Newspaper taking photos of children at school then selling them to parents

[Palinto]

When DS started school I ticked the box which said I didn't mind him having his photo taken, assuming this would be for school related things.

A term in and a photo of their first day at school is published in our cities newspaper, which we can then buy from them.... I felt a bit about this but obviously didn't want to not buy a picture of my DS on his first day at school.. I was then charged £7 plus £2 postage for a rubbish quality tiny print.

It reminds me of being in Morocco and getting followed by guys with cameras who would then try to sell you the pictures they took, i.e. not entirely appropriate for an infant school. I wouldn't mind so much buying a photo from the actual school, but the newspaper?

AIBU to be annoyed at this?

[HoratiaWinwood]

mumagain What risk is there to my child if his photo is in the paper, assuming no particular safeguarding file is open?

And given the statistics, the people most likely to cause harm to your children are those in a position to take their own photos, namely family.

The hysteria drives me nuts. What harm does my child suffer if a baddie looks at him and he is oblivious?

[mumagain38]

2rebecca 'we just signed a consent form' like i said before ... OP didnt realise it was going to the papers for public veiwing. jesus im on a bloody merry go round, good night!

[Sirzy]

Why would you sign a consent form for something without knowing what it was? Sorry the only person to blame for that is the person signing!

[2rebecca]

The OP ticked a box saying she didn't mind him having his photo taken. Why should she not assume that that covered photographs by the school for publicity on their website, in the school newsletter and also in the local media?
I think it's sad that some parents are upset rather than pleased when their child's picture is in the paper (provided they aren't in it for battering an old lady or similar).
I agree with Sirzy that it's up to the individual not to sign a form if they aren't clear exactly what they are signing, otherwise schools and organisations will end up with 5 page long forms covering all eventualities and we'll end up with a society where children are invisible in the media because including their events is too much hassle.

[mumagain38]

why should she assume that it would? Why does it bother u what other parents feel--its there choice, just like its urs to have them in it. would u mind if ur childs pic were sold on to advertisement , maybe in another country? just curious?

[mumagain38]

im not a stick in the mud, my partner was a up and coming football player in his youth (a long time ago!!) and he was reg in the local rag and he loves looking back at those photos. Im also so aware of the real dangers of kids pics on here as ive done several IT protection work shops which frankly did alarm me, i also know we cant wrap our kids in cotton wool....my point is that the op wasnt aware of where her childs pic would end up. Its not up to her to dig and find out, the school should have been more clearer. thats my point and im sticking to it! :)

[HoratiaWinwood]

What "real dangers of kids pictures"?

[Clary]

I loved seeing the pix of all mine in the paper.

You didn't have to buy a pic OP. Having form pictures taken is a thing that happens at school - maybe you had better request your child is not included next time then

Yes LOL @ the idea that yr DC's pic will sell copies of the paper - to whom exactly apart from you? And if you object, well just don't buy it at all. [puzzled] Presumably the consent form covered pics in the local paper too? If you really object to that then let the school know asap.

mumagain I would also like to know what the real dnagers of kids' pictures are. My kids often used to be in the local paper and on its website - should I be worried? If so, what about?

[mumagain38]

Honestley clary i dont know if u should or not its down to ur personal choice at the end of the day..like i said a couple of post up i did a IT child protection work shop and what i discovered was unerving and unsettling for me personally.
If u literatly type in 'The dangers of putting kids pictures on internet' into google it will come up with a load of links for some interesting reading, there is arguments on both sides, explains it a bit better than me.
anything that gets published will likely be up loaded and its anys ones pic then as www. stands world wide web so that means any one on this planet has acceses to it to do with what they wish with it, they could even use it for advertising in which u would defo not agree with or have a choice in the matter. I dont think people grasp the full magnitude of it. we spend years telling our kids dont talk to strangers..yet were happy to see them in the paper telling us all '' this is little billy blogs..age 4..goes to what ever primary school. To me that dosnt sit right, i dont take risks with my kids...if i want my kids in paper then i will agree to it, i dont need the school making those choices for me. The school should have clearly stated on the consent form..maybe used to external purpose. There done ..no need for the 5 pages of blah blah ;)
ok ive had enough arm wrestling on this link see u all on the next ;)

[insancerre]

we spend years telling our kids dont talk to strangers
no we don't
stranger danger is a myth

[shesariver]

and no i wouldnt want a 'random paedophile' seeing my daughter. clearing u dont mind -grim

No Im not grim, just a normal parent whos not completely hysterical about paedophiles, I work with adults who have been abused as children and everyone of them has been abused by someone they know not this mythical stranger. But I forgot - you are obviously the expert here as you have done an IT child protection course, as you keep mentioning (3 times and counting!)

[10storeylovesong]

This is not a new thing. My mum still has the photos on her wall taken by the newspaper on mine and my brother's first days - we're 30 and 28! Neither of us have come to any harm from this (and yes it is available on the Internet in the paper's archives). We love to reminisce about the photos.

[shesariver]

And on the very very minute chance a paedophile does happen to see a picture of any of my kids in their school uniforms on the internet - this is going to affect me and them how exactly??

[10storeylovesong]

Oh, and I work in child protection (not a one day course!) and have absolutely no concerns about this and look forward to seeing my own children's photos.

[PuppyMonkey]

I also work at a local paper, we do the 1st day at school, nativities, sports days the lot to try and boost sales. Local papers are dying a death so little bits of business like this can really help. People aren't forced to take part and no one has to buy the pix if they think they're poor quality.

It's prob something you won't have to worry about in a few years when all the local papers have folded because nobody reads papers any more.

[mumagain38]

Lol it wasnt a one day course, and 10story children pictures and usage on internet IS an issue in child protection .but to be fair look at the STATE of the child protection services at the moment???? and this is not souly about peodophiles jeez! The OP hadnt agreed to to the pics being published! It her choice not the frigging school. Ones those pics go live they are anybodys maybe the op didnt want this.. i certainly wouldnt. and that MY choice! Also i have lots of photo albums pics on walls videos of kids which they enjoy looking?laughing at- they are personal and private. I dont feel the need to see them in the paper lol. its the same replies over and over...bleat i want to to my kids in the news paper...bleat...what harm can it do...bleat.
oh and EVERY one works in child protection, child abuse any thing relevent to the topic at the time.

THE underlying issue here is that the OP didnt want/aware that her child pic was gonna get published. They should have put a short sentence stating that they maybe used to external sources. If u want ur kids all over the internet/papers then bully for u..i dont. my choice.

[HoratiaWinwood]

So you don't know then? You can Google "chocolate causes cancer" and get results - proves nothing. Tell us one of the reasons that convinced you...?

Yes there are child protection issues for some children, but schools know who those children are and don't take/publish their photos. These full-class pictures don't have children's individual names on, and each child is scarcely visible anyway.

Hysteria helps nobody. Focusing on some mysterious stranger when the real danger is far closer to home massively clouds the issue.

[PuppyMonkey]

If OP was really so shocked at the unexpected appearance of her kid's photo in paper, maybe she should've had a word with school about it. Rather than, you know, buying the photo from the paper.

[ginmakesitallok]

YAB totally Unreasonable. If there was a genuine reason for you not wanting pictures taken of your child - then you wouldn't sign the consent form.

Local newspapers take photos of kids groups all the time - should they have to contact every parent for explicit consent before they publish? No - they rely on the consent given to school/club etc.

Dear God if a paedophile is so desperate for pic of kids in school uniform they just need to go to any cataolgue/website.

[Sirzy]

The OP did give permission she signed the consent form. I don't know why MumAgain is struggling to understand that.

I am pretty sure anyone with any sort of genuine concerns wouldn't sign something without clarifying any areas they weren't happy with first.

[Pandemoniaa]

I also resent my DS being used to sell their paper for free, then if I want a copy of the photo being charged a relatively high price for it.

Taking pictures of reception class children and featuring them in local papers is absolutely standard practice. I've copped that particular duty shift myself.

However, you are under no obligation to buy the picture (not that papers make much from prints anyway) and it is ridiculous to compare this practice with being hounded in Morocco. As for looking good in their paper this is nonsense. It's just a regular feature. It doesn't make the paper look good or bad. However, most local papers will run features that reflect what is happening in the local community and are popular with their readers and certainly, this one usually is.

I strongly suggest that you withdraw permission for your child to be photographed at school if this is going to be your reaction. Because it won't be the only time in his school life that he is likely to be photographed for the local press.

[ChristmasJubilee]

Our school consent form covers photos for school displays, website, and press. You can agree to any combination. We are also asked if we are happy for their name to be included.

My dc's have appeared in the local paper many times over the last 14 years that they have been in school I have only ever bought one photo, an individual one of ds3.

The local swimming cub regularly feature in our local paper and are photographed wearing ummmm "swimwear". I don't see what difference there is between this and gymnastic or dance costumes and I don't have any problem with it.

[jamdonut]

I really don't know why you bought the newspaper photo.

In our area, every school is included in the new starters feature. here is no push for parents to buy.

I've kept pages from newspapers of my kids appearing in photos. They are lovely keepsakes to look back on, It would have to be exceptionally special (occasion or picture) for me to buy one.

I like to see pictures of my kids in the paper. Its a pride thing.

That is why I always sign consent for pictures taken during school time/outings/events etc to be published. If you don't like it, withdraw permission.

[10storeylovesong]

mumagain no-one is saying that the use of children's images is not an issue on the Internet. In this context I would not have an issue personally with my children being in the paper, and if this was the only concern raised to me about other people's children then again I would not have concerns.

You say that your concern about it being online is not about peodophiles - what exactly is it about? If there are no other safeguarding issues then there are no reasons not to publish it.

And yes, the OP did give consent. She obviously didn't know what she was giving consent to but that is her own fault. I don't sign anything unless I know exactly what I'm signing, especially if it's something so important.

And like someone else said, if she had a real concern regarding this, why on earth did she buy the photo??? I think the real issue is that she is not happy with the quality of the photo - which is not a safeguarding issue. The newspaper have done nothing wrong here.