Wednesday, 25 April 2012
-
Is this a School Picture or a Comic Strip?
How would you feel if your child came home from school with this class picture? Just a quick side note; the other children’s faces were not blurred out for the picture that was sent home.
I think I would be thoroughly confused. This is exactly what happened at Sawgrass Elementary in Broward County. Florida.
According to the Broward County Board of education this child’s family did not sign a media photo release form. Every year parents in every school district throughout the United States are required to sign a release form, so their child’s photo can be displayed in public. If you do not sign the release form, the school is unable to publicly show your child’s picture. In this age of technology are children’s faces are put out there for everything the schools website, local newspapers, flyers, and more. I am slightly confused though; I did not think that it pertained to class photos. I cannot imagine not allowing a child to have their picture taken with their class even if you did not sign a public release form. That just seems like a punishment to the child.
The school’s PTA notified the photographer of the error and requested that he remove two children from the picture. The photographer David Claussen was able to remove one of the children, because the child was standing on the end of the group. He let them know that he was unable to edit out the other child because he was in the middle of the picture. According to Claussen he suggested placing a star over the child’s face. He stated it was the PTA that insisted he put a smiley face over the child’s image. Claussen also agreed to reshoot the picture. Claussen does have 35 years of experience with taking photographs for the Broward County school system.
Broward County School District spokesperson Marsy Smith stated, "It was totally inappropriate," referring to the smiley face; Smith also said the school’s principal, Sherry Rose was shocked when she first saw the photo. "She was very, very upset and immediately took action to reschedule a picture-taking session for Thursday."
Some of the parents have gone on the record saying the picture is “degrading” and “offensive”.
I think a yellow smiley face would have been sufficient. That is not completely true, but if he had to put a smiley face on there, he should have stuck to the traditional. However, I feel it is extremely irresponsible for the Broward County school administrators to put the blame on the photographer. The school should be responsible to know which of their student should not be photographed. Why they sent the picture home in the first place is overwhelming. They could have avoided all of this if they sent a note home stating there was a problem with the picture and they have rescheduled them. Shame on Broward County’s Board of Education they have made a mountain out of a molehill, and offended many people in the process.
RecommendRelated Posts
Post a Comment
- Back to momaroo's Momaroo Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in momaroo's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)
Comments (24)
I'm too busy laughing at the look on that cartoon's face to really care about the actual issue.
I don't even get it. I chose not be in the yearbook my junior and senior year becaue I was sick of immature kids saying I was ugly. See, I had zits and the stupid service would try to smear them away and it left my face looking like clay. I need my freckles to look normal (I had them when I was younger and it suited my face). Major rules, so you don't have to look at my face. As misfortune would have it, I was pretty from 17-22, and my life was a nightmare then too.
Uh... What? lol...
That never happened when I was in school o.O
I agree with you. The children that did not have a waiver should have never been photographed, but the photographer should have stuck to the traditional smiley face, or just blurred the faces.
I guess maybe I'm naive but I don't think the smiley he used was inappropriate. I do think the school should be paying more attention to keep this from happening though. They should have had more attention to detail and made sure if a child's parents didn't sign the release they never should have been photographed. I also think they should have done all they could to just reschedule the photo shoot.
These rules come about because people have brought them on themselves by suing and making big legal protection issues out of things that shouldn't be big legal protection issues.
The irrationality of rationality at its work. They should have just signed the dang form.
As for the smiley face, I don't personally think it is intended to be offensive, but it seems very far from the "best" choice...which, in my opinion, would have been blurring the child's face out.
Or not having an issue in the first place...but the public school system is too deep in bureaucratic $h!t for that.
Honestly... I think everyone's to blame in the situation. No one stayed on top of who's allowed to take pictures, etc??
Every time I had pictures (or my students now that I'm a teacher), the photographer had at least one assistant and the teacher (or I) stayed on top of who had the proper forms to get pictures taken.
lmao who.... cares....? I actually think the cartoon is better than an awkwardly placed yellow smiley. Besides, if the kid was white we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
So, wait... I just don't find that smiley face offensive at all. If a school kid draws a picture of his class and colors everyone appropriate skin color, is that wrong? If I need to be blurred out and they stick a smiley face with red hair on it, should I be offended? Hmm... maybe. But this just doesn't smack of anything to be offended about.
Clearly it shows the school and the PTA need to learn some more critical thinking skills. It is not the photographer's job to go around editing people out of class photos. He was probably simply trying to do what his customer asked for. A star is just as bad as anything else you can come up with, but with a class photo like this I'm sure his options were limited.
The right thing would have been to cancel that class photo (and the other one) and have it retaken. Touching up a photo or editing it was a bad idea from the start. The PTA should have eaten the cost on that one!
at my school they did this with famous faces on kids
later i found out that this is done because some kids are being hidden from parents who lost custody trying to kidnap them...one kid did get kidnapped and taken to albania, he still isn't back
I think they were just trying to stick to the policy, and I like that they are being careful. I would have saved a back up copy of the orignal photo in case the parents "change their mind" or the kids just forgot to ive the form the them, which I bet was the case. Or at least to sell/give it to the families that didn't want the kid's faces in public. I don't think children should be deprived of that memory and not be photographed at all if that was the case. On teh other hand I would have been glad if we had been asked wether we allow it or not.
I don't care if it's a yellow smiley or a cartoon face or a star...but blurred out would have destroyed the pictures as a whole less.
What they did to that kid was down right weird. What the parents did by putting fear and other goofy ideas into the kid's head about getting his picture taken is equally weird.
What I find really disturbing is the people suggesting that the parents don't know what is best for their kid, even down to getting their picture distributed.
Who knows, they could be in a witness protection program... regardless of the reason, whether it seems valid or not to other people, parents have the right to make decisions for their children.
Anyway, what's offensive about the smiley face matching his actual skin color? I just read a post on Lovelyish bitching about how the nude bras don't match all skin colors. I think it would be more offensive if the smiley were not matching.
But yeah, it does look funny, and yeah, they should have just retaken the photo.
that's not the right thing to do... yes it would have made the kid upset to say he can't be in the picture but its his mother's fault for not getting things in on time. everyone else in the school can do it, why can't she?
and if she had a specific important reason for not wanting her child to be in the photos.. then that should have been communicated so he would not be in the photos!
Um, strange?
At my school the consent to be photographed was implied, and you only had to sign a form to NOT be included.
This is hilarious!
@QuantumStorm@xanga - You're funny!...
OMG, I almost pissed myself laughing so hard. I heard about this story a few weeks ago, but I didn't see the pic until just now. Too funny.
@xOne_twentyX@xanga - Thanks! ^_^
lol what?
If they'd used a yellow smiley face then ppl would be bitching it's racist against Asians or implying that black people have to shop at Wal-Mart. *rolls eyes*
A yellow face? Over an african-american child? THAT would be offensive I think. I do agree that they shouldn't have sent the photo home but simply sent a note home stating there was an issue with the picture and it'd have to be retaken...
And it's not the photographers fault. He isn't the one responsible for keeping track of who is and isn't allowed to be photographed.
If nothing else, they could have called the child's parents and asked if he could be allowed to be shown in the picture, if not, then just retake it.
The upside? Every kid in the pic will forever remember this kid's name and exactly what he looks like.
wait, so what the general concensus is that it's offensive because the smiley face is black? Are you guys serious? it's fricken 2012. get over it people. the parents didn't sign the waiver, so their kid isn't in the picture. Move on.