Primary School Girl Told To Stop Photographing and Blogging School Meals

JamieKitson writes "British primary school (elementary to those of you in the U.S.) pupil Martha/'Veg' has been taking photographs of her school dinners and writing about them at her blog Never Seconds since April. The blog has become popular, and Martha decided to do something with the popularity: namely, raising money for an international school dinners charity. Unfortunately, the local council, Argyll and Bute, having apparently not heard of the Streisand effect, didn't like the publicity that her blog was generating and have shut her down. They said the blog made the catering staff fear for their jobs. There is a happy ending though: donations have gone through the roof and she has already passed her target."

Comments

U turn

[shortscruffydave]

Just heard an interview with the council on BBC Radio 4, and it sounds like they've reversed the decision.

Re:U turn

[tbird81]

It doesn't, by any means, excuse them from the original decision to force someone to take down their website.

Their back-pedalling now the case has publicity only shows how out-of-touch they are with the world. I'd love to know who was personally responsibly for this decision.

We're all used to national governments trying to get their greasy control-freak hands on our internet, but now councils are doing it! Stick to water supply, sewerage and rates - keep away from the internet. It's none of your business, and you don't understand it. Controlling the internet is controlling our speech.

UK numbers for the council:
Phone: 01546 602127
Text: 07624808798
Complaints: http://www.argyll-bute.gov.uk/council-and-government/complaints

Re:U turn

[Blahah]

That's not what happened at all. They didn't force her to take down her website, they just told her she couldn't bring her camera to school. Still a stupid move, but not the same as what you are alleging.

Re:U turn

[AngryDeuce]

Well, I would probably be pretty pissed off if I was catching all the heat for the school district's poor meal choices. It's not like the lunchroom workers get to choose what the kids are served, they just prepare it. At least, that's how it is here in the US in my own experiences, maybe in the UK it's different and the individual schools have more autonomy?

Growing up in Philly, we ate what was called "satellite lunches", which were nothing more than prepackaged meals made by some private company. They literally served us a white box with "food" in it on a tray. Our school didn't even have a proper kitchen, just some ovens to heat them up. They were fucking nasty as shit, too...I bet prisoners ate better then we were. The fried chicken was especially gross, because we could smell it throughout the school in the period just before lunch, so as soon as someone caught a whiff and said "Aw, man, friend chicken again?" a collective groan went through the entire building.

I would have brown-bagged it but we were poor so I was on reduced lunch and thus forced to eat the crap by my mother.

Re:U turn

[mekkab]

Yes; as a corollary to this, DC public schools are loathe to close on snow days because for some children, that's the only food they get all day.

Re:U turn

[Electrawn]

The Turkey Sandwich story is a bunch of hysterical bunk that was rapidly picked up by Fox News and Huffington Post. It was a bunch of poorly worded reporting by the original source, Carolina Journal.

Please read: http://www.carolinajournal.com/jhdailyjournal/display_jhdailyjournal.html?id=8780 for the real deal.

Re:U turn

[canajin56]

In the original outraged story, poor innocent child comes with a healthy meal of chips, a banana, a sandwich, and extra sugary apple juice (less healthy that pop). She tries so hard to eat her healthy meal but the nazis throw it in the garbage. She gets chicken nuggets only. No fruit, no vegetables, nothing to drink. Then she is sent home with a bill for the food. This is the story in the local paper. Then Fox CNN NBC ABC HuffPo Slashdot Reditt etc all link to the local paper without any followups of their own, and it makes national news. The school is confused because their inspectors don't confiscate anything except peanuts, and they never sent home a bill. This is taken by Slashdot etc as a sign of coverup. Then the woman posts a picture of the bill. The "bill" is a note. This note is dated. The date is NOT the day this happened, but the week prior. The "bill" says that in future, they may begin charging children who are not enrolled in the lunch program, but who need supplementary food because, for example, they were sent with a lunch with no fruit or vegetables. Oops, nothing that could have been done to avoid that mistake except hiring reporters who know how to read. So all you're left with is a mom angry that her child ate junk food like chicken nuggets instead of healthy potato chips, a crying child who says that they made her eat the delicious chicken nuggets and she really tried to eat mom's sandwich but they threw it out, and a school that says they supplement unhealthy lunches, but never replace them. Obviously children never lie to get out of trouble, but schools will always lie about following their documented procedure to get out of trouble.

summary error...

[Anonymous Coward]

the blog didn't make catering staff fear for their jobs.

the press reaction in the UK has made catering staff fear for their jobs

Martha was blogging what she had for dinner NOT what the full menu was.

the press ommited this detail and pitchforks started being sharpened as it appears Martha wasn't picking the best of what was on offer (health wise)

all that said, i think it's a bloody shame the council have stopped given that the school actually encourages children to talk about their diet and this girl's only taken that training to the next logical conclusion of sharing with the internet.

Re:Free speech

[Anonymous Coward]

That was not school who banned her but the council. The school supported it, but the council was embarrassed when it was revealed how crappy food the pupils are eating, so they tried to gag her.

Re:Free speech

[AngryDeuce]

Not sure about the UK, but the U.S. courts have repeatedly upheld that students do not have free speech. The case Morse v. Frederick comes to mind, otherwise known as the "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" case.

Long story short, the students were released from school early so they could watch the torch pass from the 2002 Winter Olympics, and Joseph Fredrick, a student at the school, along with friends, held up a banner they'd made earlier that said "Bong Hits 4 Jesus". He was suspended for 5 days (later increased to the maximum 10 days after quoting Thomas Jefferson, which is hysterical), sued, and lost several times. School speech can be regulated both on and off campus; Frederick was not technically in school at the time of his banner (as they'd been dismissed) and he was also standing across the street from the school, thus not technically on campus, but in view of those that were.

Then, of course, are the myriad cases cropping up over the last few years where student's Facebook posts are getting them suspended Just a few months ago a 12-year-old girl was interrogated at length by the administration at her school, with police officers present (but not her parents, of course), and ultimately forced to give up her Facebook password.

If this girl had been here in the U.S., she'd probably already be charged with some form of terrorism by DHS and thrown in a cell with murderers, rapists, and people that upload HD rips of hit movies to the internet.

Links to blog and stories

[TarpaKungs]

This may be helpful:

The blog: http://neverseconds.blogspot.co.uk/

BBC story: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-18454800

Independent: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/school-dinner-blogger-martha-payne-photo-ban-overturned-7854487.html

Council rebuttal: http://www.argyll-bute.gov.uk/news/2012/jun/statement-school-meals-argyll-and-bute-council