Slashdot Mirror


10 Percent of Colleges Check Applicants' Social Profiles

theodp writes "Confirming paranoid high-schoolers' fears, a new Kaplan survey reveals that 10% of admissions officers from prestigious schools said they had peeked at sites like Facebook and MySpace to evaluate college-bound seniors. Of those using the profiles, 38% said it had a 'negative impact' on the applicant. 'Today's application is not just what you send ... but whatever they can Google about you,' said Kaplan's Jeff Olson. At Notre Dame, assistant provost for enrollment Dan Saracino said he and his staff sometimes come across candidates portraying themselves in a less-than-flattering light. 'It's typically inappropriate photos — like holding up a can of beer at a party,' Saracino said. On the other hand, using the Internet to vet someone's character seems overly intrusive to Northwestern's Christopher Watson. 'We consider Facebook and MySpace their personal space,' the dean of undergraduate admissions said. 'It would feel somewhat like an invasion of privacy.'" We recently discussed similar practices from prospective employers.

77 of 398 comments (clear)

  1. The public internet is not private or personal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you can't figure that out, you shouldn't be getting into good schools.

    1. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by Yer+Mum · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What happens if you can figure it out but your friend who took the photo and uploaded it can't?

    2. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Very true. It is also true that if you think what someone puts on Facebook and MySpace is relevant to their academic performance, then you shouldn't be in charge of admissions decisions for a good school, or any school. If you think it's relevant to job performance, you shouldn't be making hiring decisions, either.

      There. That disposes of the question of what people "shouldn't" be doing. Now, back to the real world.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    3. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by JustOK · · Score: 5, Insightful

      take responsibility for your own actions?

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    4. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by KDR_11k · · Score: 5, Funny

      Punch him in the face?

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    5. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by zappepcs · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, I don't think it's moot. The idea that semantics can be played here means that a given percentile of the populace will be confused and not understand the dangers of posting a picture of their friend on the internet passed out, with the caption including their name and the particular substance involved. So a future employer check their myspace page, and pages of all his best friends. One lost job in the making, and not through personal mistakes, but because friends talk too much.

      Personal information on the Internet is dangerous. My own family mocks my attempts to tell them not to do it, and to be very careful about what their friends post. Despite that there are pictures that are less than complimentary on line of them. I don't think that anyone can stress enough how those semantics will not protect them from a nosy prospective employer.

    6. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by Kjella · · Score: 3, Insightful

      take responsibility for your own actions?

      And what exactly does that mean in practise? If everything private is free to be put on the Intarwebs by someone else, then you don't have a private life. It doesn't mean that you have to be ashamed of it or anything, but it means it's no longer private. There's a difference between "taking responsibility" by using a condom when banging your girlfriend and "taking responsibility" for the video being on porntube against your will. I think you can find many examples of socially accepted behaviour where putting it online isn't if you think about it.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    7. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by dal20402 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In other words, if you ever want to do anything but be a bum, you have to live life like Ward Cleaver.

      A world were "holding up a can of beer at a party" is something that should disqualify anyone from anything is not a world I want to live in. There are several pictures of me holding a beer or a glass of wine on Facebook. They don't reflect anything remotely negative about me.

      Yes, people should use judgment (i.e. not let pictures of themselves naked, etc. onto the Internet), but I shouldn't have to be held hostage by people's crazy hangups. People don't always just sit in their houses and read the New York Times.

    8. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by discontinuity · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Very true. It is also true that if you think what someone puts on Facebook and MySpace is relevant to their academic performance, then you shouldn't be in charge of admissions decisions for a good school, or any school. If you think it's relevant to job performance, you shouldn't be making hiring decisions, either.

      I'll play devil's advocate here. I happen to agree that this kind of thing shouldn't matter, but I think I understand the admissions perspective:

      For the college admissions people this is an odds game. The number of applicants who are qualified based on test scores, grades and all the normal junk is larger than the number of spaces they have. Given this, how do they pare it down? Perhaps Googling or checking out the Facebook/MySpace pages for some of the "borderline" students is more practical than throwing darts? I'm guessing their belief is that a student who gave in to peer pressure and the like in high school has worse odds of being successful in college where such pressures go unchecked by parents, etc. I'm not saying it's right, but I think I see where they're coming from.

      Now, all of that being said, I think students who are somewhat sheltered in high school are just as likely, and perhaps even more likely, to succumb to the temptations and pressures of college life. I've seen more than a couple people who were honors students in high school simply go off the deep end upon arriving at college. Conversely, I've known several who were "party types" in high school who decided that it was time to get serious about life when they got to college and have been very successful since then. It's just really hard to know how people will react until you do the experiment.

      I for one am glad that MySpace and camera phones weren't around when I was a teenager!

    9. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by TheLink · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Who really wants to work for an employer who won't hire you just because you've been drunk after hours? Or even just holding a mug of beer with friends doing silly but fairly harmless stuff?

      The upcoming generation seem to take a lot of pictures (often unflattering or just silly) of themselves and their friends, and post them straight to their blogs or other pages. So it seems to me the future bunch of CEOs and bosses would probably have plenty of pictures of them passed out/drunk on such sites, maybe even with youtube videos.

      Maybe some might figure the passed out person with a good portfolio would still be a good worker AND be good fun for the rest of the company.

      They might even be suspicious of people without evidence of any friends - antisocial, bad fit for the company etc.

      --
    10. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by Artraze · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > take responsibility for your own actions?

      So are you trying to say that people shouldn't drink, have sex, or do anything else that others would consider inappropriate so as to ensure such actions could never be photographed and posted online? Or when you say "your own actions" you mean the actions of the person that's taking the picture and then posting it?

      There are a lot of things that people can do very responsibly, like drinking and having sex, and I for one don't care (in principle) if the events are cataloged by photo or what have you. The trouble is, however, that other (such as these colleges) view such behavior as 'inappropriate'. That's why many people will not post such things on the internet. The problem here is that some people _will_ post pictures/accounts regardless of the wishes of those in the pictures/accounts. So unless your idea of taking responsibility involves a shotgun, I fail to see how it, in any way, helps the situation.

      (Of course, the real problem lies in the hypocrisy of the admissions boards. I highly doubt that they never went to parties or had sex or did something that looked stupid for laughs. But for some reason the fact that these kids doing the same means that the will make shitty students? Give me a break. I've got a lot of respect for those boards that consider these pages to be personal and don't look as to avoid biasing themselves with information they know isn't relevant.)

    11. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by pjt33 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The context here is 17-year-olds holding up a beer can and posing for the camera. There is a difference between not drinking and not drinking under-age: only one is illegal. There is also a difference between doing something illegal and doing something illegal while posing for your friend to take a photo: one is arguably a bad idea, but the other is plain stupid.

    12. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by Kjella · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, it means not drinking at age 17 in a country where the drinking age is 21. (...) Your examples are silly; placing pornography of a highschool student online is highly likely to be child pornography

      Sorry, I forget I'm talking about freak country. At 16 about 84% of our teens have drunk alcohol (legal age 18), and noone would freak if they say a 16yo with a beer bottle. Also, at 17 about half our teens will have had sex, yes technically it'd be child porn here too (legal age for porn 18, but age of consent 16) and they'd probably be chasing who uploaded it but it's not unusual for a 17yo to have a sex life.

      The problem is simply publishing without consent;

      There we agree, it's just that "take responsibility for your actions" is a completely meaningless answer to the problem.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    13. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by billcopc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you're already partying and binge drinking in high school, I can't imagine yourself making a dramatic voluntary change in college.

      If you're not partying by the time you hit college, I'd say there's something wrong. Binge drinking ain't for everyone, but everyone should at least have a bit of fun in life.

      If holding a beer in a photo is an excuse to consider someone "irresponsible", well then I got two middle fingers with Dan Saracino's name on them.

      The teenage years are about making connections, learning one's limits and getting ready for the rest of your long repetitive bullshit life. I'd much rather have someone who partied in their teens, got their fill and settled down in the later years, than a goody-two-shoes that's going to be consumed with jealousy and go apeshit in their early thirties.

      The whole US college system makes less and less sense with each passing year. That's where they're breeding all this passive-aggressive nonsense that transpires in every business transaction, every press release, every visit to the doctor. I don't care if a kid is a freaking genius, if he/she doesn't have a good life balance they won't get much accomplished in the end.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    14. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Of course you take responsibility...then punch him in the face.

    15. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by xenocide2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      One quibble:

      At 16 about 84% of our teens have drunk alcohol (legal age 18)

      The beauty of legalization is that you can have a beer with your parents. A better comparison, however, would be the percentage of 16-year-olds who've gone drinking in private without any adults present. The atmosphere is entirely different, and good judgement is entirely absent. This is the atmosphere that leads to keg stands and binge drinking, drunk driving and death by alcohol poisoning. It's already something of a scourge on campus nationwide.

      In the absence of legalization, it's also the only atmosphere that will exist with undergraduates, and I have to agree with recruiters that the poor judgment to participate in that at 16, 17 or 18 probably won't change course before something dramatic happens like a good friend's death, being kicked out for poor grades or worse.

      So I guess, no we don't agree, but perhaps because the culture you're in serves to protect the young and the culture I'm in serves to fuel rebellion against common sense.

      --
      I Browse at +4 Flamebait

      Open Source Sysadmin

    16. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by billcopc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yep I agree... at least where I'm from, people start partying at age 15-16, so that by the time they're doing their masters degree, they have not only passed the binge phase but they also have developed their social skills. By the time they're legal and hit the bars, they're hopefully experienced enough to stay out of trouble. It's far better to make your first mistakes in the safety of a friend's living room or cottage, than to puke all over some guy's dick in the back of a bar then spend the night in a holding cell for trying to score dope off a narc.

      I'm not saying everyone needs to be a drugged-up drunken whore, but there should be more tolerance and understanding of the process. Prohibition only makes the problem worse, and uptight admissions officers / employers / parents are sending out the wrong message.

      Is it alright to party ? Hell yes, just be reasonable about it and don't show up to school/work intoxicated. How can teens learn to be reasonable if they don't party at all ?

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    17. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by billcopc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's not so much about privacy as it is about freedom.

      What you do in your private time is your business, not that of the admissions staff, your employer or anyone you don't explicitly include in that private life. My boss/coworkers know full well I'm a (part-time) party hound, but when I'm on the clock I'm delivering 100%. If either one of them were to criticize me over my facebook-documented weekend boozecapades, I'd give them an earful! Conversely, I'd drag my boss out to the peelers and drink him under the table, were he that kind of fellow.

      Put it this way: replace drinking with any other hobby or pastime, like canoeing. Some people really enjoy canoeing, others think it's a mindless unproductive waste of time and money. People that enjoy it, often do it all the time, and post photos of their exploits on facebook. Should a bright kid be denied entry to college because the dean of admissions doesn't like canoes ?

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    18. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by Yer+Mum · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Won't get you very far in a society where what's important is image not responsibility, where nobody takes responsibility until the image comes out, and even if there's a reasonable explanation for the image then responsibility must be seen to be taken (a different thing) because the image is more important than the actual facts.

    19. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by billcopc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hypocrisy is how the most obnoxious nation in the world has demonized the oldest forms of entertainment, and is now whining because those demons are out of control.

      Killing is fine if it's in the name of "god", fraud is fine if you call it "banking", but nudity will not be tolerated in any form, unless you cover your nipples.

      What the fuck kind of warped mind came up with that ? The mindset is most definitely not in line with the majority of Americans I've known.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    20. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Funny
      "This is the atmosphere that leads to keg stands and binge drinking, drunk driving..."

      Ahhh......the good old days!!

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    21. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by Praxx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The teenage years are about making connections, learning one's limits and getting ready for the rest of your long repetitive bullshit life. I'd much rather have someone who partied in their teens, got their fill and settled down in the later years, than a goody-two-shoes that's going to be consumed with jealousy and go apeshit in their early thirties.

      You hit the nail on the head. Most of the hardcore party people I knew in college had never partied in high school. All of the ones that partied hard in high school always had the "been there, done that" attitude and were much more serious about school.

      --
      http://www.policystew.com/
    22. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by Blackknight · · Score: 2, Insightful

      OMG, somebody drinking a beer! When I was 17 I did a lot of stupid/illegal stuff but I turned out to be a productive member of society.

    23. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by electrictroy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I think people (meaning those rejecting college applications) need to stop being so uptight.

      I drink beer. So what?

      --
      The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
    24. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by BitterOak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, it means not drinking at age 17 in a country where the drinking age is 21. I'm sure there's other better examples of stupid pictures recruiters would dislike on the internet, but that particular example is both common and indefensible. If you're already partying and binge drinking in high school, I can't imagine yourself making a dramatic voluntary change in college.

      There is a difference between underage drinking and binge drinking. And what's wrong with partying?

      --
      If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
    25. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by xenocide2 · · Score: 2, Funny

      And in some cases, drunk cycling!

      --
      I Browse at +4 Flamebait

      Open Source Sysadmin

    26. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by QuoteMstr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Legality does not define morality. Rules should flow the other way. A 17-year old drinking beer is not immoral, and therefore should not be illegal.

      As Thoreau said, we have not only a right, but a duty to disobey unjust laws.

    27. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by cayenne8 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      "I think people (meaning those rejecting college applications) need to stop being so uptight."

      Nice wish, and in an ideal world it would be so.

      Unfortunately, that is NOT the world we live in.....so, get used to it. Publishing photos of your self, nekkid, with a bottle of Jack in one hand, and a skull bong in the other can keep you out of a good school. It can also keep you out of a good job later in life.

      And Lord help you if you ever wanted to get into politics later in life, that stuff will last forever, and can and will be dug up to be used against you.

      Yep, it would be great if people weren't so uptight, but, alas....that is not the world we live in.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    28. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by spazdor · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't think you really understood the meaning of responsibility there. If you don't want to be held accountable for doing something, then don't do it. That doesn't somehow translate to doing it in 'private' with the assumption that private means that nobody knows about it.

      Does the same logic apply to things like being gay? "Hey, if you don't want to face the college-admissions consequences, you shouldn't have done it!"

      The problem is whether a beer is legitimately objectionable or not.

      --
      DRM: Terminator crops for your mind!
    29. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by n+dot+l · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you're already partying and binge drinking in high school, I can't imagine yourself making a dramatic voluntary change in college.

      That doesn't even begin to match up with what I've seen around me. Of my friends in high school there's a group of around 20 that were pretty heavy drinkers by the time they turned 18 (the legal age where I live). Oh, and they did a lot of drugs, too. And they skipped classes a lot, and half of them dropped out of school. They were pretty much your typical "gonna be a rock star" crowd (which is why I hung out with them - we all loved the same sort of music). By age 19/20 most of them were complete fuckups, as you'd expect, and I absolutely guarantee you that somewhere on the internet there are pictures of them doing some pretty fucked up shit.

      And then they, for various reasons, grew up. Some got kicked out of home and had to cope. Others had kids and suddenly realized they had to care for them. Whatever the causes, within the next four years all but two had stopped the heavy partying, stopped doing drugs altogether, were working hard and paying rent on their little apartments. That was three years ago and every single one of them (except the two who will probably never have their shit together) have either trained into a trade, or gone back to school, or worked their way up to a management position in their companies. They own homes, and pay their bills every month. The ones with kids are either taking care of them themselves or (where the relationships fell apart) making regular support payments. None of them are living on welfare (not even the two who will probably be fighting their addictions till they die) or begging on the street or robbing people.

      That matches up pretty well with what other people my age observed in their social circles, and even what older people I know remember of the "loser" crowd from when they were young. No, not everyone is going to turn their lives around, but in my experience and that of many others I know the vast majority of the people you'd have written off in high school as utter failures do manage to build a good respectable life for themselves in the end.

      So no, I don't buy the whole "if you failed in high school you'll fail forever" mentality. People certainly do change, and I'd be pretty appalled if industry and educational institutions were to deny these good, solid, hardworking people a future because they did some dumb shit almost a decade ago.

      Then again maybe social pressures are different enough where you live that everyone that parties hard in their youth does end up an alcoholic, I don't know, you'll have to enlighten us.

    30. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by ragefan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think people (meaning those rejecting college applications) need to stop being so uptight.

      I drink beer. So what?

      Probably because if an applicant is willing to disregard the laws in order to underage drink or perform other illegal activities and flaunt them on the internet then likely he or she have no qualms with breaking the college honor code.

      When Admissions has at least an order of magnitude more applications than open slots, they can afford to be picky about those things.

    31. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by n+dot+l · · Score: 4, Informative

      Do you think that they'd be drinking with their parents vs. their friends even if it were legalized?

      No. But I think they would have been drinking with their parents before wandering off to drink with their friends, and that they might be going into those situations with a better understanding of what alcohol is and how it affects them.

      Here's my experience: my parents let me drink a little every now and then when I was younger (~15/16), and they explained how tell when I'd had enough. Of course, later on (~16/17) I started going off drinking with my friends. Yeah, I got really drunk a few times. But I never got yelled at for it, in fact my parents laughed at me the first time I woke them up stumbling in late and then puking my guts out at 4AM. I ended up being the first one of the bunch to figure out the trick of having enough and no more. So I'm the one that remembers what happened when, and I'm the one that had the most fun at parties during those years, and I'm the one that stopped a lot of really reckless shit that might have caused some serious injuries or property damage. The rest of them didn't figure any of that out until a few years later.

      Why? Because they were drinking to be rebellious, and all that wonderful crap. Freaking their parents out was something they were proud of, they bragged abobut it all the time. I heard about lots of (and witnessed a few) times when their parents would totally snap out on them and do pretty much anything except discussing it reasonably. They didn't care, that's what it was about to them. Establishing the boundaries between their free will and what their parents could make them do.

      And no, I'm not somehow inherently more responsible than the rest of them - pretty much the instant the whole it's illegal/defy the parents/be a rebel thing expired they turned into normal people that drink socially and never drive drunk or try to set fire to things just because they're flammable. It's the whole prohibitionist shit seriously warping young people's minds - we need to stop doing it as a society.

    32. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by Metasquares · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes and no. They are disregarding formal enforcement, but most are either bowing into peer pressure ("it's cool to drink") or do so because they physically enjoy the feeling of being inebriated. Neither of these expressed a particularly developed personality. To borrow a page from Dabrowski, they are both still "primal" behaviors (first factor of physical wants, second factor of social norms). You're breaking a social norm of a certain peer group in exchange for obeying the social norm of a different group.

      It is pointless to rebel unless you have a truly different, developed system of values to rebel with. Dabrowski calls this set of values the third factor ("self-determination"), and the only way I can see resistance being a positive trait is if you could somehow construct a value system that featured drinking as the way the world should truly be and were so convinced of its righteousness that you were willing to spend a significant portion of your life attempting to make it a universal value.

      I know you're using the example of Hypatia as a way of demonstrating a general principle (which I agree with), but I'm not sure that it would be a good analogy to use with the specific example of drinking. Hypatia was burned for transgressing a norm held by peers as well as enforced by society. Her transgression did not yield any physical gratification and was not considered normal, and thus must have been an expression of a value.

    33. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by n+dot+l · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The students' time is theirs to waste as they will. It's not the admissions staff's job to parent them. As for the university wasting time, it's paid for that time. And it's not even like they'd waste a lot letting some losers in - you know how attrition works, hardly anyone truly stupid makes it through the first month and most of the people that won't manage to pass are gone by the end of the first semester. I don't remember any idiots disrupting class from second year on when the material started to get really hard in my program. I imagine this would be even more true at a highly competitive big-name university.

      Now, if we're talking about the situation where you've already let in all the exceptional applicants, and there's one seat left, and the choice is between a guy with grades at X level and a guy with grades at X level that did some really dumb things last year, then I wouldn't object to mining random data since it's pretty much a coin toss otherwise. But if this sort of data is valued anywhere near as much as past academic achievement, or the results of an entrance exam, or something like that, then I consider it pretty ridiculous.

      Overall though I don't think we're really disagreeing with each other here. This just bothers me since it seems like a fairly stupid metric to be using at a university when you've got a person's academic history right there in front of you. I think the thing that I got stuck on is that you were talking about highly academic fields whereas I was thinking, "Hey, I know lots of people that cleaned up and went through some pretty intensive trades/management programs run through local colleges."

    34. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by jstott · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I drink beer. So what?

      Its like a job interview - if you don't care about your own application enough to clean up your public image (and Facebook is public), then why should I take you seriously?

      If your Facebook page makes you look like an idiot, then yes, I do question how seriously you intend to study here at ExampleU. A competitive college gets many more applicants than they can possibly accept, public information is a pretty good way to weed out the pile and discover who's likely a good student and who paid someone else to write their application essay. Furthermore, since graduation rate is one of the numbers that goes into US News and World Report's college rankings, the schools have a vested interest in favoring hard-working academic types over students who are likely to party themselves right out of the classroom.

      -JS

      --
      Vanity of vanities, all is vanity...
    35. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by KDR_11k · · Score: 2, Insightful

      IOW, "come back when you learned to deceive me!"

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    36. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by rakslice · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There's a missing piece here that comes in by implication: that drinking beer would be seen as a blemish on your image at all in the first place.

      As a non-USian it's hard for me to attribute a reason to that. My first guesses would be:

      - a tradition of puritanical views on drinking
      - an overwhelming law-abidingness that views even a single lapse of an insignificant regulation as a major character flaw

    37. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by HungryHobo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I know more 50 year olds who drive drunk than 17 year olds.

      I used to work at a restaurant which was a little out of the way and even though there was always a fleet of taxis there at the end of the night it was common enough as I went home to see the car in front meandering around the road with an obviously drunk driver. I'd pass them later and it was almost always some white haired old codger.

      You see old people can be idiots too but the difference is that they're certain they can handle it because they've been doing it for years and nothing bad has happened yet! You'd hear a crowd of them talking about the "disgraceful way young people act now days" and the "sure we'd always stop at 2 or 3 pints (reassuring isn't it)" would inevitably come up in the conversation. Of course these guys never drank less than 5 or 6 pints on their nights out but they were sure they were fine and wouldn't dream of wasting money on a taxi!

      I've been temped more than a few times to call up one of the local police I know and hint that outside where I work might be a good spot to watch for drunk drivers.

      In their favor they tended towards swerving around at 20 miles per hour rather than 80 but it's still fucking stupid.

      As for the risky behaviors bit, being a few years on from that age group I can agree with you on some counts but there is a reason why young people do stupid things- much of what you're told is dangerous really is, some of what you're told is dangerous isn't dangerous at all and the person doing the telling be it a parent or other authority figurte is just neurotic in some shape or form and has a warped view of risk in certain areas.
      Had I not ignored my uncle (who is mortally terrified of heights) whenever he got freaked out because I was more than 6 feet off the ground and climbed around in trees etc then I would have never learned that the risks involved are minor as long as you follow a few extremely simple safety precautions.

      If everyone took everything their parents claimed to be dangerous and didn't challenge it or try it out for themselves then humans would do nothing but sit very quietly inside rooms lined entirely with pillows quivering in fear. Sometimes when parents claim something is dangerous they're wrong. Simple as that, they're crazy or they don't look at the risk in a sensible manner.

      Admitedly I tend towards slightly higher risk sports like kayaking, rock climbing etc but it's always annoying when you run into someone who's way of deciding if something is dangerous is to assume that nobody else around them is any more experienced than themselves and from there make up their lack of experience with what their friend told them in the pub.

    38. Re:The public internet is not private or personal by BForrester · · Score: 2, Funny

      And Lord help you if you ever wanted to get into politics later in life, that stuff will last forever, and can and will be dug up to be used against you.

      Heaven help is if a beer-guzzling, pot-smoking, tail-chasing, draft-dodging dumbass ever got into political office, much less the presidency. That would be the end of the world as we know it.

  2. Common sense by haluness · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Don't put up what you don't want other people to see - I hear all about the new generation growing up with the Internet and Facebook being a part of their life.

    But what about simple commonsense rules (either derived on their own or imbibed from parents)?

    Would you make a fool of yourself in the street (OK, some people would)?

    1. Re:Common sense by Revolver4ever · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's easy to do that. And while I'm sure lots of people post pictures of themselves doing stupid things, I would be more worried about my friends, enemies, girlfriends, ex's, bystanders, even family posting pictures or writing blog posts about me without my knowledge or consent. If a university finds a blog post that mentions my name and how kinky I am in bed especially after drinking and smoking and getting a tattoo written by my ex who wants to get back at me..what do you do?

      --
      If O2 is good, O3 must be 1.5 times better!
    2. Re:Common sense by Skye16 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's funny how most parents spend a considerable amount of time telling their kids "it doesn't matter what other people think" when it comes to things like peer pressure or social interaction, and then we go right back around and tell them it's important what other people think and your life is ruined if you make a fool out of yourself, whether on the street or online.

      It's either one or the other, people. Either it doesn't matter what people think, and you can wear a toga when you're sweeping your lawn with a vacuum cleaner, or it matters what people think and you should be devastated that Kristen thinks you're a retard because you won't spend 150$ on a pair of jeans.

      Or maybe, just maybe, parents should be telling their kids the truth: "it always matters what important people think, but determining importance is an exercise in good judgment. Since you're a teenager, your judgment sucks, so I'll decide for you who should be important to you."

      I'm sure this wouldn't come over so well stated precisely like that, but I'm sure someone could come up with a better way of saying it.

    3. Re:Common sense by JustinOpinion · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Fair enough. People should be careful what they post (I know I am).

      But in another sense, this issues is shining a light on a fundamental hypocrisy in our society. Were teens before the Internet angels? I think not. They vandalized, they drank, they did drugs, they pushed boundaries... just like the teens of today. But, their actions were easier to keep private. Now with SMS, YouTube, Facebook, MySpace, Google, etc., all these kinds of things are more consistently cataloged and disseminated. Even if you don't post it yourself, a friend (or enemy) might post it. And it will be indexed.

      The hypocrisy comes in from the social elders who now judge these teens. They see a teen holding a can of beer, and deem them irresponsible. Yet, the vast majority of those judging did the exact same thing when they were a teen. Holding this next generation to a higher standard is hypocritical. How many of the great men and women in society did the same kinds of things? (According to statistics: most of them.) And what does it accomplish? Does it actually reduce the activitie(s), or just teach teens how to hide and lie?

      I think it's time that society in general got a little more honest and realistic about what teens are up to. They drink, they have sex, they do all kinds of crazy things. I'm not saying that we give them free reign to do whatever they want without consequences. But I'm sick of holding them to unrealistic expectations, and teaching them habits that amount to "hide the truth" rather than "enjoy life in a balanced and responsible way."

    4. Re:Common sense by GoodNicksAreTaken · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Or maybe, just maybe, parents should be telling their kids the truth: "it always matters what important people think, but determining importance is an exercise in good judgment."

      The problem is that a lot of parents aren't responsible enough or intelligent enough to figure this out for themselves and an even smaller number are able to then extrapolate from that and see relevance elsewhere, as in their children's lives.

    5. Re:Common sense by Arterion · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Almost all kids do things that others would frown on. Just because you find nothing about someone online doesn't mean they don't do it -- only that there is no indication of them doing it online.

      It leads to the fallacious reasoning "Oh, student xxxx doesn't have any online profiles of him drinking and having sex, and student yyyyy does. That must mean student xxxxx doesn't do those things and student yyyyy does. Therefore, student xxxxx is a better choice."

      It sounds like that's the argument, and, even if you agree drinking and having sex is inappropriate behavior for students (HA), the fact that some student don't have pictures of it on the internet is in no way proof they they don't do those things.

      --
      "That which does not kill us makes us stranger." -Trevor Goodchild
  3. Breaking news! by Cheza · · Score: 2, Funny

    In other news... The earth is still round.

  4. Saving the morality of our higher institutions by Puff+of+Logic · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is a completely legitimate practice. After all, if we don't catch people holding up cans of beer at a party before they are admitted, why, they'll be doing it at colleges around the country next before you know it!

    --
    P.P.S. I'm doing Science and I'm still alive.
  5. Just because you can doesn't mean you should. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    'It's typically inappropriate photos â" like holding up a can of beer at a party,' Saracino said

    Riiiight. Because nobody who has had a picture taken holding a can of beer could possibly benefit from a higher education, or be a net positive for society.

    Cripes. Makes me glad I'm decades past my college days.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    1. Re:Just because you can doesn't mean you should. by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Maybe it's just my read but I do believe that "holding up a beer can at a party" is really just a placeholder phrase for all the jackass things people post of themselves on the internet. In the US it has become apparent to me that mostly what counts is image. From products to politics it is not necessarily a good product (only) that wins out, it is a product that has a good image with the public.

      As my mother-in-law says, if you're alive you're in business. So don't be a dolt and publicly post stuff that could have a deleterious effect on your image.

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
    2. Re:Just because you can doesn't mean you should. by gnarled · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Point taken, but such a student may indeed be far less likely to contribute to that university's Nobel Prize count.

      Are you sure? I bet if Richard Feynman had had a Facebook profile it would have been pretty scandalous.

      --
      I'm a firm believer in the philosophy of a ruling class. Especially since I rule. -Randal, Clerks
    3. Re:Just because you can doesn't mean you should. by FailedTheTuringTest · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Feynman was a pain in the ass to administrators and bureaucrats, I can certainly imagine petty bureaucrats passing up a student potential-Feynman in order to make their own lives easier. (Before Nobel-worthiness is proven, of course. Once you're a proven genius then you can be as eccentric as you want and people will make allowances. They couldn't kick Feynman out of Los Alamos for safe-cracking, but a non-famous student picking the lock on the Dean's office...?)

    4. Re:Just because you can doesn't mean you should. by Indagator · · Score: 5, Funny

      Riiiight. Because nobody who has had a picture taken holding a can of beer could possibly benefit from a higher education, or be a net positive for society.

      I would say that it betrays a serious lack of judgement.

      Specifically, everyone knows that American beers that come in cans are shit. If the prospective student can't even discern that, how can you expect them to perform in rigorous courses?

  6. I wonder how much they even bother to check by antifoidulus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    for accuracy. First its really easy to blackmail someone by creating an account with their bio, and probably next to impossible to get it down. Secondly, esp. with more common names, its really easy to find someone with the same name who is totally unrelated to the applicant. Should you be judged based on what that person does? Finally, how many people actually take the time to really interpret what a quick google search reveals? A search for my real name without quotes, esp. my full name, reveals tons of porn. I guess I just better hope that nobody tries to search for me on the internet without taking the time to do a proper query(and even then all they will find is my embarrassing performance in the one and only sanctioned chess tournament I ever participated in....)

    1. Re:I wonder how much they even bother to check by Xugumad · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Hell, I have a surname I have to spell for people, and a quick Google leads to the conclusion that I have my own band, regularly do shows of my art, and hold degrees in Computer Science and Medicine. Suffice to say, most of that isn't accurate.

      Sooner or later someone (university admissions, potentional employer, whatever) is going to get themselves badly sued over this, and frankly it serves them right for making snap judgments based on what amounts to unproven rumours.

  7. Beer by halcyon1234 · · Score: 4, Funny

    'It's typically inappropriate photos -- like holding up a can of beer at a party,' Saracino said.

    ... "Because," Saracino continues, "Beer is not the sort of thing people drink at college."

    1. Re:Beer by CodeBuster · · Score: 2, Funny

      Beer is not the sort of thing people drink at college.

      Says the college administrator while he pours himself a scotch from the bottle on the bookshelf...

  8. Scariest here... by mysidia · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Their reliance on the fact that the profiles are "real"

    Of those using the profiles, 38% said it had a 'negative impact' on the applicant. 'Today's application is not just what you send ... but whatever they can Google about you,'

    Suppose a person has a grudge against you. They know you are applying for admission to a certain school. They know the school searches for myspace profiles or other profiles on social networking sites.

    The person anonymizes themselves using proxies and creates a fake facebook or myspace profile. They use your name and general location: they include some nasty message/text that would be seen as highly negative.

    The admissions office searches for your name. They find this page. They have no real way to verify whether or not you posted the page.

    Their decision otherwise would be to admit you to their school, but they assume you posted this horrible page: it has your name, location, and a few other details that match their records, after all. Their assumption leads to a negative conclusion which prevents you from being admitted.

    The person who posted the info is completely anonymous, and there is no means to locate the person.

    What is your recourse? You will never actually be told the underlying reason for the rejection.

    This is a reason universities should not be "searching" social network sites: until such time as the identity of the site's creator can be proven. They are creating a DoS opportunity for anonymous people to prevent other people from being admitted.

    1. Re:Scariest here... by Kneo24 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There's always someone posting what you wrote, and I always laugh. Not because it couldn't happen, but because the chances of it happening to any given person is unlikely.

      I don't disagree that universities shouldn't be using this information to make their decisions, but not for the reasons you've given.

  9. Personal? by Toonol · · Score: 4, Insightful

    'We consider Facebook and MySpace their personal space,' the dean of undergraduate admissions said. 'It would feel somewhat like an invasion of privacy.'"

    They're being overly sensitive. MySpace isn't private. Information put on the internet, publicly available without a password or other security, should be considered as public as anything on a community bulletin board.

    That's why deeplinking is legal, to refer to the discussion from a few days ago.

    Also, a simple MySpace check can probably tell the college a vast amount of detail about the student... and their level of stupidity. Responsibility and Judgment should be rewarded.

  10. No expectation of privacy in a public space by SlashBugs · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ..including the internet.

    Arguably the universities should restrict themselves to the application documents and interviews, in the spirit of fair play.

    However, these kids have created publicly viewable profiles for themselves and chosen to leave the privacy settings off so anyone with a net connection can view them. They've then loaded up these profiles with photos and information that make them look bad, and still decided to leave it all open to public view.

    There's no way someone who's done all this could possibly complain that someone has invaded their privacy. They've undoubtedly tried to find all the online information about their prospective colleges and professors; it's a two-way street.

  11. Very scary, because it isn't just your content! by compumike · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It doesn't have to be a photo you posted... but someone else could have posted it and tagged you! You essentially have to start assuming that any digital photo taken of you will end up online with your name. Quite scary. Would be nice if there sere some sort of consent-based tagging, requiring your approval, but that's probably too complicated for Facebook to think about.

    --
    Hey code monkey... learn electronics! Powerful microcontroller kits for the digital generation.

    1. Re:Very scary, because it isn't just your content! by Ma8thew · · Score: 4, Informative

      You are alerted when you are tagged. You can remove your tag from other people's photos, and they will not be able to add it again.

  12. Pimp your profile by Animats · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The obvious next step is to make your profile a promotional tool. The "high achiever profile" may be the next big thing. You addressing the Junior Chamber of Commerce. You working on a political campaign. You being interviewed on TV.

    Soon, this will be a routine part of getting into college, and there will be services to do this for you.

    1. Re:Pimp your profile by Animats · · Score: 4, Insightful

      getting accepted someplace famous isn't important.

      It gives you a significant edge in later life. Leaf through Who's Who and notice people's colleges.

  13. School and work are not one-dimensional by mgkimsal2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Since when has a school been *just* about academics? Isn't it also about the 'life experience' aspect too?

    Since when has a 'job' *just* been about 'performance'? Doesn't your personality and ability to fit in with others have anything to do with how well you'll do on a job?

    1. Re:School and work are not one-dimensional by CSMatt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't go to college for the "life experience." I go for the degree. If socialization was the goal, I'd do it without spending thousands of dollars a semester.

    2. Re:School and work are not one-dimensional by Yetihehe · · Score: 2, Funny

      Doesn't your personality and ability to fit in with others have anything to do with how well you'll do on a job?

      Yes. If someone does not have photos at party, it means he doesn't fit with others well.

      --
      Extreme Programming - Redundant Array of Inexpensive Developers
    3. Re:School and work are not one-dimensional by Indagator · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't go to college for the "life experience." I go for the degree.

      Then it sounds to me that you're wasting your money.

      This isn't to say that a piece of paper to hang on your wall doesn't have value. Especially today, having that piece of paper is a necessary condition to obtain good employment. But if you think that being around hundreds or thousands of academically minded peers, from all different backgrounds, and who possess both the time and the inclination to explore new ideas with you - if you think that is worthless, then you don't belong at a typical university. You should be attending a commuter school, where you could be saving some of those thousands of dollars a semester while still getting your piece of paper to hang on your wall.

    4. Re:School and work are not one-dimensional by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wow. You have a pretty rosy idea about what university is like.

      I went (not in the US). It wasn't anything like that. I mean, don't get me wrong, I had some fun with my friends there, but it there was no uplifting atmosphere of intellectual curiousity. And I'm afraid nobody had time to "explore new ideas" with me, we were all busting our asses to jump through enough arbitrary hoops to get our degrees. The ones who weren't that busy were doing arts degrees and spent all their spare time socialising or doing college sports. Intellectual curiousity in a modern university is minimal in my experience.

      Knowing what I know now, I'd definitely have preferred to go to either no higher-ed school at all, or to a much cheaper community college. Unfortunately many employers and nearly all governments require them if you want to get a job/emigrate. There's no particular reason for this other than discriminating against poor people, but there you go.

  14. for faculty jobs as well by call+-151 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There was a recent post on the physics group blog Cosmic Variance about potential job applicants having webpages and getting Googled during the course of hiring for academic positions- postdocs and faculty. So it's not just the students, it's faculty as well.

    There are lots of questions you can't have on a job application (sexual orientation, religion, etc.) but if an applicant volunteers that information, that is permitted. And the attitude seems to be that if information is on a webpage, it is "volunteered" to the world.

    --
    It's psychosomatic. You need a lobotomy. I'll get a saw.
  15. They do this for job applicants as well by linzeal · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I worked for a company that had a ton of custom robots crawl Google, Usenet, The Internet Archive and a laundry list of other places your name or moniker might of left a mark. People often use an email address that goes "clevernicknameonlyIwilleveruse789@blah.com" what these things spider for is that clevernickname... part. It was mostly to embarrass people with their sophomoric attempts at debate in newsgroups or to dig up personal websites from their teen years but HR used it too. It discovered one of the applicants for the job of CFO had used his clevernickname... to bitch and rant about his last job on some obscure financial site, needless to say he did not get the job but they printed out his tirade and posted on the BB.

  16. No sympathy. by EWAdams · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you post stuff about yourself that reflects badly on you, you have no grounds for complaint. Live with the consequences of your actions or don't post. Underage drinking may or may not be a bad idea; telling the world about it definitely is. Why should a college want to admit a moron with no judgment?

    --
    I piss off bigots.
    1. Re:No sympathy. by Adrian+Lopez · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If the stuff you post has no bearing on your ability to be a good student, you do have grounds for complaint. Life shouldn't be limited to whatever is acceptable to admissions officers with an overinflated sense of their ability to judge other people's character. Perhaps you're happy fitting into other people's molds of what people should be, but many people are not. Their personal lives -- even when discussed in public -- should generally have no bearing on your ability to attend college and improve yourself.

      --
      "In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
  17. Duh, and duh-er. by geofgibson · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You don't show up for the job interview stoned and wearing a tie dye either. And, "We consider Facebook and MySpace their personal space,' the dean of undergraduate admissions said. 'It would feel somewhat like an invasion of privacy." is just so incredibly stupid. It is a PUBLIC site you morons. If you don't want to be known as a loadie, don't post it. Kids today, (as I sound just like my dad).

  18. Re:inappropriate beer photos? by D+Ninja · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think you kind of missed the point. Said individuals holding the beer were in high school (AKA this is why they were applying to colleges) and, as such, were illegally in possession of beer.

    That's why it was inappropriate.

  19. A new social norm is being created by zermous · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It is going to be rough for a while, but I hope that we can watch a new norm get created as a generation who puts their frontstage and backstage personalities waaay too close together online grows up and becomes dominant.

    Pop quiz: you are at a co-worker's desk looking at the monitor and working on something. An IM pops up. Do you avert your eyes? It is dreadfully hard, but we have to try. Folks conduct personal business at work. The internet makes that easy. We need to respect that and avert our eyes when they do it.

    Myspace profiles are a microcosm of the internet: the good and the terrible are side by side in the same place. You have to learn the skill of knowing when not to look, because the only thing stopping you is you. Just because you CAN look at EVERYTHING doesn't mean you should. Just because it is information on the 'public' internet doesn't mean you should look at it. You should treat it as private just as soon as you realize it is something that the individual in question thinks is private.

    Even if you don't follow these rules yourself, I bet you still implicitly follow them a little better than the college admissions boards who really have no clue and no experience with trying to keep public and private personas online. Things will change, if we give it time.

  20. Exactly by dmsuperman · · Score: 2, Funny

    This is exactly why I, Bob Taylor, would never associate my online handle with my real name. Because then I, Bob Taylor, would be susceptible to this sort of profiling.

    --
    :(){ :|:& };: Go!