In June 2012, Natalie Munroe, a high school English teacher, was fired from Central Bucks High School East after outrage following the discovery and distribution of derogatory comments she made against her students on her blog. In these blog posts, she called students “frightfully dim”, “utterly loathsome”, and “rude, disengaged, lazy whiners” among many other names and insults. Munroe fired back at the high school by filing a suit in the Philadelphia U.S. District Court on the basis that her dismissal violated her first amendment right to free speech. Munroe’s case brought up an interesting debate: should social media have understood boundaries?
While the high school claimed that Ms. Munroe’s dismissal came after years of unsatisfactory work performance, these unsatisfactory reports were only brought up after the blog had made its way around the school and then across the nation. It is also important to point out that Munroe never named the students she was referring to, the school she worked at, or even her own last name. The blog was simply written under the moniker “Natalie M”. She even said in an interview with ABC’s Good Morning America that her posts were never meant for public consumption, but rather just as a creative way to keep in touch with close friends and family. However, in the age of social media, does intention matter? Is privacy on social media a right or are you compromising your privacy for a public platform? And if so are you inviting retribution against your online commentary?
For many teens and young adults who have grown up with social media and the internet, the phrase “it’s on the internet forever” was hammered into our heads. More and more, teens are becoming hyper-aware of what they post and what they do not. They know that schools and even potential employers could be viewing what they post and this could have long-lasting effects. For older generations however, these risks are less known. As stated in The App Generation, “researchers have found evidence that young people’s privacy-protecting behaviors on social networking sites have increased over time such that they are more likely than older adults to engage in these cautionary behaviors” (Gardner and Davis). While the first amendment right of free speech still holds, social media creates a new platform where your words and posts can have real-world consequences. While on one hand social media allows for the easier proliferation of ideas and thoughts, it also creates an accountability for these posts. Nothing online is private and thus everything can have a consequence.
The court ultimately decided that Ms. Munroe’s case was without merit and rejected her lawsuit against the school. Natalie Munroe continues to defend her comments and actions and has even continued blogging now under her full name, perhaps using infamy to her advantage.
Featured image courtesy of CC0 Public Domain
Social Media@ NYUPraha 