US Ed Dept Demanding Principals Censor More 493
Toe, The writes "Education Department officials are threatening school principals with lawsuits if they fail to monitor and curb students' lunchtime chat and evening Facebook time for expressing ideas and words that are deemed to be harassment of some students. Under the new interpretation of civil rights laws, principals and their schools are legally liable if they fail to curb 'harassment' of students, even if it takes place outside the school, on Facebook or in private conversation. When children are concerned, where is the line between protection and censorship?"
Ludicrous (Score:5, Insightful)
On the one hand we teach kids about the Constitution and Bill of Rights. On the other hand, we tell them "Hey johhny - what you say can get you in trouble if you make fun of that fat kid in the playground...
Whatever happened to "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me?" Have we become such a bunch of pussies that we can't even deal with having people call us bad names? What ever happened to "hey - here's two pairs of boxing gloves - go behind the gym and work it out?"
And finally, doesn't the Dept of Ed have ANYTHING else to deal with besides this BS?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Whatever happened to "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me?"
I want to put an early Godwin in this thread: Hitler happened. The nastiest people don't hurt anyone directly. They merely influence people's opinion.
The US has the most powerful propaganda machine on the planet. Do you discount this entirely? Is the brain not just another organ which can be trained in a particular direction?
What ever happened to "hey - here's two pairs of boxing gloves - go behind the gym and work it out?"
Are you serious? The solution to bullies is to get physically fit and beat them up? Self-defence is entirely acceptable [dailymotion.com], but corporal punishment is not justice.
Re: (Score:2)
I want to put an early Godwin in this thread: Hitler happened. The nastiest people don't hurt anyone directly. They merely influence people's opinion.
The US has the most powerful propaganda machine on the planet. Do you discount this entirely? Is the brain not just another organ which can be trained in a particular direction?
What does that have to do with not being offended by mere words and responding to the situation logically?
I do agree with your second point, though. I believe that initiating violence is idiotic.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What does that have to do with not being offended by mere words and responding to the situation logically?
How do you logically respond to Hitler? Do you note that he has not killed anyone with his own hands and ask him nicely to step aside for a friendly chat? If he ignores you, do you just shrug and let him carry on? Do you tell his victims that he's an insane little man and that, if you're not standing up to him, you're just weak?
Most verbal bullies aren't powerful because they call you names. They're powerful because they influence others' behaviour toward their victim. If you take aside the grunt who throws
Re: (Score:2)
How do you logically respond to Hitler?
By analyzing what he is saying and either accepting or dismissing it based on its truth value (and recognizing mere opinions). Do not be so easily influenced by words.
Most verbal bullies aren't powerful because they call you names.
They're not powerful at all. It's just that others are weak-minded. Also, many weak-minded people are affected emotionally (in the negative sense) by words, which was partly was I was speaking of.
They're powerful because they influence others' behaviour toward their victim.
This is also what I was speaking of. This shouldn't happen, obviously. If it does, too bad. People shouldn't be so easily influenced (emotionally or
Re: (Score:2)
People shouldn't be so easily influenced (emotionally or otherwise) by mere words.
Alternative reality fallacy. People are easily influenced by words. You're essentially saying that the problem is that we've evolved wrongly and that our brains should be perfectly rational (and by your definition of rational). Who will strike the first blow to eliminate this imperfect species and all similarly behaving primates, and replace it with yours?
Anyway, the influence may benefit the influenced. Many people have a better life at school thanks to being one of the bully grunts. Perhaps the "weak-mind
Re: (Score:3)
There is well over $1T industry called the advertising industry that exists because humans are highly influenced by other's opinions, much moreso than they realize and admit to. That strategy does not work against prolonged attack.
Re: (Score:2)
The former(ya right) political wing of the IRA has gotten people elected into the dail and various positions of power in northern ireland.
They've scaled back because the catholics/republicans in the north are being treated like crap less.
Giving them a voice cut down on the violence, the exact opposite of your insane claims.
You respond to hitler by not supporting him and by speaking out against him, not by shooting him.
that just creates a martyr to his cause and a replacement arises out of the cesspool that
Re: (Score:2)
I know I probably shouldn't respond, but I'll do it anyway:
You respond to hitler by not supporting him and by speaking out against him, not by shooting him.
Given this particular person, shooting might have been the best option.
The reason is that Hitler's rise to political power was mainly due to his individual character traits; he had a very charismatic personality with verbal/presentation skills to match. A large part of his party's power was due to this single person. Had he been shot, the party would have had much weaker leadership and either would not have pushed it's views quite as extremely as it
Re:Ludicrous (Score:4, Interesting)
On the one hand we teach kids about the Constitution and Bill of Rights. On the other hand, we tell them "Hey johhny - what you say can get you in trouble if you make fun of that fat kid in the playground...
To be fair, they'll face the same thing when they get jobs and try to use facebook there.
And finally, doesn't the Dept of Ed have ANYTHING else to deal with besides this BS?
Maybe not with their budget? Saying "crack down on hate speech on facebook" probably doesn't cost as much as buying new textbooks.
Whatever happened to "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me?" Have we become such a bunch of pussies that we can't even deal with having people call us bad names? What ever happened to "hey - here's two pairs of boxing gloves - go behind the gym and work it out?"
Joking aside, I hear what you're saying, but TFA points out the suicide rate among gay and lesbian students is 4 times that of straight students. I'm not saying that justifies trampling on free speech off school grounds, but saying "work it out" is a little simplistic.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Remember when people wouldn't question the president during wartime? Yeah, we grew up.
Re: (Score:3)
Garak: Ah, but I got off several cutting remarks which no doubt did serious damage to their egos.
Bashir: Garak, this isn't funny.
Garak: I'm serious, doctor! Thanks to your administrations I'm almost completely healed but the damage I did to them will last a lifetime.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The "sticks and stones" thing is all well and good, but when you're socially awkward and get teased and made fun of publicly by multiple peers then it can really start to hurt. How often have we heard about kids attempting suicide or getting an eating disorder because of bullying?
Now, do I think that it's the Department of Education's job to curb this nasty behavior outside of school walls? Hell no, that's what parents are for. But again, parenting seems to have gone the way of the dodo bird and everyone is
Re: (Score:2)
Because you don't settle your differences with boxing gloves as adults. This website seems to have a very sharp bias. Seems to be catering to our new brand of know-nothings.
Might Makes Right? (Score:3)
So "might makes right"? What if one is significantly smaller than the bully? What if the bully always has friends around? I was physically abused by other students and was in several fights. They never helped. If I lost I got beat up again. If I won they went and got friends to help them next time. Fist fights by children is never a solution even temporary.
Re: (Score:3)
Whatever happened to "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me?"
Words will hurt you if other people happen to hear them and choose to act on those words.
Coincidentally, comments on Facebook can be read by other people.
What ever happened to "hey - here's two pairs of boxing gloves - go behind the gym and work it out?"
I'm sure the physically strongest of the two has no problems with that solution.
Usually, that is not the kid who was being threatened with physical violence by a bully.
Re: (Score:2)
I would have to agree that this really is pretty ludicrous. Schools are concerned about bullying and cyber-bullying. However, they struggle with the tools and statutory authority to 'regulate' the cyber part of this. So, if Washington really wants them to police this, then they need to give them the funding and resources to do so. Not to mention indemnify them for the privacy they will violate to monitor facebook, cell phones, etc.
No, if Facebook thinks this is a good idea, to make schools more accounta
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Another thing about this is that words don't tend to hurt if something is said once, but when the kid has to go into these situations and hear these things over and over again the affect is cumulative and can be VERY damaging. Bullying works to damage these kids because the bullies have a captive audience day after day after day. If you, as an adult, had a room mate that constantly called you a "faggot" and verbally abuse you every day you'd have the option of leaving (not trying to get into a domestic vi
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. Making principals and schools financially responsible for student conduct off-campus is only going to lead to a sudden shortage of principals (who'll want the job?) and increased closure of schools (sorry we got sued last month, can't afford the power bills this month).
If they're not going to make the students directly responsible for their anti-social behaviour then when are parents and guardians going to be held accountable for the behaviour of their little hell spawns?
Re: (Score:3)
Because of free speech codes the laws about incitement are hard to qualify under. The fact is that children are able to effectively incite and effectively due grave psychological damage without qualifying under "terroristic threat". Things like spreading gossip or attacking reputations, if they happened among adults, do qualify under "hostile work environment", "harassment", "sexual harassment", "defamation" but since children can't own property those laws dont' effectively apply to them. But to conti
Re: (Score:2)
AC has a point. Words CAN hurt you. Especially when they're words like "I hear so-and-so is a faggot, we should do something about it" posted on Facebook, that everyone from your school sees. Sure, words can't punch you... but they sure as hell can encourage people to punch you.
Or even worse "so and so said that Muhammad was a pedo and burned a qur'an". Instant death sentence
Re: (Score:2)
Or "So and so is a muslim and laughed at 9/11". Instant death sentence.
Please cite and example of where that actually occurred.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"I hear so-and-so is a faggot, we should do something about it" posted on Facebook
Of course that's bad and may require a response: either personal from the parents, or from some civil authority. But if it wasn't posted at the school, it's not something the school should deal with, be responsible for or butt in to.
And what kind of moron organises hate crimes on Facebook? Way to leave an indelible trail of evidence that any doofus can find
Well... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It did? It seems completely right for me. You just need to realize how pointless and petty everything truly is. Words cannot hurt you. They can only hurt you if you let them hurt you. This does not apply to physical violence.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Ludicrous (Score:5, Interesting)
If kids weren't beating the fuck out of each other in school and torturing and harassing each other in school, I doubt it would be an issue outside of school, either. In a lot of these instances, the online "harassment" is merely an extension of the viciousness that is occurring inside the walls of the school eight hours a day. Perhaps they'd be less inclined to do that outside of school if they weren't allowed to get away with it *inside* of school, too. The problem is that teachers and administrators look the other way. Trouble makers get away with it and at worse are "disciplined" but kept in school. Then parents excuse it as some sort of insane right of passage or character building exercise. The parents that do take it seriously reach a roadblock when nobody else engages with them and they're forced to send their kid to a violent prison for eight hours a day with no recourse to protect them.
I remember a specific incident when I was in junior high in the 90s. There were two teachers right in front of me in the hallway and a large eight grader at the end of the hallway walked passed a small seventh grade student and in one swift motion, slammed his head directly into a wall for no reason. The kid passed out and had a concussion. The teachers didn't respond. They just kept walking and turned at the next bend in the hallway. The kid who did it was a trouble maker and had a lot of detention. Was never expelled or removed from being a threat to the rest of the school.
Unrelated, but interesting, I remember when I was in grade school and I was walking down a hallway. I was running my outstretched arm against the wall as I walked down the mostly empty hall. One of the special-ed kids was coming the other way . . . and at the last second, moved to the side and took a fucking BITE OUT OF MY ARM.
Schools are fucked up places. At no other time in my life have I been forced to surround myself with sociopaths, criminals, and the insane.
Subject smubject! (Score:4, Interesting)
Worked in (UK) education for 7 years. I offer advice and training to teachers to introduce safeguarding and online safety into the curriculum, and so far have positive feedback. What the kids do at home, however, isn't our business.
Re:Subject smubject! (Score:4, Insightful)
* OK so there are plenty of parents that do raise their own kids, but this article not really about them.
Re: (Score:2)
It's worth noting that it in fact has not worked all that well. UK ranks #1 in Western Europe in youth crime.
Re: (Score:2)
If you re-read his/her post you might notice that nowhere did he claim the advice and training was aimed at lowering youth crime rates. ;)
It is aimed at informing the students about the tools at their disposal for dealing with assbags online
Re: (Score:2)
So, basically we should focus on fly on a wall and completely ignore the elephant in the room?
Re: (Score:3)
You can't build a house with just a bricklayer.
Re: (Score:3)
School is not supposed to be the nanny. School is for education, not upbringing. "Adapting" children, forming their moral character to be "productive", is the responsibility of the parent. When I worked with teachers, they were supposed to find the best way to deliver lessons about relevant information, like history. They weren't supposed to be learning parenting skills. Granted, some of them learn some of that on the job. But that's not their intended role.
The children should have already had the basics (l
Re: (Score:2)
Student A and student B don't interact outside of school. Student A posts slander about B on Facebook, outside of school. Students C through Z read said slander, and now the whole school believes it, and student B gets beat up by students D & F because they think B is gay. Ipso facto, what happened outside of school has now strongly affected what happens inside of school. Student A gets away with no punishment, because they didn'
Re: (Score:3)
Student A gets away with no punishment, because they didn't do the punching, they just instigated it.
They don't get punished BY THE SCHOOL because they didn't do anything wrong AT SCHOOL. But they could be sued, or face criminal charges in the "real " world.
It's not the school's place to punish students for what they do in their own time.
Re: (Score:2)
Hell, file a police report if that doesnt work.
Dont clobber the rights of everyone because some people are asshats of greater douchery...
This coming from someone still in therapy at age 26 due to the asshattery throughout my first 9 years of school.
You would think I want all things like this stopped but for fucks sake dont ruin the world to 'save the children'. Go for the fuckbags in other ways... What someone does outside of school is between parents or in a worse case youth arbitration boards or the legal
Where are the parents? (Score:3)
This strikes me as a profoundly bad idea. While we're delegating parental responsibility over to the principal (which is weird), are we also going to hold them accountable if the kids aren't vaccinated or eating healthy enough?
Re: (Score:2)
You may jest but....
Here is the Government regulated food program [usda.gov] and I believe school health officials are permitted to give vaccines too. The local school district sends out flyers and pamphlets about early childhood vaccinations, why they're important and if you cant get them through your doctor that the school can provide them.
Poor values and negative reinforcement (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
And it's not just the values, of course, but also the fact that the society is very stratified. And the warmongering and the death penalty and the imprisonment of a comparatively large part of the population... All these things of course contribute to reinforce those values.
And the lie that is the American Dream, that the US is the land of the free and the land of opportunity, that you can make it here if you just put your mind to it, will contribute to many a desperate poor soul. For some the opportunitie
somene please help me (Score:3)
When exactly did the USA remove the right of free speech from their constitution?
Re:somene please help me (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it is an interesting area for debate, particularly when state education is legally required. But then again I guess teachers need to have some level of control. I think the most controversial area is if school should have any input into what students do in their own time rather than the police.
Re: (Score:2)
Children in USA has never had them in school. No rights, only obligations. It's an violation of Convention on the Rights of the Child, article 12. Stating that child has the right to express themselves. USA and Somalia is the only two countries within the UN that has not signed the agreement.
Remember a story of a kid who got suspended for wearing a pepsi t-shirt in school during a photo op for Coca Cola. Might have been vice versa.
Ain't that great though? We force you to participate and earn money of your f
Re:somene please help me (Score:5, Insightful)
Children as seen as a commodity and chattel in the U.S. I know this will get modded as "Troll" or something, but it has to be said. We don't really see children as human in the U.S. We certainly don't treat them as humans. Even in this thread you can see people see "teenagers" as a totally other species.
Re: (Score:3)
Germany didn't ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child yet. So it's not only the US and Somalia.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Principles need to lay down the law. (Score:5, Funny)
"Hello students, this is your principle seaking, I'd like to remind you that bullying will not be tolerated, in particular, calling Josh Smith a 'whiny little faggot' or 'a little bitch' because he complained about being bullied to school staff is not acceptable. Anyone seen beating him up after school behind the gym, which is out of line of sight from any teacher office, will be disciplined."
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, I see you attended my high school.
Make parents responsible instead (Score:2)
Whilst I agree whole-heartedly with the school being made responsible for stopping bullying (verbal or physical) during school time and on school grounds, they cannot realistically control what the children do outside of school. The only way to achieve this would be to change the rules by which FB operates. If you read FBs T- .....
"No information from children under age 13. If you are under age 13, please do not attempt to register for Facebook or provide any personal information about yourself to us.
Pare
Re: (Score:2)
Nuff said (Score:2)
Power 4 Gestapo (Score:2)
They just passed a law which gives schools outrageous powers over students even in their own homes. Bullying is not such a simple issue. Young males often push each other to "buck up". That is to meet the mark, make the grade, ford the stream, beat the hazard or whatever. Name calling and a bit of pushing around are all part of this process. You see it when recruits go into military training. You certainly see it from both staff and students on football and other sports teams.
censorship is censorship in any form. (Score:2)
Great idea! (Score:3)
Or, alternatively, how about we teach them about how pointless and petty such things truly are? How about we teach them that words cannot hurt them unless they let themselves be 'hurt' by the words? Someone else's opinion of you matters little (no matter the amount of people that feel the same) and cannot actually harm you (unless they resorted to physical violence, in which case I would agree that intervention would be necessary). What we are doing is essentially placing them into a bubble that filters out everything that they don't wish to hear. They will never learn how pointless being offended by such things truly is, and when they are forced to leave that bubble, they will be lost. This is completely pointless and counterproductive if your goal is to raise a generation of free-thinking people who utilize logic in making their decisions, but from decisions such as this, I'm guessing that that isn't the goal at all.
Re: (Score:3)
teenagers don't have full rights (Score:2)
teenagers are mostly idiots. adults are mostly idiots, but at least they are fully legally accountable for their actions. teenager's actions are still a reflection of their parents, legally and logically, and so curtailment of their rights, according to their parent's wishes is good common sense. i don't think any RESPONSIBLE parent would have a problem with school admin monitoring and policing what their kids do while they are at work, and in fact, probably appreciate it
unless everyone here wants to regist
This is crazy (Score:2)
unconstitutional, and uses up resources that would otherwise be available to support
educarion.
They constantly interfear with the running of schools and in the British system have taken
a working system and destroyed it.
Get rid of these people and leave harrasment to the police.
On Censoring... (Score:2)
All Stick, No Carrot? (Score:2)
This sounds like an un-funded, all-stick, no-carrot mandate, like NCLB. I imagine this will hasten the departure of good school administrators.
Do you suppose that the Capitol Hill will allow schools to install Cell-Phone jamming technology to combat this sort of thing, keeping students off their cell phones during lunch and between classes? (I'm sure parents will be up in arms over something like that.)
It takes a village to raise a child, which means more than the local school needs to be accountable for
Consider the Source and Read the Guidelines (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh for crying out loud. This is what passes for news at lame wannabe Tucker Carlson's attempt to mimic Politico? The guidance letter was published in October 2010 and you can read it here: http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201010.html [ed.gov]
Tucker Carleson (Score:5, Informative)
Let me just point out the "original article" here is pointing to a news editorial site run by Tucker Carlson. The actual website run by the government dealing with bullying is http://www.stopbullying.gov/ [stopbullying.gov]
There is legislation pending in congress to make bullying more serious
(Full Text: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s112-540 [govtrack.us])
The line between? (Score:2)
There is no line. Children have (almost) no rights, only their parents have rights.
How better to show.... (Score:2)
how much we *really* value freedom of expression.
Idiots (Score:2)
Education Department officials need to get a grip on reality.
I would like to see them follow 1 tweet , facebook and myspace accounts for one person, let alone the 600 or so students you can have in a small school. Then asking 1 person without adding to their budget for such things, is really stupid....it shows their level of computer comprehension...none, zero, zip, nada....they know absolutely nothing about what they are asking....and that is bad, especially that they make decisions about our school system
I feel sorry for these kids. (Score:2)
These kids are going to drown when the real world comes knocking on their door.
Slippery slope? Iceskating down a luge path. (Score:3)
Raise your hand if you truly, sincerely believe that this will never be used to punish kids who gripe about their teachers or administration. After all, if Johnny tells his parents that Mrs. Smith is mean and picks on him, then he's clearly usurping her authority and disrupting her teaching and the school must put a stop to it.
Remember, "it's for the kids" is always a lie. Always. Without exception.
Re:The Land of the Free (Score:5, Insightful)
It's always been difficult to learn about "the land of the free" in an institution where you (the students) are forced by law to go there whether you want to or not.
Excellent training ground for applied sarcasm and irony appreciation, though.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If you'd have the autodidacts go to a Montessori school (I only know it from my
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Because those different education methodologies will almost by nature have different costs per student. As a taxpayer, people feel like they have a right to expect that their kids have the same chance at the "better" education. And if their kid is in the regular old public school they shouldn't have to pay for the advanced education that the gifted students are receiving.
It's a bit of an issue right now in Massachusetts (US). Our public school system includes a number of publicly funded charter schools
Re: (Score:2)
I thought home education was legal in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I wouldn't have taken that comment sarcastically at all.
Seriously, one of the major functions of school systems is to allow kids to socialize and learn social behaviors. It is unfortunate when the social pressure to homogenize is unchecked, that socialization experience is really really important. Kids need to be able to express themselves, but they also need to learn when to keep their mouths shut and conform to social norms. The real world isn't a Breakfast Club utopia, kids need to learn when social
Re:The Land of the Free (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh yeah, kids have limited consitutional rights - especially in education.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Now, that said, I have approximately zero confidence that school admin will be able to do much of anything based on this new mandate. In my school experience, adult authority figures were, without exception, useless or worse in dea
Re: (Score:3)
I agree with you when it comes to young kids where the label "petty shit" applies, but that's not the purpose of this action. What this is meant to address is the rising number of suicides by teens who are being persistently stalked and bullied beyond their ability to "roll it off". We're talking actual abuse here- intentional long-term malice which would result in criminal charges or restraining orders for adults. It may not be an ideal solution (educating kids to handle being picked on is probably more
Re:The Land of the Free (Score:5, Informative)
Re:The Land of the Free (Score:4, Funny)
In other words, it doesn't, but the same organization that said that growing wheat on one's own property for one's own use can be regulated by Congress under the Commerce Clause has said it is, so there.
Re:The Land of the Free (Score:5, Interesting)
Not really, took over a hundred years and a bit of pretzle logic to get to that point. I expect the newer courts will wake up and realize that the ICC(interstate commerce clause) is not a catch all for whatever the govt. wants to do. See Thomas' dissent of Gonzales v. Raich.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Until the Government's Department of Education became involved, I would've agreed with you.
Re: (Score:3)
Supreme court precedence has ruled in loco parentis, effectively limiting childrens' consitutional rights while in custody of the school.
Re: (Score:2)
It has little to do with the "land of the free" thing. It has more to do with, as was mentioned, harassment and threats. This isn't much of a problem for adults, because there are laws out there to protect people from being stalked, threatened, or physically attacked. The behavior wouldn't be tolerated if I did those things to you in public or at work or, often, even online.
However, children aren't given the same benefit. If an adult smacks their spouse, it's a crime. If they smack their coworker, it's a cr
Re:Children don't have the right to free speech (Score:5, Informative)
Not really.
In the US, the Supreme Court upheld the right of free speech for students in Tinker vs. Des Moines School District [wikipedia.org]. Students can express as much free speech as they want provided it does not disrupt the learning environment, so outside-of-class speech is protected.
Unfortunately, Bush's appointees have essentially punched a gigantic hole into the previous ruling with Morse v. Fredrick [wikipedia.org], where the Roberts Court determined that if the school officials have a seemingly good reason, they can abrogate free speech rights. This looks pretty easy to abuse, a school could claim to be protecting student safety and thus have license to patrol facebook and punish students accordingly.
Re: (Score:3)
The only way it could tie into a claim of protecting the student safety is if the discussion was about illegal activities and even then the decision specificy states the reason it was valid was because it was done at a school function.
Re: (Score:2)
Children don't have the right to free speech, only adults do.
Where in the first amendment does it state that?
Re: (Score:2)
Let's just hope the students aren't smart enough to create fake Facebook accounts/groups to harass people from.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes I know it isn't that simple. However it should be.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Besides, if FB were taken out of the equation, more sites would pop up that cater to the youth culture. Then administrators would need to monitor even more sites.