Should a photo (such as on MySpace) stop one from obtaining a degree or keeping a job?

[Ceicei]

A student on the eve of her University graduation was denied her education degree and teaching certificate just simply because of her MySpace picture of herself (halloween party wearing a pirate hat and drinking out of a "Mr. Goodbar" cup). She was given her English degree instead.

I sometimes wonder to what extent can colleges and universities go in withholding degrees? I don't think she posed nude or anything like that... Anyway, the woman is suing the University.

http://www.deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,660216115,00.html

In a similar vein, there have been several anecdotes of how companies and corporations are reaching into the private lives of prospective and ongoing employees to determine whether one could be hired or keep a job. There are quite a few mentioned (about being fired for similar offenses) on the internet about this already so I will not link to them.

Should there a level of privacy to expect and if so, how much? Are we, as a society, each living a life that is an "open window for anyone to view" that we are no longer able to separate our off-duty behavior from school/work? How much of ourselves are considered public or private? Can no one now ever be able to relax without worry about whether "to look over the shoulder"?

- Ceicei

 

[MA-Caver]

The right to privacy is rapidly becoming (if not already) one of our most cherished freedoms and that is being taken away little by little. It's both voluntary and involuntary. The internet doesn't help, and posting profiles and (personal) information about yourself on MySpace, Yahoo, AOL etc, forums and on-line dating sites reveal a-lot that you probably wouldn't otherwise reveal in person to person interaction in a (relatively) short period of time. Taking little quizzes and "what kind of ???? are you?" also reveal little hidden bits of personal info. Accumulate them altogether what do you have? Your psyche profile and your loss of privacy as to who/what you are.

I don't think companies should hire on the basis that this or that person fits this or that type of personality/profile. Background information, i.e. arrest records are important, particularly if the job entails some type of security at one level or another. But just because you're a type A or type B personality or you like prancing around in the underwear of the opposite sex or associate with this or that person... shouldn't be the basis of why you were (or not) hired.

Your skills/ability at doing the job and the amount of experience and education to go with it should be the basis of a job qualified applicant.

 

[Steel Tiger]

Can you say Gattaca?

 

[Bob Hubbard]

More and more, companies are using tools like Google to look for information on potential employees. It's not a matter of privacy invasion, but stupidity on the part of people. If I post stuff that indicates behavior that may not fit a companies 'culture' or mores, that's my fault. Teens post incredibly personal information on their myspace or livejournal pages, right down to addresses, phone numbers, and when no one will be home....them wonder why the house got robbed. People post pictures of themselves in 'wild-party' mode, or bragging about illegal activity like drug use then wonder why their job prospects are nil.

Folks, it's simple. Don't post anything you don't want the world to know.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

Id be pissed. As a college student you PAY A LOT OF MONEY to a college, and for them to do that based on a non-academic reason? Id sue.

 

[Andrew Green]

I saw that as well, here's another story, which includes the "inappropriate" picture: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0426072pirate1.html

 

[Kacey]

Do I think the picture should prevent her from getting a degree that she completed all the requirements for? No, I don't.

Do I think she screwed up her chances of getting a job as a teacher when she posted it? I see it as a distinct possibility - although I don't know that I agree that what she does outside of school time, off school grounds, with no proof that she is doing anything wrong (and what is in that cup) should have that effect. Nonetheless, I agree with Bob - if you don't want it to affect your life, don't post it on the internet.

 

[Ceicei]

I saw that as well, here's another story, which includes the "inappropriate" picture: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0426072pirate1.html

:idunno: I don't understand what is inappropriate with that picture. She could just as easily be drinking water in that cup. There is nothing shown in the picture that would have indicated anything to bar her ability to teach.

- Ceicei

 

[michaeledward]

I don't understand what is inappropriate with that picture. She could just as easily be drinking water in that cup. There is nothing shown in the picture that would have indicated anything to bar her ability to teach.

- Ceicei

The only argument that can be made relates to the caption of the photo ... "Drunken Pirate" ... and not the photo itself.

Millersville University is wrong on this, completely and totally. Soon they will retract their statements and issue the degree and teaching certificate.

However, Ms. Snyder may have a difficult time finding a job in the wake of this incident; sadly.

 

[MA-Caver]

Can you say Gattaca?

Umm... I can, but I don't think it's quite the same thing, although the future represented in the film is definitely (another) one we should work hard to avoid having.

The discrimination in Gattca was based on genetics... sorta similar to the idea of Hitler's "master race" with superior beings. This is personality discrimination... which IMO is pretty darn stoopid.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

I guess employers like to stick to the good old fashioned "ostrich" interview technique where we all pretend that everybody is perfect. I rather find out ALL my prospects "issues" right up front vs. believing the "show" we all put on at job interviews only to get stuck with a problem child down the road. There needs to be a balance here somewhere.

 

[arnisador]

I've read several stories recently about colleges of education and of social work applying what amount to "personal belief tests" for would-be graduates. Once case involved a teacher who believed it was acceptable to spank children, but who gave no indication that he would attempt to do it to others's children. Some students have complained that being conservative is enough to have them banned...a social work student was to be denied a degree for failing to support some progressive social cause (but I think the decision was reversed by higher authorities).

Id be pissed. As a college student you PAY A LOT OF MONEY to a college, and for them to do that based on a non-academic reason? Id sue.

But there's the rub...what's an academic reason? If an education student stated that he or she held an inappropriate view--say, that he or she was a member of the KKK--should the degree be granted? I would say yes, grant the degree, but deny the state teaching license. But if your state university was granting degrees to such a person, would the public be OK with that?

 

[MBuzzy]

It is unfortunate that companies and universities are doing this type of thing - we're dealing with the same problem in the military though. People are posting pictures and statements which violote security or show them in uniform doing things that they should not be doing.

The bottom line is that you need to be aware of what you are putting on the internet. It is fair game for anyone...like it or not. If you put it out there, people can find it. It is like pleading the fifth - it isn't officially admissible, but it gives a certain perception.

There are plenty of threads on this forum that I have restrained myself from commenting in due to my military status. There are more that I have commented in, but had to censor my comments in the name of security. It is just the way of the world.

 

[Steel Tiger]

Umm... I can, but I don't think it's quite the same thing, although the future represented in the film is definitely (another) one we should work hard to avoid having.

The discrimination in Gattca was based on genetics... sorta similar to the idea of Hitler's "master race" with superior beings. This is personality discrimination... which IMO is pretty darn stoopid.

That's true. But this is discrimination based on the invasion of ones privacy in a very inappropriate manner. Just your genetics cannot determine how well you may perform in your job (remember the main character of Gattaca was clearly performing in a job he was supposedly genetically unsuited for) a photograph with no context, or sketchy at best, cannot be used to determine if someone is capable of being a teacher.

You're right this sought of discrimination is stupid and like that in Gattaca we should work hard to stamp it out.

 

[Dave Leverich]

It disgusts me that someone loses an entire degree based upon a picture.

 

[Carol]

That's true. But this is discrimination based on the invasion of ones privacy in a very inappropriate manner. Just your genetics cannot determine how well you may perform in your job (remember the main character of Gattaca was clearly performing in a job he was supposedly genetically unsuited for) a photograph with no context, or sketchy at best, cannot be used to determine if someone is capable of being a teacher.

You're right this sought of discrimination is stupid and like that in Gattaca we should work hard to stamp it out.

Without diverting the convo in to a discussion of civil rights case law...using a photo alone to screen a job applicant is essentially illegal in the U.S.

However, what is happening here is not discrimination based on a photo, this is based on a chunk of information that the woman in question seemingly voluntarily published to the public internet.

 

[Drac]

What a lame reason...I wonder what will happen when one of the young ladies that appeared in the "Girls Gone Wild" DVD"s applies for a entry level job in the future or is getting ready for her graduation???

 

[michaeledward]

this is based on a chunk of information that the woman in question seemingly voluntarily published to the public internet.

However, the school had no published policy on the matter.
The State Boards had no published policy on the matter.
Even if Ms. Snyder was "three sheets to the wind", there is nothing illegal about that in this country.

No, this is (once again) the morality police, imposing their beliefs simply because they don't approve. They guise it in the argument that the 'children might be bothered' ... but, it is simply a holier than thou argument.

I predict once a bit of sunlight gets turn toward this event, the school will back down. And if they don't, I think the settlement should entitle Ms. Snyder to never have to work again.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

I'm pretty confident that she will receive her degree and some serious compensation in the end from the school. Really it is stunning that they would not give her a degree based on this picture and a myspace account. They will lose in the end as I see the facts.

 

[arnisador]

I'm pretty confident that she will receive her degree and some serious compensation in the end from the school.

That's my guess too...but they may still win in the court of public opinion if they claim they did it to "protect the children."