents writing such garbage?</p>
<p>We have become immune to this, thinking this is the norm. It is really bad behavior, and kids should learn that when they are younger, rather than growing up to think it is ok to write whatever they want on a public website - whether it is facebook, or an online newspaper.</p>
<p>People are allowed to have opinions and in this country people are allowed to express their opinions.</p>
<p>Sometimes there is a fine line between expressing opinions and libel/slander, but it’s usually pretty clear cut.</p>
<p>If I were to say that I believe my son’s HS principal is a complete moron and I have no idea how he managed to complete a Master’s in eduation as he didn’t seem to even know the basics of the education requirements set by this state - that’s an opinion that I’m allowed to express, either privately or publically if I choose and trust me, I’ve told enough people that it’s pretty public now.</p>
<p>If I, knowing it is not true, call my ex’s employer and say they should ivestigate him for drug use because I have evidence of illegal activities - then I have crossed the line into libel/slander and I can be held legally accountable for that. If it would lead to him losing his job, having legal fees, or other economic impact, I could then be sued for that amount.</p>
<p>Even annonymous internet posters can be held accountable for libel and it’s happening more and more frequently lately. If you just make stories up about a person to make them look bad or say untrue things that can cause significant damage to their reputation, you are guilty of libel (or slander if it’s spoken).</p>
<p>But opinions…opinions are still allowed, even by teenagers</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not necessarily correct. If the student is an athlete and being on the team means a policy no alcohol, then such student just offered proof positive that s/he was breaking the rules. The school would then follow written policy for handling the situation.</p>
<p>But more importantly, some ‘bullying’ occurs online, and a school is perfectly within its rights to challenge such bullies, particularly when they post the bullying for all to see.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not me; I’m not that “stupid.” Since I pay the internet bill, I made it clear to my kids on Day 1 – all social media sites much be protected and not open for the public to view. If they post “stupid” things, they lose internet access. Simple!</p>
<p>But more importantly, it is just easier to print off articles in the national press where employers hire companies to search public postings of social media sites, looking for kids who make “stupid” posts… = no job offer.</p>
<p>^^^</p>
<p>But it’s not proof positive, unless they do a BAC test.</p>
<p>The student could claim that the picture was taken before they became an athlete. The student could claim that just because they were holding the beer they didn’t actually drink it, they just thought it’d be a cool picture, they could claim that it just looked like alcohol and was actually a non-alcoholic drink. Perhaps all lies, but frankly a picture doesn’t equate to 1000 words, at that point the school would not have any actual proof.</p>
<p>And my S’s the only reason I have a Facebook account. As soon as I found out he’d started one when he was 14-15ish, I started my own so I could monitor what he was doing.</p>
<p>Mark my words: the lawsuit will involve a kid punished by the school for posting remarks that were “disruptive” because they criticized the school administration.</p>
<p>no doubt, Hunt. School administrators over-reach all of the time. :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Don’t need a BAC. Just need clearly written policies about what is acceptable/appropriate behavior for being a member of a team. Participating in ECs is a privilege, not a right.</p>
<p>
But a public school can’t condition a privilege on your giving up your Constitutional rights. (I don’t mean a right to drink, since a teen doesn’t have one, but speech rights). The lawsuit I’m thinking of may involve a school denying a student “privileges” (like being in the National Honor Society, or speaking at graduation, maybe) because of his “disruptive” statements on his website. It will be similar to the “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” case. (In that case, the punishment was upheld–wrongly in my opinion–because the Supreme Court said the speech occurred at a school event.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Never suggested that they could.</p>
<p>
I know you didn’t. It’s just that the phrase “it’s not a right, it’s a privilege” is one of my tirade triggers.</p>