Here’s a story we’re looking at for next week’s show. We’re hoping you’ll tell us what you think….
Last month, a high school student in Virginia called a school administrator, at home, to ask why the man had not canceled school that day. It had been snowing, and the student felt it should have been a snow day. He left a message, along with his phone number and his name.
The student’s call was returned, not by the administrator, but by his wife. And it wasn’t pretty. “How dare you call us at home” and “Get over it kid, and go to school” are a couple of key phrases.
Now, here’s where it really gets ugly.
The student created a Facebook page called “Let them know what you think about schools not being canceled,” and posted the message there for all to hear. The administrator’s work and home numbers also appeared on the page.
The man and his wife received many calls, and the message was posted to YouTube, where it’s had over 350,000 listens so far.
There are lots of questions at play here. The whole privacy vs public debate, the gap between kids and parents and technology and the idea of managing your reputation online, just to name a few.
So…what do you think? Did the student overstep his boundaries? Did the wife overreact? Post your opinion below and we’ll use it on the show.
“Rooney! This is Peterman!!”
C’mon, lighten up. It’s a high school prank.
“Did the student overstep his boundaries?” – Absolutely, both by calling at home and by posting it on Facebook and YouTube.
“Did the wife overreact?” – Absolutely. She should have politely told the student she didn’t know and/or that he would have to call the school.
They both displayed a lack of civility.
I think she sounded pretty angry but somewhat restrained. This doesn’t sound like someone reacting to a simple “please close the school” message. Why did he not post the message he left?
As for posting the numbers and encouraging people to call and complain, I think that treads into “bullying behavior” and makes me wonder even more what the kids original message said.
The posting has been removed from You Tube so I could not check it out. Sounds like another case of a spoiled kid not getting what he wants. These kids have no respect whatsoever for anyone or anything.
Hi David,
I just checked and the YouTube link does work for me. If you click on the word “message” in the 6th paragraph of the above post, you should find it.
Or, here a direct link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILwTcGNix00
What I found interesting about the Washington Post article was the kid’s claim that he’s part of the cell phone ‘always on’ generation. Do you buy that explanation? Has there been a generational shift in terms of the expectation that people are just available for electronic communication all the time?
It smells a little fishy…but…
The wife went a bit far in her response, but the kid has no business calling the admin at home.
And he also has no business posting the wife’s phone call, especially without posting *his* phone msg. It’s incredibly one-sided.
If anything, it’s really an example of a growing attitude especially with online kids who don’t understand basic personal responsibility, and lack all sense of privacy.
I’m not so sure the student over-stepped his boundaries in calling the listed home number of the school administrator. The behavior seems right in line with the multiple phone numbers I have for folks in my contact list: work, home, cell, Skype. If one doesn’t work, I go to the next. (Kori even cops to this behavior in the WashPost story: “He said that he tried unsuccessfully to contact Dean Tistadt at work and that he thought he had a basic right to petition a public official for more information about a decision that affected him and his classmates.”) Remember, this kid has close to a 4.0 GPA and is on the debate team, he’s not some under-achieving trouble-maker.
I think the interesting point in the situation comes when the administrator’s wife over-reacts to the in-bound message and leaves a nasty-gram in voice mail. At this point she teed herself up for the digital distribution of her words and showed a remarkable lack of constraint for an adult. If she’d taken the more mature road and let her husband answer (or ignore) the call that was directed at him in the first place, this might have remained a non-event. Instead, she acted uncivil and got caught in the act by someone who knew how to leverage the network to draw attention to her outburst.
Who knows how many other exchanges like this go on everyday? YouTube and Facebook seem to be providing an opportunity to document the lack of civility in these exchanges and hopefully make parties on both sides accountable for what they say.
I keep waiting for the ‘viral marketing’ slant to this story: it has a definite whiff of the “Hysterical Bride and the Bad Hair Day” about it.
If the story is actually true:
of course the woman should have exercised more adult and civil behaviour. Her outburst was inexcusable, and foolish, as she can only be made to look bad.
The student was also uncivil. But he is presumably 18 at most. He has time to learn appropriate behaviour.
As soon as he rakes in the cash from whatever scheme he has going, maybe he can buy a Miss Post etiquette book.
It seems like both parties were lacking in politeness and respect.
I think most teachers and principals have unlisted phone numbers and I would say that it’s a good policy!
This piece, and the subsequent one about effectiveness levels of teachers who are tapped into the online social networks, got me thinking. I ended up writing something that’s way too long for a blog post comment, so I posted it on my own blog at http://www.bailie.com/index.php/site/social_networking_reverting_to_a_global_local_village_model/ , which basically posits that we should think back a bit in time (remembering that those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it) and learn from our rural Canadian roots. This age isn’t so much different than how our retiring boomers grew up. The only difference is the numbers and the technology used to grease the social wheels.
I didn’t need to listen to the message. As a teacher, I know what part of the problem is. There is a lack of respect for the privacy of people in certain professions.
Think of a doctor at a party who gets scars shown to him. Or the lawyer who has to give free legal advice when she takes her kid to playgroup. Or the cop who has to answer for why response times are so bad when he is at the ball game.
Teachers and school officials face similar issues. Parents seem to think that when they run into you at the grocery store, they have a right to an interview. Students and parents also seem to think that they have a right to access every aspect of your life.
I am currently on sick leave due to complications with my pregnancy. On my way back from a doctor’s appointment, I stopped off at the library to pick up some books to read when I ran into a parent. She wanted to discuss why I wasn’t around. I don’t really think that’s her business. But she seemed to think she had a right to comment on it.
In this specific case, the student should not have called the administrator at home. He had a right to have the conversation, but at school. The administrator’s wife should not have called the child at home. She should have let her husband deal with it at school the next day.
Posting the number on the net, that’s harassment, like writing your ex’s phone number on the bathroom wall, and perhaps the laywers should be involved. This young man needs to learn boundaries. He has crossed one. If he treated a boss like this (and if you think about it, that is a similar relationship), he would have been fired.
First, the student is wrong for even calling the school administrator’s home in the first place, and for posting such trivial matters online in the first place.
Second, I understand how the wife felt, but she was rather direct in her anger toward the student, and was also in the wrong for her rather rude remarks.
Third, ABC was in the wrong for bringing up the topic in the first place. The only reason the privately owned network did this is for the sole purpose of obtaining advertising dollars and ratings.
Fourth, what we have here is a perfect example of the type of incivility that goes on in the States.
What I am still undecided on is the role technology plays in this. When we did an interview about this, one of our guests said the important thing is to focus on the inappropriate behaviour, not on online vs. offline, which I agree with. And yet, I can’t help but think that there is a distancing aspect that happens with technology, that makes it easier to be uncivil. Of course, that applies to television as well as cell phones and social networking sites!
Nora, it applies to driving too. Do we have a term for “blog-rage” yet? Um, yes: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/6059726.stm
Other posters have very well covered all points. The main thing I have issue with is that the MEDIA focused on the Principal and his wife’s “embarassment” — and said nothing about the “child”. If that had been MY son, who a) was outside his bounds by calling the principal at home and b) major outside bounds by posting her call back on line — MY son would have had to stand up for a few days, and wouldn’t have touched a computer other than supervised for school for a YEAR. But, I rather think that the “child” hand’t been taught proper manners, anyway. It all runs downhill, doesn’t it? Apple doesn’t fall far from the tree, etc. etc. I over 40– and what I see everywhere I go, real life and media world — is appalling lack of very basic manners and respect. Taken to extreme– you have that YOB stuff in England, and a man being kicked to death outside his front door because he told some loitering rowdies to get out of his ‘space’. It’s Kubrick’s Clockwork Orange, only it’s real.
In general it sounds like it could have been handled better. There's a lot of possibly pertinent detail not included. Was this kid being a wiseacre by calling the admins home? Or maybe the kid has emotional/behavioral issues. Teens in general aren't notorious for great judgment. The kid should definitely face negative consequences particularly for broadcasting personal info like that, but If one is going to work in the public schools, dealing with teenage stupidity is part of the job description. It's a matter of statistics that some of the student body are sociopaths/psychopaths in training, teachers and admins should take common sense precautions like having an unlisted number.