Not consenting to dc being on school Facebook

[nevernotstruggling]

I deactivated my Facebook account for 5 years. Dds are 6 and 9. The school didn't have social media when dd1 started in 14.

I've activated my Facebook in the last week and been directed to the school Facebook page. I was horrified. Hundreds of photos of children including mine close up not group shots far away.

The school sent a media consent form this week where you could choose yes to photos and website but no to social media. I have said no.

I'm worried that this might mean the dds are left out of pictures when they are taken and this might upset them.

I don't consent to my child being posted on open social
Media accounts I'm not having it. It's totally unnecessary and unsafe.

Has anyone else done this? What was the outcome?

I'm not sure I'm following you here nevernotstruggling.

You don't want your child on SM - that's absolutely fine.

You've now told the school - also absolutely fine, but pretty poor show of the school not to ask you at the start of the school year.

There are photos on FB that now need to be removed - understandable, and you should get in touch with the school admin/secretary to ensure they are now removed.

Why do you want to see the Head?

There's no danger to my children for being in photos, I just don't want their photos used for marketing purposes.

I'm worried that this might mean the dds are left out of pictures when they are taken and this might upset them

It depends on the way the school handles it as to whether the children are even aware they are being left out though.

I used to teach at a private school abroad and one of my students was the daughter of a well known actress and musician and another was the daughter of a top league footballer and model. Both sets of parents obviously didn't want their child photographed and put on school SM/website as those photos could then end up in the tabloids (the parents were often photographed dropping their children off/picking them up but the media rules ensured the children's faces were blurred, whereas if the photos were taken from school sources they wouldn't have had to do that) and encourage more photographers to harass their children at school.

Of the two, one set of parents dealt with it in a very low key way. They sat down with the school and agreed that they didn't want their childs picture used but didn't want it to be a big deal, especially as the child was young enough that they didn't yet realise their family was different as they were famous.

That family basically agreed that the school could take whatever pictures they wanted but any involving their child would be immediately deleted and the head had to personally review and sign off all photos before they went on SM to ensure their child was not in any of them.

Every teacher was aware of this so when they were taking pictures at events they either took small group pictures and immediately deleted any with that child (eg taking a pic of each of the 6 teams in a class activity the pic with that child's team would be deleted and only 1 or 2 of the teams were featured on SM so it was "coincidence" the child was always in a team whose photo wasn't used). In larger posed/group shots they would be arranged it so that the child was in a position that they could either be easily obscured (eg at the back of a group and have a held up item covering their face) or easily cropped out (eg standing on the end of a row) to comply with their parents wishes. It It also meant that on a special occasion, eg when they had a personal award and each child was photographed with their certificate the school could include the child in the whole process and then ask the parents if they wanted to be given/sent a copy of the picture before it was deleted. That ensured their child was kept off SM but they could still have a record of their child's achievement.

The other set of parents were super OTT. Their child could not be in any photograph. Never. Not Ever. If there was even a whiff of a camera then their child could not be anywhere near it. That child was never allowed to participate in any activity where lots of photos would be taken eg concerts - they would join another class or do another activity. If teachers were taking pictures in class activities -eg taking pics of teams in a class like I mentioned above - then that child's team would be photographed without them. The teachers would usually try to take those pictures whilst the child was busy with something else so they weren't aware they were being left out but it wasn't always possible to be subtle and that child knew it and was always asking why they couldn't be in photos, but it wasn't our place to say anything as it was their parents' decision.

Lots of the usual hysterical hyperbole on here again.
Assuming there are no safeguarding issues, exactly how is allowing a photo of your child unsafe or dangerous?
It's been asked a few times on here but I don't think anyone has responded to the question.

I am surprised the school have a Facebook page with photos

Really? Most schools have them and have done for years.

We have public Facebook and Twitter, a public school website and also password protected class blogs. Each class has its own page and a generic class password, which changes each year.

We ask for permissions for various things including:

• social media
• password protected blogs
• website
• internal use on displays in classrooms, and within school
• internal use in books for assessment
• outside media such as local newspaper, etc.

We have parents select some, all or none of these as it their right to choose. Almost all allow internal use and the password protected blogs. We have about 1/4 of the school who can't be on public social media. We have less than 10 out of 270 children who can't be on password protected. We have 1 who can't be photographed for any purpose.

We do still take photographs of all children bar the 1 above. But they do miss out in some photographs, yes.
I deal with the social media and blogs. I know who can and can't be on.
For a large group shot where the child's been left on I drop if possible (staff encouraged to have that child/REN on the end) or I blue/pixelate their faces.
Close up shots we either don't take (unless needed for books) or just don't use.
The one child who isn't allowed on anything simply isn't photographed at all.

Amazing how many were allowed to be photographed for the local newspaper or included in the national radio broadcasts we did though, even despite some of those not being allowed on the school social media. National media social media is fine apparently though!

It won't hurt to write and ask the head to confirm the photo policy (and give or refuse your consent whilst you're at it/ask them to remove the existing images).

I offer parents/carers special photos because, to all intents and purposes, I don't exist as a child. There are six photos of me from the age of 5 to 11, all taken at school, nothing else before or afterwards, and it's very strange when others have loads of pictures of them doing exciting things to think that I wasn't important enough to waste film on, compared to the sodding cats. It's not a requirement of my duties to offer it, but because of that, I make the extra little bit of effort/time needed.

@Ribbonsonabox I'm curious as to the rationale of the school using photos on Facebook. I'm entitled to ask

Why? Just say no to your child. What other parents choose to do is up to them. The school do not have to justify their choice to you.

As the social media lead I would simply tell you that we'd decided this as a school and felt it was a useful tool for us as part of the wilder community. That we only include children who have been happy to be photographed, and who's legal guardians have agreed to them being photographed and their image used on SM. We don't include the names of photographed children. We also don't publish the details of upcoming school visits with dates, times and locations on our public pages.

As it is I actually select the photographs used on our SM carefully and for a given purpose each time. Infact it has brought us wider interactions with the local community and beyond in recent weeks. This has lead to some very beneficial things happening for the school and our pupils.. OFSTED also loved our use of SM and it was referred to in a very positive light. It gave them a good overview of the school and our activities before they came.

@Aragog your post is really interesting. I will check the ofsted report I'm curious to what it says re our school.

Re the positive interactions with the wider community - that's interesting and food for thought.

I have not claimed that I won't accept the school's response. I'm not unprepared to accept that they will state that the positives outweigh the risk posed by sm.

As far as I can see this school posts a lot more photos than the neighbouring primaries and yet has little traffic that I can see.

I'm entitled to ask

Well, half of that sentence seems correct.

The school is, of course, entitled not to answer.

They don't have to run policy by you and I'm sure they won't give two hoots if you accept their response or not.

I don't see the problem, can you explain it for me? To me it reads that you don't want photo's of your children on facebook and the school did as you asked. It also looks like they did post photo's of kids with permission of parents who presumably are happy about it. What have I got wrong?

Were the photos taken and put on from before you said no to social media?

I'm not sure what people think is going to happen to their PFBs if their photos are online (and I reiterate, other than any with safeguarding issues).

Are they never in the paper? At the park? At a public place where anyone could secretly take their photograph?

Also, in my experience, paedophiles generally aren't that interested in photographs of school children doing science, or playing football.

I wouldn't worry - in a couple of years when they become a teenager, they'll be putting their own photos all over the Internet

There are apps to download Instagram pics flirtygirl. Presumably similar for snapchat.

And anything that’s online can be screenshot.

OP, if you have no real safeguarding issue then you will have to accept that not consenting means your child is removed from group shots. In our school no photo kids stand aside while the group photo takes place.

Cathf- you're right, no-one's answered the question of exactly why they don't want their kids on school facebook - I think fear of paedophiles may be in it somewhere but not 100% sure

I'm not scared of paedophiles, I just don't particularly want my children used in marketing when they're too young to consent to it themselves.

I see the photos on our schools social media platform as a great way to keep the parents informed. I think its fab.

I feel informed through internal use of photos, class blogs etc. I don't feel photos on social media, website, marketing materials enhances my child's experience.

@flirtygirl how old are your kids? At what age would you allow them to make their own choices about social media?

Another reason other schools use social media than 'advertising' is to keep parents informed and up to date with what the children are learning.
The majority of our parents love having weekly updates from each class/year group about the learning taking place. We use photos of the learning but our policy is no close ups of children's faces so they can't be recognised. The response from parents has been very positive and they feel they have a much better idea of what learning is taking place and feel they can have better conversations with their children about school (often children will tell you they can't remember what they did today).

On a side note I once had a parent complain their child wasn't in the local newspaper for the classes first year photo. I reminder the parent that they had signed the permission slip as no consent to media including newspapers. They told me I didn't mean for their first photo in the paper you've made my child miss out.
Ermm no I didn't I followed our policy which you signed, I can't go round checking every time something like this happens, they either want their child in or out of the photo.

I just don't see the need for schools and nurseries to be taking photos of the children as frequently as a lot of them do.Just let the children get on with what they're doing! I think a lot of children growing up now have photos taken of them so frequently that the act of having your photo taken overshadows the actual activity they're involved with.

We take a lot of photos for evidence. Videos too. We have to tick a million boxes a year to prove children are hitting certain targets and when you have to prove them for 30+ children, it takes a lot of photographs.

Also, most parents really enjoy seeing their children on the school Twitter/Dojo feed, school website etc.

Why do you have to take photos to prove that? Is this something that Ofsted/whoever makes the rules has decided?

I'm in Wales. We don't have Ofsted.

@Proudteachermummy

The majority of our parents love having weekly updates from each class/year group about the learning taking place. We use photos of the learning but our policy is no close ups of children's faces so they can't be recognised. The response from parents has been very positive and they feel they have a much better idea of what learning is taking place and feel they can have better conversations with their children about school (often children will tell you they can't remember what they did today).

And I'd be fine with that.....

So you've said no, as is your right, and now want to go in all guns blazing against parents who have chosen yes? How would you feel if the reverse was the case? And you were being questioned through the school for your choices? This is not an unusual occurrence. Don't assume every other parent is unaware and you're the o my one aware. I know all about Facebook policy, I also don't put my kid on my social media, but I'm happy for her to be on the school one. You're sounding unreasonable questioning everyone else's choice juts because you e made yours.