Kids' info on web - bad idea?

"Jerry Muelver" <jerry DeleteThis @allmyfaqs.com> wrote in message
news:c1bf2c9b.0309100553.15d4ca2d@posting.google.com
 > Responding to unfortunate economic circumstances, I took a job at a
 > small town daily newspaper, doing the computer work for page layout
 > and web site maintenance. On the job only a week, I raised an issue
 > with the editor about a newspaper story to be transferred to the web
 > site. The story was a picture of a group of pre-schoolers on their
 > first day at school, complete with first and last names of each child
 > and the name of the school where they could be found. I objected to
 > posting the story to the web site. The editor overruled me, saying the
 > information was already available in the current issue of the paper,
 > and "it's all the same thing." They posted the story. I quit the job,
 > throwing myself once again on the mercy of the Bush economy.
 >
 > My question -- was I right to object? Or was the editor right to
 > assert that information publically available in print should also be
 > publically available on the web?
 >
 > ---- jerry

I don't think pictures and and names of minors should be published in print
or on the web without the parents permission, but that's not the way
newspapers operate. I think you can make the argument that publishing on the
web is more dangerous because it lasts longer and is more widely available
than in a newspaper that's likely to be thrown out the next day.
--
Red E. Kilowatt
Advertise your webmaster-related products
and services in news:alt.www.webmaster.ads
Read the FAQs at: <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://aww-faq.org" target="_blank">http://aww-faq.org</a> and <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://awwa.aww-faq.org/" target="_blank">http://awwa.aww-faq.org/</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Kids' info on web - bad idea? 

In article <c1bf2c9b.0309100553.15d4ca2d.RemoveThis@posting.google.com>,
jerry.RemoveThis@allmyfaqs.com (Jerry Muelver) wrote:

 > My question -- was I right to object?

No. You may have been right to quit, though.

 > Or was the editor right to
 > assert that information publically available in print should also be
 > publically available on the web?

Maybe. The question is what was the basis for your objection to online
publication of the information compared to print publication? Were you
somehow worried about what people thousands of miles away would do with
the information compared to what local people would do with it? If you
have an objection with the editorial policies of the paper, it doesn't
seem like it should have anything to do with the method of publication.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Kids' info on web - bad idea? 

Jerry Muelver wrote:

 > My question -- was I right to object?

It is part of your job to identify risks and problems, so yes if you believe
you had good grounds to object, then you are right to do so.

Quitting a position over this objection is a very principled stand - I am
impressed. (Although, I hope that doesn't fsck things too badly for you).


 > Or was the editor right to
 > assert that information publically available in print should also be
 > publically available on the web?

The editor has the right to assert anything. He had the option to consult
for a legal opinion before making his assertion - it sounds like he didn't
take that route. So the responsibility is his - you pointed out a problem,
his decision is that it is not a problem. The editors word is final
(whether it is right or wrong).


--
Iso.
FAQs: <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://html-faq.com" target="_blank">http://html-faq.com</a> <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://alt-html.org" target="_blank">http://alt-html.org</a> <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://allmyfaqs.com/" target="_blank">http://allmyfaqs.com/</a>
Recommended Hosting: <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.affordablehost.com/" target="_blank">http://www.affordablehost.com/</a>
Web Design Tutorial: <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.sitepoint.com/article/1010" target="_blank">http://www.sitepoint.com/article/1010</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Kids' info on web - bad idea? 

"Isofarro" <spamblock.DeleteThis@spamdetector.co.uk> wrote in message
news:c3knjb.023.ln@sidious.isolani.co.uk...

 > It is part of your job to identify risks and problems

Eh???

Jerry's job was "doing the computer work for page layout
and web site maintenance".

Where did he say that the Editor hired him to "identify risks and
problems"??

Funny how an evangelist assumes that everyone shares his arrogance, and
stakes a claim to be the self-appointed protector of the moral high ground.

I think the Ed made a fair point, and Jerry was right to quit.
--
Charles Sweeney
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.CharlesSweeney.com" target="_blank">www.CharlesSweeney.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Kids' info on web - bad idea? 

Charging up on a white horse Jerry Muelver said:
: My question -- was I right to object? Or was the editor right to
: assert that information publically available in print should also be
: publically available on the web?
:
: ---- jerry

Yes and I would have done the same thing. At the risk of sounding
perhaps motherly... I am proud of you. I just hope you find something
new soon.

In the paper it might be okay but on the web.. definitely not.
Too many pedophiles out there that prey on kids. All they would
need is to see one in that picture they took a fancy to and would
know where to find them. *shudder*

--
Heidi
PaidToReads: http://www.paidtoreads.com/
Recommended Hosting: http://www.page-zone.com/
http://www.webmaster-talk.com/index.php?referrerid=146
 >> Stay informed about: Kids' info on web - bad idea? 

Jerry Muelver wrote:
 >Responding to unfortunate economic circumstances, I took a job at a
 >small town daily newspaper, doing the computer work for page layout
 >and web site maintenance. On the job only a week, I raised an issue
 >with the editor about a newspaper story to be transferred to the web
 >site. The story was a picture of a group of pre-schoolers on their
 >first day at school, complete with first and last names of each child
 >and the name of the school where they could be found.
 >I objected to
 >posting the story to the web site. The editor overruled me, saying the
 >information was already available in the current issue of the paper,
 >and "it's all the same thing." They posted the story. I quit the job,
 >throwing myself once again on the mercy of the Bush economy.
 >
 >My question -- was I right to object?

You were absolutely right. I don't know if it's normal practice to get parents
to sign a consent form every time their kids get pictured for the local paper,
but perhaps it should be. How do the parents feel about it, I wonder? You might
get try to get in touch with them and ask, talk to the rival papers, raise a
stink.

Local papers print pictures of kids because they've always done it, but on the
internet rules are different. You have to be in the locality to buy the paper
usually, and that narrows down the list of people who could potentially harm
the children. Not just paedophiles, but scammers, bullies and anyone with bad
intentions could use that knowledge.

Good on you.

--
Alice Woolley
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.insidethebubble.co.uk/" target="_blank">http://www.insidethebubble.co.uk/</a>
Inside the Bubble - autism information<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Kids' info on web - bad idea? 

"Heidi" <blackcat2 RemoveThis @zwallet.com> wrote in message
news:RQJ7b.26430$162.8300@twister.austin.rr.com...

 > In the paper it might be okay but on the web.. definitely not.
 > Too many pedophiles out there that prey on kids. All they would
 > need is to see one in that picture they took a fancy to and would
 > know where to find them. *shudder*

What's to stop them scanning the pictures from the paper?
--
Charles Sweeney
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.CharlesSweeney.com" target="_blank">www.CharlesSweeney.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Kids' info on web - bad idea? 

Charging up on a white horse Charles Sweeney said:
: What's to stop them scanning the pictures from the paper?

Nothing but I got the impression this was a local paper
and the risk is minimized that way.

On the web, it is global, any pedophile could see it
anywhere.

--
Heidi
PaidToReads: http://www.paidtoreads.com/
Recommended Hosting: http://www.page-zone.com/
http://www.webmaster-talk.com/index.php?referrerid=146
 >> Stay informed about: Kids' info on web - bad idea? 

"Heidi" <blackcat2.RemoveThis@zwallet.com> wrote in message
news:TkK7b.26433$162.18400@twister.austin.rr.com...
 > Charging up on a white horse Charles Sweeney said:
 > : What's to stop them scanning the pictures from the paper?
 >
 > Nothing but I got the impression this was a local paper
 > and the risk is minimized that way.
 >
 > On the web, it is global, any pedophile could see it
 > anywhere.

Fair point. Although if it was on the web, you could argue that it would
only be the same local people who would see it.
--
Charles Sweeney
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.CharlesSweeney.com" target="_blank">www.CharlesSweeney.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Kids' info on web - bad idea? 

On Wed, 10 Sep 2003 19:54:51 +0100, "Charles Sweeney"
<me DeleteThis @charlessweeney.com> found these unused words floating about:

 >"Heidi" <blackcat2 DeleteThis @zwallet.com> wrote in message
 >news:TkK7b.26433$162.18400@twister.austin.rr.com...
  >> Charging up on a white horse Charles Sweeney said:
  >> : What's to stop them scanning the pictures from the paper?
  >>
  >> Nothing but I got the impression this was a local paper
  >> and the risk is minimized that way.
  >>
  >> On the web, it is global, any pedophile could see it
  >> anywhere.
 >
 >Fair point. Although if it was on the web, you could argue that it would
 >only be the same local people who would see it.

Not so, for you'd have to subscribe to the local paper to read it
physically. That would be costly to cover many areas and for those
outside, it's probably not even known about.

On the web, search engines point out nearly every topic, so I find
articles about my area of interest (no ... it's historical mining!)
from all over - places I wouldn't have though of checking or of
knowing how/who to contact.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Kids' info on web - bad idea? 

Jerry Muelver wrote:

 > My question -- was I right to object? Or was the editor right to assert
 > that information publically available in print should also be publically
 > available on the web?

You were definitely right to object. I'd like to think that I would have
the foresight to do the same if I were in that situation.

In a paper the risks are different, the audience is smaller with a local
paper and less perverts are likely to read it. The Web is different, it
doesn't have a catchment area.

Like Charles said elsewhere in the thread, there is nothing to stop a
paedophile from scanning in the pictures and posting them online, but my
view is it's not a good idea to do it for them!

--
Dylan Parry - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.DylanParry.com" target="_blank">http://www.DylanParry.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Kids' info on web - bad idea? 

"Dylan Parry" <dylan.DeleteThis@webpageworkshop.co.uk> wrote in message
news:pan.2003.09.10.19.41.26.950775@webpageworkshop.co.uk...
 > Jerry Muelver wrote:
 >
  > > My question -- was I right to object? Or was the editor right to assert
  > > that information publically available in print should also be publically
  > > available on the web?
 >
 > You were definitely right to object. I'd like to think that I would have
 > the foresight to do the same if I were in that situation.
 >
 > In a paper the risks are different, the audience is smaller with a local
 > paper and less perverts are likely to read it. The Web is different, it
 > doesn't have a catchment area.
 >
 > Like Charles said elsewhere in the thread, there is nothing to stop a
 > paedophile from scanning in the pictures and posting them online, but my
 > view is it's not a good idea to do it for them!

I am not convinced that more people will see the local paper's pictures
online, than would see them in the paper.

I know my local paper has a very limited website, yet the paper version
sells very well. I would be very surprised to learn that the website was
seen by more than read the paper.

My feeling is, as soon as a paper publishes pictures of children, then they
are at risk of being used by paedophiles (however remote this may be)
whether online or not.

But of course, local papers have always published pictures of local kids,
and still do. It's a tricky issue. I run a website about my old school. I
will not publish pictures of pupils currently at the school, I only use old
pictures from years back.

Lots of people put up family websites with pictures of themselves and their
children. Again, a tricky issue. I don't have any small children, not sure
what I would do, my feeling is that I wouldn't put their pictures on the
web, just as I wouldn't put their pictures up in my window! I don't think I
would feel a desire to publish them in any way.
--
Charles Sweeney
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.CharlesSweeney.com" target="_blank">www.CharlesSweeney.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Kids' info on web - bad idea? 

Charles Sweeney wrote:

 > "Isofarro" <spamblock RemoveThis @spamdetector.co.uk> wrote in message
 > news:c3knjb.023.ln@sidious.isolani.co.uk...
 >
  >> It is part of your job to identify risks and problems
 >
 > Eh???

Its called professionalism.

 > Jerry's job was "doing the computer work for page layout
 > and web site maintenance".
 >
 > Where did he say that the Editor hired him to "identify risks and
 > problems"??

Website maintenance - keeping the website up-to-date by adding new content,
updating current content and removing old content. You wouldn't just upload
any content without first double-checking it for suitability and assessing
any impacts or problems with the material.

Publishing illegal content can result in the entire web site being taken
down by the webhost -- doing a professional job like Jerry did warns the
business of these risks.


 > Funny how an evangelist assumes that everyone shares his arrogance, and
 > stakes a claim to be the self-appointed protector of the moral high
 > ground.

Its called doing your job properly. Maybe you can learn something from this
lesson.



--
Iso.
FAQs: <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://html-faq.com" target="_blank">http://html-faq.com</a> <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://alt-html.org" target="_blank">http://alt-html.org</a> <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://allmyfaqs.com/" target="_blank">http://allmyfaqs.com/</a>
Recommended Hosting: <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.affordablehost.com/" target="_blank">http://www.affordablehost.com/</a>
Web Design Tutorial: <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.sitepoint.com/article/1010" target="_blank">http://www.sitepoint.com/article/1010</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Kids' info on web - bad idea?