It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

On Facebook bullies, refusal of business, and privacy

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 09:25 AM
link   
Hi ATS. I came across the following article and I think it raises certain social issues, so here we are.

Basically it is the story of some girls who were being mean on Facebook to some other girls. A photogapher who was going to do a shoot with the mean girls saw the Facebook postings and got angry and refused to take the photos. The photographer says the response has been overwhelmingly positive.

Well, on one hand everyone is happy to see mean bullies get what they deserve, right? But I can't help but find it creepy that one type of interaction (like discussions between you and your friends, whether friendly or not) can affect another type of interaction (like having a photographer or another service refuse to do business with you). Where do we draw the line, how much should we applaud things like this and how much is it serving to erase privacy? I don't want to live in a world where complete strangers are making all kinds of judgements about me based on things that took place in other contexts. What do you guys think?

From the article:



Photographer refuses to take the pictures of high school Facebook bullies, telling them 'You're too ugly... on the inside'

A photographer has refused to take pictures of a group of high school girls who were bullying other teens on Facebook. Pennsylvania photographer Jennifer McKendrick was scheduled to shoot the school girls for their senior photo. But when she came across a Facebook page with cruel comments from four high school girls whose names matched her scheduled clients she saw red.

McKendrick emailed the girls and their parents to cancel their portraits, including screen-shots of their comments to explain why she was calling off the session. McKendrick wrote more about her decision on her personal blog, in a post titled 'I Won't Photograph Ugly People.' She wrote: 'I mean how could I spend two hours with someone during our session trying to make beautiful photos of them knowing they could do such UGLY things.'

More at source:
www.dailymail.co.uk...
edit on 21-8-2011 by Partygirl because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Partygirl
 


Explanation: S&F! Uhmmm?



I don't want to live in a world where complete strangers are making all kinds of judgements about me based on things that took place in other contexts.


To late for that. There are no strangers anymore ... everyone is a simple whois away from being profiled by anybody online!


Where do we draw the line, how much should we applaud things like this and how much is it serving to erase privacy?


What your talking about is secrecy ... not privacy.


Here is the difference...

Privacy = You don't get to watch me and my g/f in flagrant dilecto ... but I am 100% cool to explain in lurid details afterwards on what transpired ... if your lucky enough to be present when I divulge such information.


Secrecy = I have a gf???
....


Personal Disclosure: God is going to judge you on every microsecond of your life and God has the ultimate say ... so why worry what a few sinners have to say or do about you?



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Partygirl
 


Good for the photographer to use her judgement, regardless of why she choose not to shoot the photos. I would say the same thing if she choose not to shoot them because the girls were involved in a save the whales organization or because they were all blonds. It is her right and her choice.

Information on Facebook or other on-line sites is not private and can be used for any number of reasons. If you want to be a tool on facebook, expect to be treated like a tool. If you want to put information on it that describes your likes, dislikes, views and habits, expect that people will use that information in making a judgement about you. It was purposefully placed on Facebook so that people could make a judgement about you. Further expect that most of the time that your on-line information is working against you, that you will never know about it.

Universities are looking at facebook pages of applicants, employeers have long been looking at them. It is a source of information and in a competetive environment, information to assist in decision making is useful, regardless of where it comes from.



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 10:52 AM
link   
I don't understand (But I have my theory)* facebook at all.
I think it is targeted to peole seeking the recognition of strangers because in real life they lack social skills.
1 live friend is worth a million facebook 'friends' who you have never, and will never meet.
Why would someone even join? You email friends and family and you don't put personal/private info on the internet.

*Facebook is meant to acclimatize people to live in solitary confinement perhaps in FEMA camps perhaps working from home in a box appartment and they are happily typing away until they disappear and no one notices because their online personality keeps posting (which is easy with the correct spybot software available) No one will notice the loss because all their friends are online.



posted on Aug, 21 2011 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Partygirl
 

i wonder about certain comments made regarding an individual who then gets wind of them. a potential goldmine for lawyers and plaintiffs alike. i'm thinking slander laws here.
i respect the photographers stance on this, however, the door swings both ways so as long as she has no skeletons in the server, all should be fine and dandy.
f.



posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 11:24 AM
link   
Thread here also not gonna repeat what i wrote


www.abovetopsecret.com...



new topics

top topics
 
3

log in

join