Yearbooks mutilated to remove student comment

June 15 2010, Comox Valley Echo

A Lake Trail student has been quite literally cut out of this year's yearbook.
School board officials told the Echo that Grade 10 student Brandon Armstrong's photo was chopped out of the yearbook due to a "hurtful and untrue" comment in his bio.
Because of that comment, scissors were taken to 299 of the 300 yearbooks produced to remove Armstrong's photo.
Just one yearbook has Armstrong's picture: his own. Beneath it is the comment that caused the kafuffle: his favourite Lake Trail Memory was "when Mrs. Carpenter spent all our money on a new fence instead of new textbooks." Lori Carpenter is the school's principal.
Armstrong said it "blew my mind" when he found out he'd been snipped.
"It kind of sucked," he said. "I was excited for the yearbook and I'm excited to keep it for a long time. It kind of sucks, for sure."
He said he included that comment as his favourite memory both because he thought it was true and also because he thought it was "kind of funny."
School officials obviously didn't think it was very funny, while assistant superintendent Sherry Elwood said it was absolutely untrue -- the principal had no part in the decision to install the fence, she said.
Elwood said the comment was removed both because it was untrue and because it was targeted at a specific staff member.
 
"I don't believe that's censorship," she said. "That's about you being responsible for what you put in print under your name as being true. That's really what it's about."
Elwood admitted that the teacher responsible for the yearbook should have caught the comment in the editing process and removed it at that time if there was a concern.
She said he was "mortified" over the inclusion of the comment and removing it with scissors was a thoughtful, measured decision.
But Armstrong's mother, Sherri Kennedy, felt the entire incident could have been dealt with in a much more reasonable manner.
Elwood noted that school officials did try to cover the comment with black felt, but it was ineffective with the glossy paper the yearbook is printed on.
Kennedy would like to know why they had to cut his entire picture out rather than just taking the scissors to the comment.
"It's not just that one line that's cut out," she said. "They could have at least left the picture in.
"It's kind of unfair -- not just to my son, but to everybody -- that it's not there."
Beyond that, the school included an insert in the yearbook to explain the gaping hole.
It states that "one student made a comment in his bio that was both hurtful to another person and which was not based on truth." In bold, it states: "I will not allow anything to be published that is hurtful and untrue."
"It makes it look like he said some kind of swearing or something really bad about another person, bad enough to take out his whole profile, including his picture," said Kennedy.
"Parents would look at it and think this child had done something worse than what he actually did."
Elwood said that had the comment been targeted at the school district, which did make the decision to install the fence, it would "probably be a different issue."
Kennedy said she'd like to see all of the yearbooks reprinted, but was told by school officials that would not happen because it would cost upward of $3,000 and the money is not available.
The yearbook is the last one that will include a Grade Ten class, of which Armstrong was a part, because the school's grade configuration changes next year.
"This boy is permanently removed from this piece of history at the school," said PAC chair Yolande Munroe.

Overreacted much? Five years from now nobody is going to give a damn about the comment, but everyone is going to notice one of their classmates has been deleted from the yearbook. Why didn't this get edited out after it was submitted, or during the design and layout process, or at the printers? And most interesting of all, the Streisand Effect is now in place: because the administrators wanted this removed, it's now all over the Internet.

Cutting out a student's photo from a keepsake because of a sarcastic comment is petty and vindictive, and is guaranteed to cause more ill-will towards the principal than if she had let it go. A yearbook bio is neither a scholarly report nor a piece of journalism and she is at no risk of libel. If was going to be redacted, why not buy Avery sticker sheets to cover the comment? And perhaps the most interesting question... what happened to the image on the other side of the page?

And oh yeah, the yearbooks were paid for by the students. Hope they got what they paid for.

Judge OKs Anti-Uniform Buttons

Associated Press, September 20 2007

Two Bayonne students can wear buttons featuring a picture of Hitler Youth to protest a school uniform policy, a federal judge ruled yesterday.

U.S. District Judge Joseph A. Greenaway Jr. sided with the parents of the students, who had been threatened with suspension by the Bayonne school district last fall for wearing the buttons.

However, the judge added in his ruling that the boys will not be allowed to distribute the buttons at school.

"We're very pleased with the decision," said Laura DePinto, whose son wore the badge. "It's essentially confirming that students have the right to express their opinion and to peacefully protest."

Asked if her son would resume wearing the emblem, DePinto said that would be a matter for a "family discussion."

Citing a 1969 case in Iowa involving students who wore black arm bands to protest the Vietnam War, Greenaway wrote that "a student may not be punished for merely expressing views unless the school has reason to believe that the speech or expression will 'materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school.'"

Greenaway's decision "follows the law as we saw it going in," said Karin R. White Morgen, an attorney representing both boys' families

The buttons bear the words "no school uniforms" with a slash through them superimposed on a photo of young boys wearing identical shirts and neckerchiefs. There are no swastikas visible on the buttons, but the parties agreed that they depict members of Hitler Youth.

Bayonne Superintendent of Schools Patricia L. McGeehan said the school district was disappointed in the decision and would review its legal options.

"We are very concerned with the precedent this may set, not only for Bayonne but for every public school district in New Jersey that tries to create and maintain a school environment conducive to learning and that is not offensive to students and staff," McGeehan said.

Earlier in the day, Board of Education attorney Kenneth Hampton said he doubted that the district would challenge the decision.

"It would not be worth the dollars to appeal this further," he said.

Bayonne instituted mandatory uniforms last September for grades K-8, and fifth-grader Michael DePinto wore the button several times before objections were raised in November, attorneys for the plaintiffs said.

In a letter dated Nov. 16, 2006, Janice Lo Re, principal of Public School 14, notified Laura DePinto that her son "will be subject to suspension" for wearing the button in school.

Parents of the other student, Anthony LaRocco, a seventh-grader at the Woodrow Wilson School, received a similar letter from principal Catherine Quinn.

Neither boy has worn the button since the lawsuit was filed, Morgen said.

An excellent ruling in support of civil liberties. The students were highly aware of the issues present in schools today and the issues surrounding school uniforms, and sought to protest in an effective but reasonable manner. The school of course overstepped their authority and suspended the students for their expression of their views.

The social and political issues represented here were important enough that the suggestion of offensiveness has no legal grounding--we have a right to freedom of speech, regardless of who is offended, because more often than not it is the very people we are offending who need most to hear the message. Furthermore, the buttons were condemning the Nazis and Fascism, not endorsing them. The school's position was not one of preventing hate groups, but of suppressing a highly unflattering comparison, one not entirely without merit.

If the school district is trying to "create and maintain a school environment conducive to learning" then they could start in their history classes, discussing the formation of the Hitler Youth, the Vietnam student protests, and the exercising of the First Amendment. If the want an environment "that is not offensive to students and staff" then perhaps they shouldn't introduce policies that invite such comparison.

If students exercising their civil liberties in a responsible and appropriate manner offends your sensibilities, and you take disciplinary and legal action to restrict their rights, then you are no better than the fascists they are comparing you to. The Bill of Rights was written to prevent the Tyrrany of the Majority, where one group tramples over the rights of the rest through force. The issue is more important than ever today, and thankfully the students, their parents, and Judge Greenaway is aware of this. I hope they continue to wear the buttons and find solidarity with their fellow students and their teachers.

Gay pair's photo blacked out of yearbook

Newark Star-Ledger, June 22 2007

A photograph of an East Side High School student kissing his boyfriend was blacked out of every copy of the school's yearbook by Newark school officials who decided it was inappropriate.

Andre Jackson said he never thought he would offend anyone when he bought a page in the yearbook and filled it with several photographs, including one of him kissing his boyfriend.

But Newark Superintendent of Schools Marion Bolden called the photograph "illicit" and ordered it blacked out of the $85 yearbook before it was distributed to students at a banquet for graduating seniors Thursday.

"It looked provocative," she said. "If it was either heterosexual or gay, it should have been blacked out. It's how they posed for the picture."

Russell Garris, the assistant superintendent who oversees the city's high schools, brought the photograph to Bolden's attention Thursday afternoon. He was concerned the picture would be controversial and upsetting to parents, Bolden said.

There are several photos of heterosexual couples kissing in the yearbook, but the superintendent said she didn't review the entire yearbook and was presented only with Jackson's page.

Ripping the page out entirely was considered but, Bolden said, it was decided blacking it out with a marker would lessen the damage to the yearbooks.

Jackson said he showed up at the banquet, excited to collect his yearbook. He'd paid an additional $150 for the special tribute page filled with shots of boyfriend David Escobales, 19, of Allentown, Pa., and others. Jackson learned what happened to his page moments before the books were distributed.

While the students waited, staff members in another room blacked out the 4½-by-5-inch picture from approximately 230 books.

"I don't understand," said Jackson, 18. "There is no rule about no gay pictures, no guys kissing. Guys and girls kissing made it in."

East Side's is like most high school yearbooks. About 80 pages in the roughly 100-page tome is dedicated to class photos, formal shots of seniors, candids and spreads dedicated to a variety of sports teams and academic clubs.

The back of the book is a collection of tributes where students designed pages filled with pictures depicting them with their families, girlfriends and boyfriends, and friends.

Rules for publication of the pages prohibited shots of gang signs, rude gestures and graphic photos, said Benilde Barroqueiro, an East Side senior graduating with Jackson.

"You know, it couldn't be too provocative. No making out, no tongue," she said.

Students were surprised when they opened their books and found Jackson's picture had been covered with marker, Barroqueiro said.

"He purchased the page and fell under the rules," she said. "If they want to kiss, that's their page. If you don't like it, don't look at it."

It's crystal clear that this blatant and wholly unnecessary censorship was driven by the superintendents' personal prejudices. Instituting a rule or regulation about appropriate photographs is is fine, but this demonstrates an obvious anti-homosexual bias.

The assistant superintendent found the photo to be "inappropriate" "illicit" "controversial and upsetting" and selected it out of all the other photos on 100 pages for special treatment: blacking out with marker on every copy of the yearbook, while the students waited for them in the next room. For the exorbitant prices the school charges for the books and the tribute pages, for the administrators to make such a biased judgment call and then to handle it so heavy-handedly is criminal.

It's been noted that the bias seen today against homosexuals has parallels to discriminatory policies of the past. Consider if the administrators had blacked out a photo of an interracial kiss, and read the comments again. It's the same attitudes, by the same sorts of people, just in a new era. We've made a lot of progress on the civil rights and tolerance frontier (this couple is probably not in danger of being lynched) but to continue making progress it's necessary to be aware of and condemn behavior like this.

School pulls approved book after one complaint

San Francisco Chronicle, April 12 2007

Citing his concern for "the morals of our society," Burlingame schools Superintendent Sonny Da Marto has stopped four eighth-grade classes from reading "Kaffir Boy," an award-winning memoir of growing up in a South African ghetto during apartheid.

Da Marto had banned the book from the Burlingame Intermediate School late last month when the 13- and 14-year-old students were nearly halfway through it, said their English teacher, Amelia Ramos, who was required to take the books back from 116 students...

..."Kaffir Boy has been taught in eighth grade and in many high schools across the United States," Ramos said. "I wanted to challenge and motivate my students, to broaden their perspectives on life beyond the borders of Burlingame."

That strategy worked last year, when Ramos freely taught the memoir after it was approved by the Burlingame School District's "core literature committee" of parents, teachers, a librarian, a student and a school board member.

But in late March, Ramos received an e-mail from a parent complaining about the graphic scene.

On Page 72, readers find a description of child prostitution witnessed by Mathabane when he was younger than Ramos' students...

...Board member Liz Gindraux, who also sat on the core literature committee that approved "Kaffir Boy," said the process had been "disrespected."

"Two parents object, and the book is pulled without any discussion," she said. "I feel we jumped the gun a little."

Board Vice President Michael Barber said, "I don't want to be the censor board."

Parent Kerbey Altmann said the banning decision had "echoes of a police state."

"I feel my right as a parent was usurped unceremoniously and quickly. There was not full disclosure," he said.

His son, eighth-grader Tom Altmann, asked the board how "shielding us from the scene in the book will benefit us."

No one spoke in favor of the ban.

Mathabane has been dealing with objections to Page 72 for years. In 1999, he wrote an essay that appeared in the Washington Post, titled, "If You Assign My Book, Don't Censor It..."

...Mathabane writes that he was shunned by the boys for running away. He concludes that "resisting peer pressure is one of the toughest things for young people to do.

"That is the lesson of the prostitution scene. It's a lesson that seems to be lost on the people who want to censor my book."

One concerned parent and one overzealous administrator have negated the efforts of a board of genuine educators and intercepted the genuine, authentic lessons this book was to teach. "Kaffir Boy" had gone through the school board's approval process and had been taught in the past, in its entirety. The correct response to the student's parent should have been a brief explanation of the book's, and the passage's, value to the student and its purpose. Although the parent reserves the right to decide what their child should be reading, yanking a half-finished book out of the hands of over a hundred students is irresponsible.

The very purpose of Page 72 is to disturb readers; I as a parent or a teacher would be more concerned if the student wasn't disturbed. The book is not pornographic, it is an authentic first-hand account of a very real and regrettable part of human history. If future generations don't understand why and how the ugly parts of history have occurred, then they will likely be doomed to repeat it.

Thankfully most parties involved recognize the value in the book, and if more parents raise children like the Altmanns we should be headed towards a more enlightened society.