Slashdot Mirror
Kent State Banning Athletes from Using Facebook
denebian devil links to a Columbus Dispatch story about athletes at Kent State being forbidden to use Facebook — "not by the Web site, but by university administrators."
From the article: "Athletics Director Laing Kennedy recently told student-athletes they have until Aug. 1 to remove their Facebook profiles, citing a need to protect both their identities and the university's image. "We're really concerned about the safety of our student-athletes and some of the personal information some of them have on there," he said. ... If student-athletes don't remove their profiles by the deadline, they risk losing their scholarships, he said. Coaches and athletics counselors will monitor the site for violators."
denebian devil continues "Arstechnica also has an interesting take on the subject. Makes you wonder why they even bother providing internet connections on college campuses."
At my own college, security uses facebook to find out about parties and underage drinking on campus. Chances are, someone put stupid info up and has ruined i for everyone. Do I feel bad for them? Not at all.
Haven't these people thought of phones! Oh my god, these college athletes could be talking on phones RIGHT NOW, we have to stop them!
Some of these people talk about sex, drugs, etc. on phones, without realizing that the people on the other end could hear!
The way these student athletes talk on phones could give a bad impression of the university!
These students frequently communicate personal information via phones, such as address and class schedules, and the people on the other end could easily use this to stalk them!
We must stop student athletes from using all forms of communication! Its for their own good!
P.S. I've spoken with many students about this and they seem to agree!
Is your free speech for sale ? It is if you want to keep that scholarship. This is a great example of how growing economic inequality spills over into other aspects of life. A well off student can afford to take a stand on principle here.
In Soviet America the banks rob you!
The move to ban the site came from students and coaches expressing concern over safety and privacy issues. Kennedy said he hasn't seen the site.
So not only has the guy making the policy not even seen the site, but the move supposedly came from students and others - the same students who were posting there in the first place? "Higher" education is so smart.
Um, perhaps because it is easeir to plagerize papers using the internet? But seriously, one could consider research for papers, help with math and science papers. Most universities, perhaps you haven't been in one recently, pay for a large number of resources, that are really quite expensive, to thier students and faculty.
Of course, it may be that millions of dollars of infrastructure and millions in connections fees are what is neccesary for the modern college student to get a date. I just had to ask the babe that sat next to me in Calculus.
To be more serious, I understand that this ban has more to do with public image, and could be construed as censorship. But think of ti this way. The average athelete is on scholarship, which mean he or she is there at the whim of the university and those alumni that donate to the university. If, due to something posted on the net, such funds become unavailable or the students freedom becomes compromised, then the student does not get an education. We all know that adolescents and young adult do silly things, and none of us really want to impose any significant consequences for the most of the silly things kids do. The minor things are often best handled in house in such a way that boundries are enforced, but the future of the student is not compromised. It may seem funny to post teammates drinking, or in drag, or pretending to commit some felony, but in the competitive world of althletics, where perhaps 1:500 gets into college ball, and 1:2000 gets into pro ball, such actions may not be insignificant.
And think of it another way. When one enters college, escpecially on an scholarship, and especially on an athelitic scholar ship, one is asking the college to help guide you to a hopefully more promising future. A significant number of freedoms and rights are given away. Unlike other 18 year olds, you are in class and studying, instead of working at starbucks for 8 hours then coming to you apartements and doing nothing. The college students has any number of people using thier experience to navigate a specific educational journey, even though it is theorectically possible to navigate that same path using free resources. In other words, the student is attending the university to help insure a specific outcome, and has accepted some limitations to achieve that outcome.
To put it simpler, if facebook is so important, an athelete could gain an education and even break into the majors without a university. It is not impossible to his the minors and work the ladder to the majors. But if one wants a univeristy degree, or wants the NCAA help, then one should have a little trust in the people in charge. If there is no trust, then why go to that school? If the school is so corrupt, then why accept the tainted money?
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
It's funny to think of "underage drinking" as "drinking under 21" as in Belgium you're legally allowed to drink from the age of 16.
Even before you're allowed to drive a car...
I'm not sure what's better though, I used to get wasted when I was 16-17. Now I'm 24 and I barely drink as I lack to see the "cool" or "fun" of it other then once in a while a glass of wine with a nice dinner.
I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1
Interesting. I missed the part of TFA where congress made a law preventing scholarship recipients from using Facebook. I take it you believe that all NDAs are unconstitutional too? I'll have to remember that if I am ever in a position to do business with you.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Why Facebook and not Myspace?
Because the main "advantage" of facebook is also its main disadvantage. Since the profile is automatically associated with your college email address, the facebook profile becomes an extension of your "college identity" and what you present on there is more or less irrevocably associated with the college you go to (there are now ways around this, but circumventing this basically makes having a facebook profile meaningless.)
Will KSU care what their student athletes put on Myspace? Maybe...but since its alot easier for the student to not associate their college with their Myspace profile, a careful student may have no problems with Myspace at all.
I'm not sure a state univeristy is completely out of bounds here. The supreme court might very well rule in their favor. Hell, they allowed the military to recruit on campus despite the fact that their "don't ask, don't tell" policy violates many state universities' written policies on discrimination against gays.
I reserve the right to think for myself. Others' opinions are optional. Puppy on lap = typos...not illiteracy.
I'm sure this is a DIRECT outcome of the Alleged Duke Rape Case that's not only being mishandled by the prosecution(There IS no case against the Duke kids IMHO), but it's forcing Universities to take steps to protect their students(read: athletes) from whatever digital evil they thought up.
The "anti-facebook" is more than likely a protective measure to keep the wild parties where strippers might be involved under wraps. We all know, if there's no proof, then it NEVER happened.
" i r 1337. j00 a l0z3r "
That talk kinda makes you cry, doesn't it?
That's right..cry those nerdly tears
A state university with this kind of policy is setting themselves up for the mother of all First Amendment lawsuits.
Not true. US courts have repeatedly ruled that, as participation in extracurricular activities is not a required part of the educational mission, it can be subject to restrictions that would otherwise be unconstitutional. That's why drug tests for Algebra II are not allowed, but drug tests for Basketball are.
The major advantage they have at the university level is that athletic scholarships are tied to eligibility (and sometimes even performance), so getting kicked off the team also takes away the money you're using to pay for school.
Note that I don't support this move (though I can understand picking the low-hanging fruit), but it's certainly within their authority.
Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
I'd agree that it's not a particularly big deal, but I do find it rather strange nonetheless. According the Ars Technica article, Kent State could be concerned about atheletes posting pictures of themselves participating in some unsavory act during a party. That's a pretty legitemate reason, but it's also pretty easy to believe that anyone else on campus attending the same party could take similar pictures and post them on...oh just for grins let's say Facebook.
This thread has already addressed the issues of student atheletes vs. students being in legal agreements, so I'm not headed down that road. I do think, however, that this is a pretty short-sighted move on the part of the University. Again, the Ars Technica article makes a good point: Kent State is an educational institution. Why aren't they educating their students on this instead of outright banning the site and creating an opportunity for students with friends on athletic teams to make a nice, fat mistake in the name of ignorance?
Now I'll grant you that it's impossible for them to prevent all student-related bad moves, but wouldn't it make more sense for them to have an athletic department meeting with the students, explain what the University wants and why that's best for all parties involved? Similarly, wouldn't it be fairly easy to add a little five minute segment to the Freshman orientation presentation explaining Facebook, MySpace, and similar sites, and explain why posting pictures of this sort of thing can be embarassing for students, parents, and the University? Hell, this message applies to non-athletic groups as well -- think of how many College-related organizations there are, and how many students belong to the organizations. It's pretty easy to explain to someone that when you belong to a College-related organization, your actions frequently reflect (to a greater degree, even) upon the college, you, and your family.
Taking the position that these tradeoffs shouldn't exist is all well and good, but expecting people to take you seriously is something else.
Those tradoffs should not exist at a state university. If they want to kick people out doing some real harm, that's OK. Kicking people out for publishing a web page is pure bullshit. Policing it is going to be a real waste of time and money.
If you want me to take YOU seriously, justify the expense in some real terms. No, telling me that the company you work for sucks is not an adequate justification. Nor are the silly things rich people can do or the fact you work for a living (or at least pretend to work for a living).
Face it, at best Kent State's Administrators are a bunch of pussies. At worst, they are a bunch of greed heads worried about revenue from "exclusive" interviews.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Hm. Interesting perspective on scholarships. Let me show you another one, from Europe.
We have state sponsored education in my country. You can also pay if you want to get into the university with a bit lower scores.
We have a grant system based on a student's average grade. On the top of that we've got scholarships, you apply, they tell you if you've been accepted, you sign a form (not a contract! It is governed by educational law so no contract is required).
If a university would tell me to quit being registered on a website I'd most likely first laugh them in the face about the absurdity they want. Even if I would have a scholarship. The point is, just because you've got free education or even a nice scholarship on the top of that, it doesn't mean they should be able to force you to do stupid shit like this just because of that.
Now, I realise that there are differences between my example and this case, but even if they agreed to a contract with the college/university/whatever, it is not certain whether it has a clause by which they can sanction this kind of thing. Even if it has such clause, it could be still horribly wrong and maybe even breaking your laws, because it is a government institution that is doing this. Just because someone gets a scholarship, a government institution shouldn't bastardise the meaning of a scholarship to mean a paid slave/pr drone.
I certainly can understand that you might not be too concerned about losing something most of you never had (so you had to pay for university education), but the scholarship and the censorship should be separated from each other. Accepting a scholarship shouldn't be a faustian business deal. It shouldn't come with this kind of strings attached.
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say