The Greenbaum Incident – How Far is Too Far?
This week, the St. Louis blogger community rocked the Internet as news of a school employee who resigned after posting vulgar statements on a blog brought to the forfront Internet ethics.
On November 13, Kurt Greenbaum, the Director of Social Media for the St. Louis Post Dispatch, posed a question on STLToday’s Talk of the Day blog asking readers to describe the “craziest thing” they’ve ever eaten. As comments came in, a lively and fun discussion started within the confines of the blog. Until one person took the conversation in an unfortunate direction leaving a comment that used a vulgar description for the female anatomy.
When the comment was first noticed, Kurt Greenbaum deleted it, but within a short amount of time, the comment was apparently left a second time. From here, steps were taken that are now being criticized and questioned.
Upon tracing the IP address from the user, Greenbaum noticed that the computer used belonged to an area school. And he made the decision to contact the school and make them aware of the situation. From there, the school tracked down exactly which computer was used and what time and confronted the employee who was using the computer at that time. The employee resigned on the spot.
Did Kurt Greenbaum make the right decision?
The Internet is fired up asking the same questions. And Kurt Greenbaum addressed the issue himself. On November 16, he issued this statement on Talk of the Day. Some (many) felt that this post only made the situation worse. They accused him of gloating about costing someone their job. As he stated here, it was never his intention to do so. Perhaps that claim can be debated, but it is clear that he was on the defense.
When I first heard about the Greenbaum incident, my immediate reaction was to wonder why he felt the need to go after this person. After all, while the comment was vulgar and inappropriate, the commentor wasn’t attacking or threatening anyone. He was clearly using poor judgement, but couldn’t his comments simply have been blocked?
But upon learning that the commentor was an employee of a school, Greenbaum made a judgement call. Having time to reflect, he states the following:
“Did I overreact? Maybe I did. I am constantly frustrated by the difficulty of dealing with this kind of language. And in this case, I was motivated by three things.
First, this came from a school. I didn’t know if it came from an employee, a guest or a student. But I viewed it as a “teachable moment” and a chance, perhaps, to nip something in the bud, to engage the community to help me. I didn’t anticipate that the reader would resign.”
The fact that this type of comment came from a school emplyee changes the situation for me personally. I am the mother of a daughter. And I am accutely aware of the fact that little girls need protection from creeps – especially in this day and age. If I knew that there was an employee at my daughter’s school who was making vulgar comments on the internet while he was on school property in the same proximity as my child, I would want that person removed from her sphere of influence. While I agree and understand that the statement made by the poster was obviously tongue in cheek, I also think he possessed an obvious lack in judgement. And that is what got him in trouble.
While everyone is up in arms over Kurt Greenbaum’s supposed mishandling of the situation, the fact remains, an employee of a school made a very poor decision on school property and that decision cost him his job. Did he deserve it? Maybe not. In the grand scheme of things, this comment was not harming anyone and seems pretty mild. But, when you work in an environment where children are present, certain precautions have to be taken. Unfortunately we live in a day and age where we can’t assume someone is just joking around. This commentor may have been a very nice man who was just playing around. But he was in the wrong environment to make such a foolish comment.
There is no anonymity on the internet. Anyone can be tracked down. We all need to be wise about how our words may be perceived when read by others. Perhaps this employee thought he was being funny. I’m not sure what his intentions were when posting his comments. But the fact remains, he was on his employers property and he abused his privilege within those confines. And he is suffering the consequences.
Do I think Kurt Greenbaum overreacted? Perhaps. He could have taken a few more steps before heading down the path of contacting the school. But again, because this foolish commentor posted from a school computer, Greenbaum had to make a judgement call. Yes, there are some steps that could have been taken before contacting the school, but a decision had to be made quickly and, in the moment, Kurt Greenbaum made what he felt was the right call.
Let’s just look at the facts. Kurt Greenbaum did not get anyone fired. He contacted the school in question with an IP address. He didn’t know who posted the comments. The school administrators took the information they were given and they chose to track down exactly which computer was used and who used it. The school adimistrators chose to confront the employee in question and the employee chose to resign. Those are the facts.
Another fact: Kurt Greenbaum has the authority to decide what kind of comments are tolerated on Talk of the Day. It’s his job to make those decisions. While I understand that with that authority comes the responsibility to control and maintain the direction of the comments, the fact is, Kurt Greenbaum gets to make the call. How many blogs have a detailed list of guidelines on what can or can’t be posted? To say that STLtoday is at fault for not making their policies on commenting known is unfair. They have every right to decide what will or will not be tolerated. Yes, they have the responsibility to keep inappropriate content off their website but it’s also the responsibility of readers to use common sense and know what’s appropriate and what isn’t. And when a vulgar comment is reposted after being deleted once, then by all means let them know it’s unacceptable.
I know I won’t be popular for that opinion.
Does this set a standard for STLtoday? I hope so! Why shouldn’t we have standards on the internet? What’s wrong with expecting those who choose to comment to do so respectfully and to observe a little simple common sense? If you don’t like it, then don’t read it. It’s that easy.
This is one of those grey areas in blogging. The internet provides the freedom for people to share without restraint. But there have to be standards. And people have to have the right to enforce those standards without being slaughtered for them.
Clearly all have learned from this unfortunate incident. I am not defending Kurt Greenbaum’s actions. But I also don’t believe that this issue is cut and dry. I believe Kurt Greenbaum and STLtoday learned to be more clear in their expectations of readers and their policies on how to handle inapproprate content. And I hope that all of us have realized once again that we are ultimately responsible for our actions.
The thing that leaves me all oogy about this situation is the whole free speech aspect.
I couldn’t understand why Greenbaum contacted the school, and perhaps we’ll never REALLY know. If he thought it could have been a student, that might be cause. If he thought it was an employee, it seems that Greenbaum had less of a cause.
Now, I’m the parent of two school-age daughters. So, the idea that some guy is thinking, and writing, this way in a school makes me squeemish, too. However, if the school did not have a policy about use of the internet (which we don’t know), then he really didn’t do anything wrong. It’s possible he thought it all a funny joke. Inappropriate, yes, but I know people that would find this funny and still NOT be a molester on the loose!
So, while I suspect that Greenbaum overstepped his bounds, I don’t feel too bad about this guy losing his job as a result. According to your information, it was HIM that resigned. If this is true, then he clearly knew he had violated the school policies, and we can’t feel too bad for him. If he re-posted the post after knowing it was deleted once, even more so.
Like most things in the news, we have incomplete information and even WITH complete information, the “right” thing to have happened may not be all that clear.
Gregg,
I agree. Every article I read claims that the emplyoee resigned. He wasn’t fired. So I assume he knew he had done something inappropriate. It’s unfortunate, yes. And I’m sorry that a man lost his job right before the holidays – but people need to understand how their words will be perceived and a man in a school environment has to be able to exercise better judgement.
And while Greenbaum’s decision may have been rash, I don’t think it’s worthy of the public lashing that he is now enduring.
And, incidentally, I’m not claiming that this man is a child molestor. Not by any stretch of the imagination. I don’t presume to know anything about this man. I merely think that in this day and age we have to be cautious about any such comment when the person posting has direct influence and contact with children daily. For this man not to understand this fact makes me think him a fool.
I think there’s enough blame for both parties, personally. But the lesson overall is think before you comment. You are NOT anonymous. No one is.
Sorry, I posted accidentally before I was finished. But Kelli, your words, “people need to understand how their words will be perceived” are so true. The commentor obviously didn’t think about that. Course I guess Kurt didn’t either when he wrote the post about how this whole thing played out.
Oh and Gregg… The whole free speech element is the thing I struggle with as well. Course Kelli, I also struggle with the whole “why don’t people use comment sense to begin with?”
The thing I wonder about is the fact that Kurt’s blog isn’t a “personal blog.” He’s still getting paid by a corporation to write. There is a responsiblity to the corporate image. But what about bloggers who don’t have that corporate net, those who have their own site… If one of us would have done this, would the outcry be the same? Would it even be an issue?
One thing that strikes me is that contrary to what you wrote above, from what I’ve read, Greenbaum did not actively “track” the IP. Just as he was about to delete it a second time, something in his software that moderates the comments popped up telling him it was a school IP address. There was no action on his part to research this information.
1) Does this happen when anyone comments from any school? It’s an interesting feature, and one I think I support, for some of the reasons you list. In this day and age we need to protect our kids, and knowing when certain comments are coming from a school is important. Can I get this feature on my blog?
2) Does this feature only apply to schools? Does the Post Dispatch know when a comment came from a particular corporate headquarters, for example? I can also see reasons for this. It could verify whether a commenter who claimed to work for X really worked for Y, a competitor. Also – Can I get this feature on my blog?
3) Greenbaum says he noticed this warning when he deleted the comment for the second time. He doesn’t state that he saw the warning when he deleted the comment the first time. Has anyone asked him whether he is certain that the second poster was the same as the first poster – and if so, how he is certain. It seems to me to be a rather obvious joke, and one that more than one person could easily make.
Great job boldly looking at this from “both” perspectives Kelli!
Both Greenbaum and the now unemployed anonymous TomCat creep me out.
Greenbaum because his job, I would imagine is to moderate comments and keep comments that violate the Post’s guidlines off of the site, NOT to hunt down the inappropriate commenters. If the Post doesn’t have comment guidlines then shame on them and their “director of social media.” I disagree with you on that one….most corporate blogs, social networks and many individual blogs have comment guidelines.
In my opinion, it is very important and this incident highlights why…if there are posted guidelines/standards then violators have been warned what will be considered acceptable and what the consequences for violations will be….could be “deletion” or could be “we will hunt you down and tell your employer” so that there is no ambiguity in the policy or the consequence.
I believe that this incident possibly highlighted another “hot topic” of social media….what credentials make an expert. If the Post Dispatch hired Greenbaum to be the director of social media and he was running a blog without comment guidelines it doesn’t appear as if he sufficient experience or expertise for the job. Any experienced community manager would have had guidelines to begin with and they would have been posted in a prominent place.
The fact that the TomCat poster worked in a school is creepy and I would assume he also violated the school’s internet use policy. If the school doesn’t have a policy and allows employees and students to use the internet then I hope this incident makes them re-think the need for a policy. If people are too lame to know what is appropriate and inappropriate, as this dude clearly was, a policy might at least give them something to think about….like losing their job.
If it turns out that this incident “outed” a guy who has a problem beyond poor judgment than I would say that the outcome should be considered positive….he isn’t working in a school with children.
On the other hand, what lead Greenbaum to take that extra step to track him down to begin with is what troubles people and then to brag about getting the dude to “resign” his job makes people wonder about his judgment and social media “expertise.”
So, that’s my 2 cents!
Thanks for your input everybody! I don’t disagree with any of you. And Marianne, good point in recognizing that as a corporate blog, STLtoday has more of a responsibility to make its readers aware of the penalty of stepping over the line in comments. I’ll concede that you are right on that point. I just think this situation provides a huge lesson for everyone who deals with internet relations. We all have to be responsible for the words that we use when posting online. Kurt Greenbaum and this ananymous poster are both dealing with fallout from foolish online choices.
There is true anonymity on the internet. I am anonymous because I utilize an IP anonymizer. Try to track me downand get me fired — you can’t!
The mission of the Post-Dispatch is to deliver the news. Their mission is not to be moral inquisitors. Memo to the Post-Dispatch — Let’s leave the gestapo in Germany. It’s up to the school to ensure it’s people act according to your standards.
http://anonymouse.org/anonwww.html
Actually, the Post-Dispatch and STLtoday.com has had long-standing comment guidelines that are easily Googleable.
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/help/stories.nsf/termsofservice/story/58C6115339C8CADB8625706800596EE1?OpenDocument
Ya’ll are killing me. If a site allows open commenting, the host should be well aware that the least common denominator of thought is going to eventually ooze into the comment section. That you and your supporting commenters are aghast that Mr. Firedfrom hisjobforcommentingonthedispatchsite posted a [gasp] vulgarity, is humorous at worst, and farcicle at best. The fact that 1. there’s a st. louis bloggers guild, and 2. you are discussing net ettiquette and the ramifications of bad choices in online commenting is disturbing to me.
DON’T ALLOW ANNONYMOUS COMMENTING IF YOU ARE GOING TO PURSUE ANONYMOUS COMMENTERS.
With that said, if you choose to do either, expect the same results. Mr. Kbaum is reaping his reward for being extremely foolish in his online decisions.
I’m sorry, but I don’t think this particular comment coming from a school changes anything, with all due respect to your daughter. In fact, given the witch-hunt mentality over kids’ heads these days, it can be argued that a much graver danger to kids exists in the form of attracting the attention of school administrators for trivial offenses. Strip searches for ibuprofen were just outlawed but we’ve seen kids led away in handcuffs at 8, tasered at 10, WHIPPED in certain states with their parents powerless to intervene, basically put on the no-fly list for creative writing and branded sex offenders before they’re old enough to know what that is. Had Greenbaum’s actions nailed some teenage boy, the consequences could have been dire (and of course completely out of proportion to the offense).
The comment was NSFW and NSFC (Not suitable for children) but it’s a huge, HUGE leap of logic to go from someone making a sex joke NOT MEANT FOR KIDS’ EARS (albeit in an inappropriate forum) to being a child molester, but that’s they hysteria you’re endorsing when you fall for Greenbaum’s “But it was a SCHOOL!” smokescreen. It also sets a standard of moral rectitude that’s totally unrealistic. There’s already a report of a teacher getting fired for drinking in a picture on Facebook — on her own time. As if nice, responsible adults don’t drink routinely.
MANY adults who routinely interact with your kids use profanity. They just don’t do so in front of the kids (or, evidently, in front of you). They might post swear words on the Internet. They also make sex jokes, just not in front of your kids. And brace yourself, but many of them are… school teachers. SUNDAY SCHOOL teachers, even. Many nice, responsible ladies enjoy the technique in question and don’t consider references to it even sexist. (The sexists are the gentlemen who won’t participate in the technique.) Some of these people are even raising children. Something should be done!
OK, that got a little sarcastic but think it over. What if Greenbaum somehow knew the comment came from someone with children. Would that be grounds for intervention? Based on a sex joke? That’s really the same logic.
Suspecting someone of being a pervert due to sex jokes is a non-starter. Where does it end? Can teachers watch TV shows like “Californication?” Or does an ability to enjoy a show so full of sex jokes… SAY SOMETHING about the teacher? Do you really want to go there?
Also, asking for someone’s resignation is routine. It’s used, among other things, to blackmail employees for letters of references, and also for making the employee think they can’t get unemployment. It doesn’t mean anything about what the employee might also have been doing. If the employee was guilty of something else, it should not be reported as a job loss for posting a vulgarity from work.
Lots or paranoia around here, showing that Greenbaum’s “Think Of The Children” smokescreen has done its job.
If Kurt was operating solely as a blogger his actions would not have been as big an issue as it is, but when it becomes the policy of a newspaper to punish people for speech that simply involves “bad language” it should be a concern. Kurt has put himself out there as a journalist for that newspaper and was acting in that capacity when he disclosed the commenter’s posts to his boss. Even today, in the age of new media, newspaper journalist are suppose to operate under a set of standards that bloggers are not necessarily held to. And as such I have to question Kurt’s journalistic ethics.
According to the Society of professional Journalist Code of Ethics, which Kurt has tweeted about and recommended people read, one of the main principles is to “Minimize Harm”, to quote it states.
Minimize Harm
Ethical journalists treat sources, subjects and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect.
It further states that (edited for brevity)
Journalists should:
— Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage.
— Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance.
— Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone’s privacy.
I personally am not certain how his actions met any of the criteria above, nor how his followup tweet on the “jackass who posted a vulgarity on our site — and lost his job”, as he stated, constitutes treating the commenter with any sort of “respect”.
What is even more disconcerting is that in the followup message Kurt goes on to explain that they “have taken steps to beef up our review process and we’ll continue to enhance those measures to address bad language and intolerant speech” which, in the context of his recent actions, contains the implied threat that if they do not agree with your point of view they will take any measures they deem necessary to punish you. Which is completely contrary to another ethic point that journalist should “support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.”
So it all comes down to the fact that for this newspaper and this journalist, their job has changed from protectors of freedom of speech, to informants against those who may offend their sensibilities.
@TransDutch many IP addresses have the name of the organization/company embedded in them. some tracking software (StatCounter, in my case) even lists hits by the name of the company. For example, last week one of my visitors was identified as follows: Hilton Garden Inn Portland (216.220.228.58). I have regular visitors from City Hall, Washington University, SSM, Lee Enterprises, and Monsanto, among others. The software makes it hard to miss.
On one hand, I have a problem with Greenbaum’s actions from a free speech point of view, especially considering the misinformed hate that is spewed forth on stltoday.com in the name of opinion. I really wish they’d just turn the comments off completely. Barring that, a better policy would be helpful.
Finally, as to the fellow who resigned from his job over this–as Kelli notes, we don’t know the whole story, but he clearly knew he had crossed some line. Servers contain the information that make all of us trackable. Anonymous is fiction.
Oh God, another “Please think of the children” defence of Greenbaum using the usual “straw man” ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man ) arguments. “What if he turned out to be a child molester?” squealings. Fact is Greenbaum broke his employer’s privacy rules, took a shot at what he thought was an easy target (the coward would never have tried this on a lawyer) and is now paying the price ( http://www.kurtgreenbaum.com ). He threw away his career to satisfy his sanctimonious, vindictive, holier than thou prejudices and will never, ever be taken seriously as a journalist again. Journalists in America, and around the world, have gone to jail or worse to protect freedom of speech and privacy. He, however, gets a man fired for a word milder than one can hear walking down the street any day in any city in America. Joseph Pulitzer must be spinning in his grave.
I see my comment was deleted. Was it too critical of the idea that making this kind of joke indicates someone might be a pervert? Or did you not like my argument that being concerned about the children just because someone made a sex joke (apart from doing it on a work computer) sets a standard that most parents, teachers etc. Could never live up to? I mean, this idea that “someone with those thoughts” is around kids? Jokes like that are routine and not even considered sexist by everyone.
Sorry BG, just hadn’t had time to moderate all the comments and publish it yet.
I sincerely apologize if anyone has misconstrued my words to mean that I am accusing the commentor of being some sort of pedophile. I do not think that in the slightest. But I do firmly believe that there are standards that those who choose to work with children should uphold. I’m not some sort of naive prude who assumes that people who work with children are saints that don’t enjoy a good dirty joke now and again. But to make a reference like that on school property using school computers is what got this man in trouble.
Should Kurt Greenbaum have ratted him out? No. He shouldn’t have done that. I am not defending Kurt Greenbaum nor am I defending his actions. I don’t know anything about Kurt Greenbaum, but I gather that he has angered a lot of people through the years and that tells me something about his character. But, the fact remains that this man’s foolish act of using a vulgar word during school hours is what cost him his job.
I am simply trying to come at this situation from a different angle. Everyone is all up in arms over Greenbaum’s actions, but no one is talking about the guy that made the comment in the first place.. There’s a time and a place for that sort of joke. On school property, during school hours is neither. The fact is, had the man waited until he got home and made the same statement from his home computer, this situation would have likely turned out much differently.
Like alot of people, I’ve been following this for the last few days. A few points…
1. I wonder what Kurt Greenbaum would have done if he followed an IP to a lawyer’s office, a competing newspaper, a college, another country…
2. Why does he allow other derogatory words in discussions (as others have mentioned). I actually had to look up one of the words people complained about (tea….) and it’s usage is a whole lot worse than the word used to spur this controversy.
3. If he was so confident about his decision to do this, why isn’t there something that reads (we trace and followup on IP addresses, etc…) clearly visible to ALL users. As a social media director he understands that his actions are contrary to how anonymous posting works. You see… it’s anonymous if the commenting system is set up that way despite the information he receives on his end.
4. As a newspaper man, the issues with divulging personal information should have been on the forefront of his mind.
5. What aren’t personal attacks (something far worse in any discussion) not dealt with?
6. Why aren’t basic filters in place to weed out certain words if he was too lazy to actually work toward a real solution?
Commenting doesn’t just effect the owners of a commenting system – it effects posters and anyone reading the comments (including the “children” who are probably more adept at using the internet than most adults). When Kurt Greenbaum differentiated between what *HE* calls a vulgar word VS Racist Statements, Personal Attacks, Abuse, Trolls he also put the newspaper in an awkward position.
The position being that the paper SUPPORTS racism, it supports vulgarity when used against certain political parties, it will go after the weak (a child in a school system ) but not after someone capable of defending themselves.
I for one would like to see comment boards better moderated (but it takes real effort and some work). Would love to engage in conversations that actually go somewhere. I would stand behind anyone who had a real solution to this problem – 100%. He didn’t accomplish any of this.
He did everything behind people’s back in the most cowardly way possible. He thought he could suddenly instill fear into commenters by writing the second article – all without setting up an infrastructure and a clear policy. He put HIMSELF (not the paper, not his audience, not anyone) as the sole person to decide who gets “narked” on. It was the act of a Nazi and a xxxxx.
So… with all due respect, Kelli. What Kurt Greenbaum did is far worse than your daughter hearing a word she’s heard a thousand times before… on TV, on the radio, at the mall, on the web, with her friends, with her boyfriend and so on.
I hope Kurt Greenbaum comes forward and realizes the damage he’s caused. I also hope, that if he’s sincere in his desire to improve the commenting system, that he comes up with a clear plan for doing so. I’m sure he would receive plenty of support.
Kelli
He had no right to know who sent the offending post or where it came from unless it was an imminent threat to life or limb in which case he should have called the police. It violated his trust as a journalist and it violated the privacy policy of his employer. He has betrayed his colleagues (who will trust them now, even if they are serious journalists). It is an affront to the First Amendment of the Constitution. He gloated about getting the person fired (they lost their job as a direct result of Kurt’s actions so he got the person fired) and called the person a jackass in a twitter post after it happened. How he knows the person was fired is interesting and could get the school in legal trouble too. He had options like filters but chose not to use them. I also find it troubling that the PD tolerates racist comments on their blog comments – how many posters of racist comments has the paper tracked down and reported them to their employers? My guess is none. And if my guess is accurate, it shows them up to be hypocrites.
You’ve forgotten far too easily. We are legion, we do not forgive, we do not forget. This is not a hard thing to understand. This man that lost his job was not one of ours, but that doesn’t change the fact that you are condemning him without any understanding of who he is, what he was doing, or whether or not he was actually guilty. We all have skeletons in our closets. He is not an exception, Greenbaum is not an exception, and you are not an exception.
Do you know which school this was? Have you considered that it might have been a school with adolescent pranksters itching to go onto the Internet and say stupid things? Are you aware of how adept kids have become with technology? Did you consider the possibility that an intrepid and particularly skilled young man might have spoofed an employee computer’s address, gone on a joyride across the World Wide Web, and left dirty comments on any number of blogs?
And for the love of God, stop using, “Think of the children!” It was old when Hitler was using it, it was old when it was written in the Old Testament. It was probably old when the brontosaurus were telling each other, “Don’t trust those raptors; they’re nothing but no-goods and scoundrels. Please, think of the eggs!” Seriously.
I read the Post’s comment guidelines and their attempt at being cute falls totally flat…..guidelines should be specific about what is allowed and not allowed; as the Greenbaum incident and ensuing discussions points out, blog commenting has serious ramifications.Here is a link to a blog post that references several good examples of newspapers and online communites guidelines that leave the Post’s looking as lame as Greenbaum and the anonymous commenter. http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2009/10/30/a-community-guidelines-faq/
I just want to add one final thought to my previous post in reference to power (comment currently waiting moderation).
As one of many system administrators, Kurt Greenbaum had power. He had personal information about another person’s surfing behavior. I want you to think about that for a second…
Now I want you to think about companies like Microsoft, Google, Apple, Yahoo (Operating Systems, Search, Phones, GPS systems, email, etc..). These companies have the same information Kurt Greenbaum had… just a little bit more.
I want you to think about ISPs, Telephone companies, Advertising companies (and the minions who work for them).
Think about all the information they are gathering… about what they can do with it. Think about the thousands of people who have access to this information.
If that wasn’t enough… Think about the IRS, Social Security, Credit Card companies… How about medical records, psychiatric visits.
Remember when AOL “accidentally” released several months of search data? How about the boyfriend working for an online social site spying on his girlfriend? It’s all the same thing – data about people.
Kurt Greenbaum had power… the same power these multi-billion data-gathering companies have. He used that power to go after an individual because HE was personally offended.
Think about that as it relates to all the other data-gatherers and the people who actually have access to this information.
@Kelli
“But I do firmly believe that there are standards that those who choose to work with children should uphold.”
Very vague and unspecific. What standards and when? In what situations? Whose standards? Yours? Mine? Greenbaum’s? (i.e. sanctimonious, hypocritical cowardice – see http://www.igreenbaum.com/2009/09/yes-bloggers-we-can-laugh-at-ourselves/ and, as he’s now ashamed of that and hidden the video http://www.kurtgreenbaumisapussy.com/video/I_Got_a_Blog.WMV). Does it make a difference that he posted it on a private blog? Or is he a hypocrite for posting it at all? He’s a church member and his wife teaches children there. Should she now be fired from that position because her husband posts profanities on the net? Should he be banned from any contact with the children there because he posted the video? For what it’s worth my standards are that either the teacher who posted “pussy” or the journalist? who posted the “motherf****r” bomb online are both OK to work with children as long as they don’t use the offending words in the presence of the children. Frankly I’m more worried about Greenbaum passing on his narrow, sanctimonious, hypocritical, cowardly ethics to the kids than anything else.
“But to make a reference like that on school property using school computers is what got this man in trouble.”…. “There’s a time and a place for that sort of joke. On school property, during school hours is neither.”
Why? There has been no indication that the comment was posted in front of children, no indication that any kind of language that Greenbaum may have disapproved of (though see above – that might not include much!) was said in the presence of children, no indication that any children were even aware that it was posted. Nor would Greenbaum have known anything about any of the above when he chose to breach his paper’s privacy guidelines. (Which, with reference to Adam Jadhav above, include no mention of the paper contacting anyone’s employer. For reference Adam Jadhav is one of the joint authors of the video Greenbaum posted on his blog Quote from the video “Written and edited by Adam Jadhav”) This whole episode is reminiscent of witch hunting where the accused witches were presumed guilty unless they sank and drowned when chucked in the bound with bound hands. That is teachers are the new whipping boys of the religious right and subjected to wholly inappropriate standards under which they pretty much can’t win.
Meanwhile the icons, leaders and political representatives of this “moral majority” uphold their standards by consorting with prostitutes (Swaggart), committing fraud (Bakker) and corrupting congressional pageboys (Foley). How many of the religious right were up in arms about that?
In case you haven’t guessed, I don’t have a lot of time for the American religious right and neither does the rest of the world. Outside America, and in many places in America, they are viewed as nutters with a combination of more or less equal parts of amazed disbelief that anyone can be quite that deluded and derision.
I tried my best to be fair in my assessment of this situation. Perhaps I didn’t do the best job in making my point, which was simply that when you make a questionable comment on the internet while you’re at work, you should know that you are taking a risk. The fact that this man resigned when confronted shows me he knew that he made an error in judgement – and leads me to belive that he actually wrote the comment and not some rogue, internet savvy kid. I understand that people don’t agree with me, and I’m fine with that. I don’t think there’s anything else I can say to try and convey my point so I will gracefully bow out of the conversation at this point.
Thanks for joining in on the discussion and please understand that I do not presume to make judgements upon anyone. I just think there are two sides to the story and I think that both men were wrong in their actions. That has nothing to do with my morals or beliefs or who I am as a person (I’m not sure how it happened that somewhere along the way I got compared to Hitler – and by the same person who was chiding me not to judge someone I don’t know. Oh the irony). Those are simply the facts.
While I still stand by what I wrote and my feelings on this issue haven’t changed, I do regret the paragraph where I mention the caution I feel when it comes to creepy people who lack judgement being in close proximity to my child. I don’t often write articles that cause dissent and I learned a lesson in this one – stick to the facts and keep personal feelings to myself. Thanks for the lesson!
I welcome more comments but I won’t try to defend my position anymore.
Thanks everyone.
I wonder how many of you posters ever worked for a major market paper or daily paper in any size market?
Everywhere I’ve worked, he would have been fired. He unilaterally did something without getting advice from his supervisors.
There’s a thing called check and balance and everyone should be practicing it whether they have a blog or work for traditional media.
And if anyone thinks the guy voluntarily quit, take a reality check. That report comes from Greenbaum and no one else.
Do you really believe anything Greenbaum writes after this debacle? I sure don’t.
Scott Simon
Bowling Hood
The thing is, Greenbaum didn’t show the “offending” comment. But it’s available now on the Web… I read it. It was SO not offensive. It was a playful double entendre, not much worse than Greenbaum writing “Rocky Mountain Oysters”. The comment was deleted and readers were left to imagine what the comment was. I’m guessing most thought it was worse than it really was.
When Greenbaum gloated about it in his article and in his tweets, he stressed the “..and got FIRED!” part, like it’s justification that the guy was a terrible person. “Hey, people are defending what this guy did? He got FIRED , so therefore he’s a bad person!” The guy simply didn’t deserve what happened to him, and Greenbaum, in a premeditated way, set out to ruin someone’s life. It was a terrible thing to do.
When someone trolls your forum, you ban them… ban their IP address. End of problem. You don’t go trying to get them fired for saying naughty words — that’s like a totalitarian state!
The issues of judgment calls, commenter vulgarity, and school-ground morality may not be cut-and-dried, but the STL privacy policy sure is. Greenbaum directly violated it the moment he handed this commenter’s information over to the school.