Yesterday I wrote about what happens when stars are caught on camera unaware, and alluded to what could happen if kids become ‘slumber party set-ups’ for funny viral videos, or turned into web celebs when they wish to be regular Joes.
I was hoping I could defer the topic a tad longer to do my homework with some legal beagles, but alas, the 18-year old pole-vaulter turned pinup girl of salivating sports fans leaped onto the front section of the Washington Post positioned as the ‘victim of unwanted attention.’
The headline? Teen Tests Internet’s Lewd Track Record. Ahem. Dodging that interview might’ve been a good start to snuff out some of that attention, eh? Her Dad’s a defense lawyer…He knows this, n’est ce pas?
While I completely empathize with the teen feeling “violated” as her body landed on screensavers, gym lockers and fantasy forums, I think the main ‘chat’ I’d have is not online…it’s with dear ol’ Dad.
Stoking the ‘hottie’ flame via mainstream press instead of dousing it with a cold shower by using ‘no comment,’ and turning down interviews altogether only furthers the child’s exposure. Besides, her Dad has the one piece of ammo that silences media moguls quicker than you can say lawsuit. Oops. I just did.
As an attorney, he’s got “the S word” in his back pocket…sue, slander, security…Yet somehow a few others come to mind too…sensationalism, spokesperson, sexploitation, sigh.
The marketing person in me can’t help but see endorsement deal bait written all over this story. A smart, stellar athlete who’s svelte and stunning to boot? Egad…‘Thar’s gold in them ‘thar licensing deals…
Take your pick: ESPN. Internet safety poster child. Collegiate calendar cutie. Sports Illustrated darling. We’ve seen this before with the likes of Danica Patrick, Maria Sharapova and countless female sports figures. She may very cash in on the chaos she’s experiencing right now. (yeah, yeah, I know, at what price)
The blogger cited in the Post story ran a follow up piece (after his hubba-hubba panting commentary) that offered rhetorical reasoning in self-interview style.
He queried, “How would I feel if it were my daughter that got this unwanted attention? Well, I don’t know. I’d like to think I’d feel fortunate that my daughter was a record-breaking athlete and honors student with no physical or mental deformities. It’s 2007, people: time to realize that attractive women athletes will always be recognized and — yes, sometimes — obsessed over. Is it right or wrong? I don’t know. But it’s reality.”
I’m thinking there’s a teenager out there right now that’s pretty sure “reality bites,” as the movie title goes.
Still, the family’s interviews are perplexing. If they’re striving for a preventive “don’t let this happen to you” heads-up, they’re blowing it from a media literacy standpoint.
For starters, when the story broke earlier this month and she suddenly “had 1,000 new messages on her MySpace page,” the first question I’d ask would be, “under what user name?” How did they find her so fast? Why didn’t they pull the profile pronto?
Second, you notice I’m not running visuals, or even listing names in text (to minimize ‘hit count’ contribution and downplay further exploitation, assuming this is truly the motivation).
Again, they allowed all of the above.
The Post’s in-depth feature included background on the family, first names, quotes and job titles from mom and dad, her school/scholarship offerings, neighborhood and city, sports career (titles/records broken, awards) even her exact location at the track meet the night of the interview, specifying, “20 miles southeast of downtown L.A.”
Gee, folks. As a writer, I know all about adding ‘you were there’ local color, but c’mon…does this sound like a family in hiding?
There’s a security issue here, if her fans are that obsessed and she’s nervous about weirdos. Where’s the logic in hitting the syndicated press circuit?
Heck, I’m not even “officially” a public persona, but I can tell you the minute you hit the net with something interesting to say or a headshot, anything goes. That’s media.
Yes, the mere thought of cyberstalking can creep out kids, and I can attest that ardent fans aren’t ONLY fixated on attractive pole vaulting 18-year olds. (Yup, been there, done that, got the teeshirt)
There’s a REASON my daughter goes by a different name and my entire family is ‘off-limits.’ I’ll protect them like a mother cub if anyone drags them unwillingly into my own media muck.
The article said, “She felt violated…It was like becoming the victim of a crime…her body had been stolen and turned into a public commodity, critiqued in fan forums devoted to everything from hip-hop to Hollywood.”
Again, I’m sure she’s shell-shocked as all get out, and it’s sad that she’s feeling unsafe and overwhelmed. But the whole internet safety routine about not mentioning last names, school uniforms, practice times, position played and such gets blown to bits when an athlete becomes identifiable in even the LOCAL press, much less global internet access…
In this “nowhere to hide” electronic world, we ALL need to get some serious media literacy chops, and become more proactive than reactive.
Ironically, we just came back from a girls sports award banquet where cameras were snapping middle schoolers like parental paparazzi…
I asked my daughter what it would feel like if one of those photos of HER ended up on the internet with 310,000 Yahoo hits and lewd and lascivious comments.
Her response?
“I’d be totally freaked out!”—
“And mom? What does lascivious even MEAN, anyway!”
(look it up, dear, I’m trying to expand your vocabulary)
Point is, do we want to face restrictions of people ‘checking their cameras’ at junior’s championship game just so it’s not on YouTube tomorrow?
What constitutes a “public” persona? Where does “netiquette” come into play?
When candid photos of school teachers, athletes, or a child’s dance recital or birthday party can be plopped onto the internet without people’s knowledge, it means the new media lens may require we ALL get tougher skin…as harsh as it sounds.
As Anastasia Goodstein mentioned in this blog post on the subject:
“In Totally Wired, I told the story of Ghyslain Raza , who is best known online as “The Star Wars Kid.” After schoolmates uploaded a video they found of him pretending he was a Jedi Knight battling with his lightsaber, it became one of the most viral videos of all time. It also caused him to drop out of school, and his parents to sue the families of the kids who posted the video.”
Ugh. There’s that ‘S’ word again. (Have I told you I HATE the ‘S’ word? Loathe it.)
Nevertheless, I’m going to delve a bit further into the legal nuances of all this and try to get some experts from various arenas to weigh in. (Electronic Frontier Foundation, internet safety, Center for Digital Democracy’s Jeff Chester on data collection/search, youth, etc.)
After all, media, marketing, and kids’ privacy issues are being squawked about in surround-sound from most every quadrant lately.
According to PC Magazine, the U.S. has one of the weakest privacy protection schemes in the developed world. The European Union, Canada, and Japan all trump us in terms of privacy. “The U.S. is at the bottom of the heap,” says Beth Givens, director of the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse in San Diego. “We’re a patchwork of laws with gaping holes.”
It goes on to say “while protections for private information lag, the technologies that can collect and sift through this data are getting more effective and cost-efficient.”
Hmn. And that’s just data collection (aggregation and analysis stuff) it doesn’t even factor in the media technology aspects.
Lee Tien, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) was quoted in the piece saying, “There’s something weird and creepy that these systems can build a better biography of me than I could myself.”
Yep. There’s also something weird and creepy about kids having their identity and self-image hijacked by errant photos on a viral spree…
There are choices about turning the media volume up or down...
If you opt for press coverage to have your story heard, no matter what that story may be…a selection has been made.
You really need to always use a proxy.
heres a great one. http://www.mysecureisp.com
Not sure how a proxy would help this situation, but it’s interesting to consider security filters and ISP issues overall in a bigger context in terms of tracing kids’ photo postings back to the site of origin. Hmn.