Hi All
Well I don't know what to say....I need some advice.
Some twat has complained to OFSTED about a picture that was taken at one of the pre-school shows that was on a few months ago.
Why does that bother you Trev? Was it your kids?
No. But I am a committee member at that pre-school, and now we have to make a decision on having a blanket ban on all photos and videos taken at the pre-school or re-writing it so we effectively single out particular types of people who don't mind having photos taken of their kids.
Here is some background. Currently the contract does cover certain parts of this privacy. But we are being asked by OFSTED to police the internet. Basically the contract asks the parents to promise not to put piccies up on t'internet. In return for which we'll ask you if we can use the photos for promotions etc...
What we also do, which is kind of unique, is that we take piccies of the kids while they are playing or doing something and we put the piccies into their "home record book". Parents miss out on what their kids do at the pre-school and this is a good way of communicating with the parents.
With a blanket ban, all this would stop. we would have to hand-pick kids to use for photo ops and things, and we wouldn't be able to film or take piccies of the kids in plays or productions or events or anything. We can't exclude the kids from taking part in the plays because that is against the law. So we cannot record any of it for prosperity.
If we say no to a blanket ban, then the parents who are concerned about privacy in this way will leave. But we will still get the benefits and FREEDOMS for the parents to video their children in a play.
In my view I say no to the blanket ban. But can I as a committee member possibly put kids at risk by having their pictures on the internet?
If a kid falls off a swing or something we can put a crash mat down can't we? If a kid gets a picture taken and if that picture is grabbed out of thousands available by a peado, then...what? Do the kids become a target? Or not? If not, as distateful as it is, no harm has come to the kid. If so, then by allowing the photo to be taken we are partly responsible.
That is my quandry. And one that schools all over the land will have to face now, and all because of 2 miniority groups.
Those who demand that no-ones takes pictures of any children
And those who want to fuck children.
Thanks for reading,
2 comments:
it's insane that the concept of a paedophile can act as a terrorist. Not an actual person, no, the concept.
Now don't get me wrong, I don't want to undermine the relevance of considering the safety of your children, but do you cover your children in bhurkas to make sure cctv footage doesn't capture them?
The debate is presenting itself in your school, so I say take the opportunity to make a stand against this stupidity, and enjoy having a photo of your kids acting the lead in the christmas play...
I'd like to add, made up statistics show that paretns that worry too much about paedophiles outnumber actual paedophiles by about a million to one.
These complainers need to chill out, or bugger off and stop spoiling life for the rest of us.
Post a Comment