Page 1 of 2

Blogging ban provokes a debate over cyberspace

Posted: October 26, 2005 3:29 pm
by Sam
Ok, it is a private and Catholic school. There might be some truth in what is said about the threat/ danger... but to tell the students/parents what can or cannot do inside their home ( within reason it is a catholic/private school)???

Read the article....seems it says that a lot of the parents had no idea it was going on.

I am quite sure people will have some interesting things to say about it interfering with and poaching on priests hunting grounds or something along similiar lines and other comments.

*************************************************************

http://www.dailyrecord.com/apps/pbcs.dl ... 40324/1005

10/24/05 - Posted from the Daily Record newsroom

Blogging ban provokes a debate over cyberspace
Pope John H.S. demands that online profiles end, calls forums havens for sexual predators

BY LAURA BRUNO
DAILY RECORD

When students post their faces, personal diaries and gossip on Web sites like Myspace.com and Xanga.com, it is not simply harmless teen fun, according to one area Catholic school principal.

It's an open invitation to predators and an activity Pope John XXIII Regional High School in Sparta will no longer tolerate, Rev. Kieran McHugh told a packed assembly of 900 high school students two weeks ago.

Effective immediately, and over student complaints, the teens were told to dismantle their Myspace.com accounts or similar sites with personal profiles and blogs. Defy the order and face suspension, students were told.

In the arena of unregulated online communities, which has largely escaped the reach of schools, Pope John appears to be breaking new ground. While public and private schools routinely block access to non-educational Web sites on school computers, Pope John's order seeks to reach into students'homes.

"I don't see this as censorship," McHugh said this week. "I believe we are teaching common civility, courtesy and respect."

The primary impetus behind the ban is to protect students, McHugh said. The Web sites, popular forums for students to blog about their lives and feelings about their teachers and schools, are fertile ground for sexual predators to gather information about children, he said. They also are venues for cyber-bullying and harassment.

The sites appeared on the school's radar when administrators learned a student was communicating online with someone who was not truthful about who they were, their age and where they lived, said McHugh, who declined to elaborate.

"If this protects one child from being near-abducted or harassed or preyed upon, I make no apologies for this stance,"McHugh said.

Students, who asked to remain anonymous out of concern for disciplinary action, said the majority of the student body protested the new rule. They tried to argue that they have freedom of speech and the school should not control what they do at home.

While defenders of online privacy and free speech agree with the students' sentiments, they said students have little legal ground to stand on.

"The idea of a private school regulating student activity outside of school is not unheard of and there is a long tradition in it," said Kevin Bankston, staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a San-Francisco-based defender of online civil liberties.

While Pope John's school handbook does not specifically forbid students from creating personal profiles on Web sites, it does prohibit students from posting anything on the Internet pertaining to the school, without the school's permission.

'A bad idea'

A case could be made that the school added a new restriction after a family had already signed a contract with the school for the year, said Frank Askin, a Rutgers University professor and founder and director of the Constitutional Litigation Clinic.

"I think it's a bad idea and I think it's probably illegal -- I think the students have some rights," Askin said.

Bankston and Askin, who said they know of no similar cases, agreed there is no First Amendment violation because the school is not a government entity.

"It's an incredible overreaction based on an unproven problem," Bankston said. "If they're concerned about safety, they could train students in what they should or shouldn't put online. Kids shouldn't be robbed of the primary communication tool of their generation."

Acknowledging that teenagers can be poor decision-makers, at times, Bankston said the school is doing them a disservice by not showing them how to use these sites in a responsible way.

"Kids can get approached by bad people on the street, but schools traditionally don't tell them not to go out without a chaperone," Bankston said. "They teach them not to talk to strangers."

Bankston said he believes the real motivation for school officials was to suppress negative comments about the school posted by students.

Students have posted derogatory comments about the school in their profiles, using profanity, in profiles viewed by the Daily Record.

School decision backed

One student, who identified himself as a senior who was expelled, wrote that "pope john kicks you out once you think freely."

Students also blog about everything from the music they listen to, their Halloween costumes, the sports they play to what they want to study in college. They also identify the towns they live in, their ages, what they look like, their sexual orientation and whether or not they smoke or drink.

One student also appears to allude to the school's ban in a posting: "i recently had to delete my old myspace because of school conflicts, but whatevvv."

Meanwhile, a dozen Pope John parents said they supported the school's decision and appreciated the school's concern for their children.

Mary Kaye Nardone, a Wantage mother of two Pope John students, said she was grateful the school made her aware of Myspace.com. She had never heard of the site.

"It scared me enough that, when I saw what was out there, I didn't want my children exposed to it," Nardone said. "In a private setting, rather than worry about whether or not they're stepping on anyone's toes, they take the safety of the child into consideration first ... that's part of the reason why I send my children there."

Concerned about her children's online habits, Nardone has since changed the Web access password on her home computer.

A social network

"The kids are so accustomed to the Internet, they think it's OK," Nardone said. "They have no idea who they're giving information to and they think it's always kids on the other end communicating with them, while it could be a 40-year-old pervert."

Myspace.com calls itself a social networking system for anyone 14 years or older. It integrates Web profiles, blogs, instant messaging, e-mail, music downloads, photo galleries and chatrooms all within one site. Members can create personal online pages and invite friends to visit their site.

Myspace.com, recently acquired by media mogul Rupert Murdoch for $580 million, is the fourth-most viewed Internet domain in the United States. A spokeswoman for Myspace.com did not return calls seeking comment.

The concern for students posting too much information on these sites is real, said Agent Bill Tsigaris of the Morris County Prosecutor's Office.

"Sites like Myspace, Xanga and AOL Instant Messenger provide predators with an outstanding opportunity to research children," Tsigaris said. "I personally and professionally think these sites are very dangerous."

Easy targets

Tsigaris said children make themselves easy targets because they divulge information about their interests, likes and dislikes, all of which are hooks that can be used by strangers to engage them in online conversations.

Students also give cell phone numbers or home numbers in messages, when using AOL Instant Messenger. Students will activate an "away" message when they leave the computer, with a phone number where they can be reached.

"They live in their own little world," Tsigaris said. "They think the Internet exists only in their town."

Tsigaris said he is invited to Morris County public and private schools to talk about these issues with both students and parents. He averages 70 workshops a year.

Area public schools and private schools said they primarily work to educate their communities about these issues.

Glen Ridge's superintendent, Daniel Fishbein, attracted attention throughout the state last summer when he sent a letter home to parents of children in third through 12th grades alerting them to these Web sites.

"Where kids expose themselves to the darker side of the Internet, we wanted to partner with parents to make them aware of this," he said.

Issue is with parents

Two prominent private schools in the area, Delbarton and Pingry, said they do not regulate their students' access to the Internet outside school. They, too, stick to educating students and parents about the dangers.

"That's a parental issue, not a school issue," said Jill Alexander, director of communications at The Pingry School. "If they're posting blogs at home, it's a parent issue."

Alexander said the school does monitor what students say about Pingry at places such as www.ratemyteacher.com, but have never banned them from posting on the sites.

"What fascinates me about ratemyteacher.com is that Pingry students know how to write very well in comparison with students from other schools," Alexander said.

At Pope John, McHugh said administrators are not conducting a witch hunt. No student has been suspended and, he believes, the majority of students have complied with the ban. While the school will watch for blatant acts of disobedience, it is appealing to the good sense of the students and parents.

Other concerns included the inordinate amount of time students were spending on such sites, and future repercussions of posting potentially compromising photos and blogs.

"One child admitted an addiction," McHugh said. "They're logging on at all hours of the night and on Sundays."

It's not as if the site contains valuable, educational material, he said. It does not have information about the SAT, college searches, scholarship information, how to be nice to neighbors or volunteering at a local soup kitchen, McHugh said.

Simple solution

The school also discovered that many parents were ignorant of the sites and have since thanked them for opening their eyes to what their children were doing.

"The biggest misnomer is, 'Father, I know what my children are doing, I know where they are at all times,'" McHugh said. "Trust me, if they did know, their children would not be on Myspace.com for any length of time and viewing the drivel that's on there."

Parents who support the school's action said there is a simple solution for someone who does not like new rule.

"If someone doesn't like the school's rules and regulations, there are good public schools around here they can feel free to attend," said Stephen Denn, a Vernon parent whose daughter is a junior at Pope John.

Experts agreed there are distinct differences between how public and private schools can handle such situations. If a public school tried such a ban, organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union and Bankston's foundation would mobilize against it.

"If a public school did something like this, we would be all over them," Bankston said.

Re: Blogging ban provokes a debate over cyberspace

Posted: October 26, 2005 3:34 pm
by rednekkPH
Sam wrote:It's an open invitation to predators...
Guess the priests don't like the competition. :roll:

Posted: October 26, 2005 3:38 pm
by mings
As a Catholic, I realize that the Vatican and the Church hold a responsibility to their congregation to address moral & religous issues for the current time. However, I think that this is beyond what's acceptible behavior from a school. Sure it's there place to protect the students, but this only applies for when they are entrusted into the school's care = the school day. Blogging, most likely is done in the home and therefore is the responsibility of the parent(s). The school can easily disable the access to these blogging sites thereby removing liability, but they have no place to heavy-handily influence the way parents raise their children.

You can break a leg, arm, whatever skiing, does that mean that children shouldn't ski? Where's the line here?

Posted: October 26, 2005 3:43 pm
by buffettbride
I don't even know where to start. :-? :-?

Posted: October 26, 2005 3:45 pm
by sy
I'm sure there's a lawsuit in there somewhere waiting to happen.

Posted: October 26, 2005 3:47 pm
by rednekkPH
sy wrote:I'm sure there's a lawsuit in there somewhere waiting to happen.
Any more lawsuits and they'll have to sell off the vatican to pay the legal fees.

Posted: October 26, 2005 3:47 pm
by buffettbride
buffettbride wrote:I don't even know where to start. :-? :-?
Ok. This is where I'm gonna start:

1. I don't think any church needs to tell me how to parent.
2. I dont' think the government needs to tell me how to parent.

I don't know what #3 is yet, because I'm still trying to figure out the "parent" part for the other thread.

Posted: October 26, 2005 4:07 pm
by OceanCityGirl
i've heard of a school near here recently that attempted the same thing. Students were posting negative/nasty things about teachers and fellow students. These blogs cause high levels of drama in school and sometimes allow bullying to carry over into afterschool.
That said, the school still can't dictate what goes on out of school. A better tactic would have been what our school did. Have a meeting or send home info packets detailing what is going on. Site examples. Generally it never occurs to parents that the kids are really writing what they are. Also discuss internet safety with the kids and the parents. Encourage parents to monitor their kids computer use.

Posted: October 26, 2005 4:09 pm
by buffettbride
sy wrote:I'm sure there's a lawsuit in there somewhere waiting to happen.
Who is gonna sue who?

I mean...I don't like it...but they aren't breaking the law. There was a story in the news not too long about about a kid with lesbo-moms for parents. The kid went to a Christian school and he was expelled because his parents were violating something in the school handbook about "leading Christian lives at home" etc. etc. etc. Since the Church doesn't support gay-anything, the kid was nixed with no recourse.

Posted: October 26, 2005 4:19 pm
by Sam
Two words. Parental Supervision!

I don't think the school or anyone has the right to step beyond the doors and try to control like that.......I mean as long as there is no abuse going on or anything like that.

Posted: October 26, 2005 4:20 pm
by OceanCityGirl
although you have to remember as BB says it's a private school They can make whatever rules they like. Parents can pull their kids out and send them to the public school. I just don't think it was a smart move. Who's going to play babysitter monitioring all the sites hs kids post on?

Posted: October 26, 2005 4:30 pm
by ToplessRideFL
Maybe a meeting to inform the parents that children with Internet access need supervision would have been a better place to start. I am not opposed to parents being informed about such things...

My keet is 21.... so 3 -5 years ago the Internet was around. However... she didnt have a computer in her room and she was limited to 90 minutes a day for research (right! :roll: ) and or chatting with her friends thru IM. No different to limiting any other activity such as TV or game boy.

However....while I think it is a shame the school feels they need to impose such a rule, they are a private entity and have every right to do so. No different then me being subjected to a random drug test..... my boss telling us that cell phones are not allowed in the building.... (thank goodness for vibrate... :wink: ) or that I get an hour for lunch. If I don't like the rules... I can leave.

Posted: October 26, 2005 4:52 pm
by The Lost Manatee
While it is a private school, I do believe that there will be lawsuits filed and that they will have merit. If it is anything like my keets school, I had to sign a contract at the start of the year. If the school makes changes such as this without getting me to sign off on the new terms, then the school may be in breach of contract.

I firmly believe that what goes on at home is the parent's responsibility and not that of the school. I know what websites my daughter visits because I have taken advantage of parental controls and I do use software to record every keystroke on my computer. I also limit what she watches on TV and who & how long she can be on the phone. Am I an overprotective parent? Maybe, but I know I have to be careful about her safety given the number of weirdos out there.

Having said all that, you notice that I don't expect the school, the government or anyone else to protect and to raise my daughter, that's my job.

Posted: October 26, 2005 5:26 pm
by sy
buffettbride wrote:
sy wrote:I'm sure there's a lawsuit in there somewhere waiting to happen.
Who is gonna sue who?

I mean...I don't like it...but they aren't breaking the law. There was a story in the news not too long about about a kid with lesbo-moms for parents. The kid went to a Christian school and he was expelled because his parents were violating something in the school handbook about "leading Christian lives at home" etc. etc. etc. Since the Church doesn't support gay-anything, the kid was nixed with no recourse.
Oh I do agree with you, but that never seems to stop people.

Posted: October 26, 2005 5:36 pm
by jonesbeach10
As far as I'm concerned, all teh school has a right to do is to block the websites on scholl computers, and strongly suggest to parents that they take action against this. They cannot forbid students from going to websites at home. What's next? Forbidding them to go to sites at home such as ESPN.com because it may lead to sports gambling? Give me a break. :roll: :-?

Posted: October 26, 2005 6:06 pm
by Sam
I really do feel the school has the Right to control what hapens in schol and on school property. The school does not have the say so within the boundaries of one's home.

If the school teaches something is oneway and a keet finds out something questionable say about History or Geography.......would the school be so quick to judge on it?

Example:
If someone has no fish, and no way to get any before suppertime, and feeds there family meatloaf and mashed potatoes for supper,would the school have the right to object?

Granted there are policies that need to be maintained in all that one does, throughout life. Either for a job or just to travel down the road of life. I had to maintain no facial hair or maybe only a mustache within certain limits and my hair a certain way. I agreed to that when I took the job.
But it is not up to any school to say what the keets do inside the house....I mean unless one accepts that schools are nothing more than a babysitter and are responsible for the keet and have ultimate control of the keet. ( I will grant exceptions legitmate cases, of abuse or neglect, then everyone has the Right to report such.

Far too many parents accept schools as babysitters. If the school is going to take responsibility of mandating at any level what a keet does, under his parents roof while out of school, then if anything happens to the keet at home, then how much responsibility will the school have for what happened?

I am all for protecting the keets as best as possible , but then again ..the keets have to learn to accept responsibility for their consequences and actions.....If they touch something hot they will get burned. They touch a hot burner and find out what burned means...after being warned repeatedly, and get a minor burn and a blister. They learned the hard way, but they learned. A parent does his or her best and hopes for the best.

Posted: October 26, 2005 6:59 pm
by On The Edge
The California Education Code requires me as a credentialed teacher to report and protect the welfare of children, at all times. If I become aware first hand of abuse or neglect, physical or other, I am required to intervene and report the incident. There of course is a great deal of fuzzy grey area in the interpretation and the code does not specify or define abuse or neglect in a detailed manner. My vote is better to be overcautious. My job is not to tell people how to parent, rather to protect the welfare of all children. This code applies to all children, not just children I teach, and it applies to all locations, not just school.

Yes, if I see a parent slap a child in a grocery store, I do intervene and tell the parent it is not appropriate to hit a child. Every person and every teacher has their own standard of ethics, and their own interpretation of how this Education Code should be read. Just as every parent does not want to be told how to parent, please don't tell me where my standard of morals and ethics should be.

Posted: October 26, 2005 7:06 pm
by jonesbeach10
And if we're banning MySpace and Xanga, why don't we ban AIM, and Yahoo and MSN Messenger too. You can meet predators through that too. Hell, why not ban message boards like BN, too. :-?

Like I said, all you can do is regulate what the kids do on teh computer AT SCHOOL, and school only.

Posted: October 26, 2005 7:09 pm
by On The Edge
jonesbeach10 wrote:And if we're banning MySpace and Xanga, why don't we ban AIM, and Yahoo and MSN Messenger too. You can meet predators through that too. Hell, why not ban message boards like BN, too. :-?

Like I said, all you can do is regulate what the kids do on teh computer AT SCHOOL, and school only.
A step in the right direction, regardless of how small, is still a step in the right direction. Perhaps this principals actions are nothing more than an opportunity to raise awareness within the community. Seems like the principal got some national attention.. If that is the case, my hats of to him. Job well done.

Posted: October 26, 2005 7:21 pm
by jonesbeach10
On The Edge wrote:
jonesbeach10 wrote:And if we're banning MySpace and Xanga, why don't we ban AIM, and Yahoo and MSN Messenger too. You can meet predators through that too. Hell, why not ban message boards like BN, too. :-?

Like I said, all you can do is regulate what the kids do on teh computer AT SCHOOL, and school only.
A step in the right direction, regardless of how small, is still a step in the right direction. Perhaps this principals actions are nothing more than an opportunity to raise awareness within the community. Seems like the principal got some national attention.. If that is the case, my hats of to him. Job well done.
What is a step in the right direction? I'm not quite catching you. Even if there is no way they can ban AIM @ home. The backlash would be tremendous. That is how kids communicate with each other out of school. Plus there would be no way to enforce it. What are they going to do? Have each kid print out the 'puter's history each day? Go to each kids house and make sure that AIM is uninstalled on their computers?