Slashdot stories can be listened to in audio form via an RSS feed, as read by our own robotic overlord.

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
United Kingdom Censorship Your Rights Online

Primary School Girl Told To Stop Photographing and Blogging School Meals 472

Posted by Soulskill
from the food-for-thought dept.
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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Primary School Girl Told To Stop Photographing and Blogging School Meals

Comments Filter:
  • U turn (Score:5, Informative)

    by shortscruffydave (638529) on Friday June 15, 2012 @07:53AM (#40333875)
    Just heard an interview with the council on BBC Radio 4, and it sounds like they've reversed the decision.
    • Re:U turn (Score:5, Insightful)

      by tsa (15680) on Friday June 15, 2012 @07:58AM (#40333933) Homepage

      That's good news. I wondered why they told this girl to stop in the first place because the food she photographed actually looks both healthy and tasty, so what was the problem?

      • Re:U turn (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 15, 2012 @08:04AM (#40333991)
        Sorry, you think this [bbcimg.co.uk] looks healthy and tasty? Uh huh...
        • Re:U turn (Score:5, Funny)

          by AngryDeuce (2205124) on Friday June 15, 2012 @08:25AM (#40334189)
          They get fucking popsicles in the UK?! Christ, even way back when I was in school, decades ago, the best we could hope for was "nature's candy", raisins, which nobody ever, ever ate, and instead lobbed at each other across the lunch room.
          • Re:U turn (Score:5, Funny)

            by PopeRatzo (965947) on Friday June 15, 2012 @08:58AM (#40334467) Homepage Journal

            They get fucking popsicles in the UK?! Christ, even way back when I was in school, decades ago, the best we could hope for was "nature's candy", raisins

            You got raisins? When I was in school, "nature's candy" meant moose droppings. They'd just give us a dull knife and tell us to go out and kill something for lunch. And if you weren't fast enough to catch a squirrel or a vole, you starved to death. Once there was this kid who twisted his leg trying to catch a rabbit and we ended up tearing him to bits and eating him.

            I'm telling you, we had it tough back in those days.

          • Re:U turn (Score:5, Interesting)

            by CastrTroy (595695) on Friday June 15, 2012 @09:17AM (#40334653) Homepage
            I live in Ontario, so all this seems weird to me. We don't have school lunches in grade schools. Parents pack a lunch for the kids. I've always thought it was odd that kids got cafeteria meals in grade school. Even in highschool, we had a cafeteria, but still most kids brought their own lunch anyway. Most people's lunches consisted of a sandwich, some fruit, a juice box, and many of us even had some kind of snack like fruit roll-ups (always hated these) or something like a twinkie. Still it seemed like we were much better fed than the fries burgers and pizza that kids get in their cafeteria lunches. Now that my kids are at school, they still bring in their own lunches, but the school frowns upon bringing things like twinkies. Although to tell the truth, most granola bars aren't much healthier anyway. It seems counter productive to have the schools serve lunches if they aren't going to be healthy. Let the parents decide what the kids are going to eat. It only takes 5 minutes to make a lunch for your kids in the morning, and by the time they are 8, they can do it themselves.
            • Re:U turn (Score:5, Insightful)

              by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 15, 2012 @09:26AM (#40334749)

              Congratulations on growing up middle class. Many kids, especially inner city kids, don't have responsible parents to pack their lunch for them, let alone the money to buy twinkies or fruit-roll-ups. Many schools in the US also serve breakfast, and many kids qualify to receive both for free.

              • Re:U turn (Score:5, Informative)

                by mekkab (133181) on Friday June 15, 2012 @09:48AM (#40334931) Homepage Journal
                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 (Score:4, Informative)

                by dubbreak (623656) on Friday June 15, 2012 @10:58AM (#40335823)

                Congratulations on growing up middle class. Many kids, especially inner city kids, don't have responsible parents to pack their lunch for them, let alone the money to buy twinkies or fruit-roll-ups. Many schools in the US also serve breakfast, and many kids qualify to receive both for free.

                Exactly. I spent most of my childhood in Canada (capital of BC) where there weren't any hot or prepared lunches supplied by the school. Then we moved to the US (Montana) where they had a hot lunch program. Lunches were subsidized or free for some people (depending on income level). Unfortunately they got different colored punch cards, so it was doubly easy to pick out the "poor kids" (i.e. lower income families). I ended up eating the prepared lunches as it was easier, helped me fit in as a "foreigner" (almost everyone ate the lunches) and even at full price it was quite affordable (possibly cheaper than making your own lunches).

                The program was definitely needed where I lived in Montana otherwise there are plenty of kids that would have gone hungry. I was only a kid, but I don't think it would have been needed in the neighbourhood I grew up in Canada. I don't remember anyone not having a lunch (and as kids anything that makes someone stand out is noticed quickly). It appears now schools that have a lunch program are either private schools or in poorer areas (so it's either a feature of the elite or a support system). Apparently the middle class must fend for themselves.

            • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

              by q-the-impaler (708563)

              Did you hear that they confiscated a child's turkey sandwich in the U.S. because the state inspector deemed it unhealthy? Then they gave her chicken nuggets. Freedom is dead.

              http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/15/school-lunch-guidelines-p_n_1278803.html [huffingtonpost.com]

              • Re:U turn (Score:5, Informative)

                by Electrawn (321224) <electrawn.yahoo@com> on Friday June 15, 2012 @10:32AM (#40335529) Homepage

                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 [carolinajournal.com] for the real deal.

              • Re:U turn (Score:5, Informative)

                by canajin56 (660655) on Friday June 15, 2012 @10:34AM (#40335549)
                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.
            • Re:U turn (Score:5, Interesting)

              by AngryDeuce (2205124) on Friday June 15, 2012 @09:36AM (#40334821)

              I've always thought it was odd that kids got cafeteria meals in grade school.

              It obviously depends a lot on where you live and go to school. I grew up in one of the poorer areas of Philadelphia and the vast majority of the kids I went to school with were latchkey kids in single-parent households (many of whom had younger siblings to care for when they got home, myself included, even in grade school), and I'm betting many of them ate even worse at home, as horrifying as that thought is to me.

              I was in the reduced lunch program so my cafeteria meal only cost my mother $0.40 a day each for me and my younger brother, which even brown-bagging it couldn't really compete with cost-wise...

              Later, when I was in high school (by that point my mother had married my stepfather who was in the U.S. Army and we were stationed in GA) the lunches were much higher quality than the Philly ones (but my God in heaven did they love their fucking chicken-fried steak, that was served at least once a week, if not more), but the rules on what you could bring were much, much more restrictive. So help you if they caught you drinking a can of soda, even the juices that come in cans like soda would be confiscated. They'd take candy from you if they caught you eating it, which was doubly ridiculous when you consider the fact that they sold candy at the fucking school store. You had to take it directly to your locker after purchase and leave it there or else they would take it. This is high school students we're talking about here, mind you, 18-year-old's getting hassled over Now-and-Laters, it was unreal.

              • Re:U turn (Score:4, Informative)

                by X86Daddy (446356) on Friday June 15, 2012 @10:38AM (#40335585) Journal

                Oh yeah... I attended a GA high school (obedience school) and was really impressed with what they emphasized. The most important geometry to know was skirt length to knee distance, etc...

            • Re:U turn (Score:5, Insightful)

              by AlecC (512609) <aleccawley@gmail.com> on Friday June 15, 2012 @10:00AM (#40335053)

              School lunches are a surprisingly powerful tool against malnourished kids in deprived areas. Getting a decent meal into deprived children is both good for their general health and for their ability to absorb the education the school is offering. Therefore it is a policy aim that all schools be able to offer a quality meal to any deprived children in the area (since deprivation occurs in wealthy areas as well as poor). In fact, the percentage of children entitled to such meals for free is used as a metric of the school's intake, those with a higher level of free lunches being assumed to have a less well supported intake. Given that such a meal must be offered to those entitled to it free, it makes economic sense to offer it to all children. It doesn't stop children bringing their own lunches to school as you describe, and many do. In my experience in comfortably off areas, about half of all children bring their own lunches and half have school lunches.

          • by Xest (935314)

            To be fair I never got them at school, but please don't tell Jamie Oliver or he'll shit bricks and give the whole nation a lecture again on how it's disgusting that we dare to let children have a choice of what to eat or allow parents to consider letting them eat anything other than Jamie's menu.

            All whilst he continues to become even more of a fatso himself, proving the point that it's actually got fuck all to do with whether you eat chips (fries for non-British) now and again or not, because Jamie gets Jam

        • I see a recognizable vegatable on the plate. Given that, it is more healthy than anything I ever saw in my cafeteria in the good ole US...
        • Sorry, you think this [bbcimg.co.uk] looks healthy and tasty? Uh huh...

          It appears to represent a reasonable (for a primary school child) amount of all four food groups, and even has a tasty low calorie Popsicle desert to finish it off. It may not be catered by outback steakhouse but looks like a good lunch to me.

        • by cffrost (885375)

          Sorry, you think this [bbcimg.co.uk] looks healthy and tasty? Uh huh...

          Firstly, that sorry-looking excuse for a cheeseburger is an insult to human dignity. Poor kid's gonna need that stiff upper lip to bite into that son of a bitch as-is. If the time, effort, and expense is going to be put forth to make cheeseburgers, you put some ketchup, lettuce and onion on there at a bare minimum in order to normalize the flavor and provide a texture conducive to it being eaten, especially when the burgers are deployed on those nasty little miscible, hygroscopic buns, as opposed to proper

      • Re:U turn (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Darkness404 (1287218) on Friday June 15, 2012 @08:05AM (#40334001)
        Exactly. I mean how is it so terrible that the cooks "fear for their job" of course they should fear for their job! Everyone "fears for their job" if they don't do well at their job. Perhaps incompetent IT guys should call up Oracle and tell them never to post any bug reports and sue any security blogs that post bug reports and security flaws, after all, if they installed an insecure program on a critical computer that can be exploited they'd fear for their job.

        More transparency is always a good thing.
        • Re:U turn (Score:5, Informative)

          by AngryDeuce (2205124) on Friday June 15, 2012 @08:37AM (#40334297)

          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.

          • by DrXym (126579)
            I expect the school or the local council contracts the catering service and it's up to them to cook and serve food to the budget and nutritional standards required by their contract. It probably does mean they serve up crap and the crap is prepared by low skilled, low paid workers who are less interested in the quality of the food, as much as they are about their jobs. I'm pretty certain they could buy fresh ingredients and serve a far higher standard of food with the same budget but it's a question of the
        • Re:U turn (Score:5, Insightful)

          by 140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) on Friday June 15, 2012 @08:40AM (#40334327) Journal
          Often the actual "staff" in the cafeteria have no control over how much money gets allocated to them or the mandates being forced on them like "use less empty calories and have more wholesome foods" or "encourage kids to develop healthy eating habits". In these days of budget cuts, I would not blame the kitchen staff alone for poor fare in school cafeteria.
      • Re:U turn (Score:5, Interesting)

        by TarpaKungs (466496) on Friday June 15, 2012 @08:19AM (#40334121) Homepage
        Some of it looks OK. Some of it looks utterly dire, even compared to what I was being forced to eat 35 years ago! It's not a patch on what my local school serves my kids (I've eaten 3 meals with them, paid for I should add!) and down in East Sussex, £2 consistently buys a good healthy and tasty meal. I was so impressed I actually emailed the catering company's Regional Manager (Chartwells who are contracted to provide our school dinners) and East Sussex CC (school meals division) and said I thought it was an apt time to praise there efforts - the email was received with some excitement judging by the reply I just got back :) It's very easy to criticise, sometimes the opportunity to praise is overlooked. Back on topic - full marks to Martha aka VEG - trended on Twitter worldwide today, 1000+ comments on the BBC News story, front page on BBC News and Independent news (web editions). And as someone said, it looks like Argyll and Bute Council have reversed their decision - probably because her MSP (Member of Scottish Parliament) who also happens to be the Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning told them to! This sort of story warms my heart - thanks to the Internet, a minor coverup of a small time incident[1] that would have never made it past the local paper now becomes a national and international story. [1] This is a fairly minor event in the grand scheme of things, but is rather symptomatic of the "brush under the carpet" attitude of the authorities in the UK - hopefully this particular event will make other authorities sit up and listen.
      • Re:U turn (Score:4, Informative)

        by xaxa (988988) on Friday June 15, 2012 @08:22AM (#40334145)

        That's good news. I wondered why they told this girl to stop in the first place because the food she photographed actually looks both healthy and tasty, so what was the problem?

        It's variable. Scroll through the May page from the bottom: http://neverseconds.blogspot.co.uk/2012_05_01_archive.html [blogspot.co.uk] -- some is fine, some is pretty bad.

        The council's response in the BBC article claims that there are often better options available. However, that a child can choose an awful option suggests there is still a problem (at least, it is if you think the school should only provide healthy food).

      • Re:U turn (Score:5, Interesting)

        by jythie (914043) on Friday June 15, 2012 @08:35AM (#40334281)
        It was probably less about the actual content being shared, and more about the lack of editorial control they had over it. For better or worse, knowing everything you do is going to be posted for the public to see has a bit of a 'looking over your shoulder' effect on people since you never know what might go wrong, what could be taken out of context, or what could haunt you if people are unsympathetic to the tradeoffs involved in whatever it is you do.
        • Re:U turn (Score:5, Insightful)

          by hoggoth (414195) on Friday June 15, 2012 @09:18AM (#40334665) Journal

          Yeah, the British authorities shouldn't be forced to work with a "looking over your shoulder" effect on them. That situation is very stressful and will make you paranoid. I'm glad the British authorities understand the awful stress of constantly being monitored and surveilled.

          • by mekkab (133181)
            ahhhh, I see we have Irony for lunch. /it tastes kind of like goldie or bronzy, except it's made out of iron.
      • by milkmage (795746)

        blame the press

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

        But we all must also accept that there is absolutely no place for the type of inaccurate and abusive attack on our catering and dining hall staff, such as we saw in one newspaper yesterday which considerably inflamed the situation. That, of course, was not the fault of the blog, but of the paper.

    • It's incredible they even end there. I can't imagine a local councilmen getting re-elected after deciding that an incompetent cook's job is more important than children's nutrition.

      Congrats on a relevant first post!

      • incompetent or poor ingredients / equipment / time tables.

        Maybe they are useing poor ingredients with under sized equipment with a time table does not let them put out grade A food.

    • Re:U turn (Score:5, Informative)

      by tbird81 (946205) on Friday June 15, 2012 @08:16AM (#40334095)

      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 [argyll-bute.gov.uk]

  • all changed now (Score:4, Informative)

    by SkunkPussy (85271) on Friday June 15, 2012 @07:53AM (#40333879) Journal

    Apparently the Chief of the council was on radio 4 just now and he has reverted the ban live on air. It remains to be seen if this filters down correctly!

  • by gagol (583737) on Friday June 15, 2012 @07:53AM (#40333883)
    Is valid at all ages... how is that different from resto clitique?
    • by gagol (583737)
      I did not got the news about reverse decision, still how can things like that happens?

      The pupil had a creative project involving writing and the school serioulsy decided to try and stop it. In my days it would have been highly applauded!

      • Re:Free speech (Score:5, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 15, 2012 @08:06AM (#40334009)

        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.

    • by Rogerborg (306625) on Friday June 15, 2012 @08:09AM (#40334041) Homepage
      There is a limit to free speech though. And apparently that bar has been lowered to shouting "Eww!" in a crowded cafeteria.
    • Re:Free speech (Score:5, Informative)

      by AngryDeuce (2205124) on Friday June 15, 2012 @08:20AM (#40334127)

      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 [wikipedia.org] 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 [wikipedia.org] 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 [mashable.com] 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 [telegraph.co.uk].

      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.

      • Re:Free speech (Score:4, Informative)

        by xaxa (988988) on Friday June 15, 2012 @08:38AM (#40334303)

        The Human Rights Act applies to everyone (not just adults, not just British people, not just in British territory) and includes the right to Freedom of Expression.

        There are also extra Children's human rights http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/parents/parentsrights/dg_4003313 [direct.gov.uk]

        from 15 January 1992, when the treaty came into force, every child in the UK has been entitled to over 40 specific rights. These include:
        * the right to have their views respected, and to have their best interests considered at all times

      • Re:Free speech (Score:5, Insightful)

        by slimjim8094 (941042) <slashdot3@@@justconnected...net> on Friday June 15, 2012 @08:53AM (#40334425)

        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.

        C'mon dude, you made a lot of good points, why did you have to spoil it with outrageous hyperbole? It's one of the most obvious rules of trying to prove a point - people judge your argument as a whole, so if you throw in a crapton of obvious nonsense, people don't take the good parts seriously.

      • by MobyDisk (75490)

        I had never heard of this case so I became outraged, and read up on it. You posted that "the students were released from school early" which is not true. They were not released from school at all. Instead, the students were escorted across the street, as part of a school event, including supervision by teachers. That's a huge difference. You can walk across the street and be free of school rules. But you can't go on a school field trip, with school teachers, and expect not to follow school rules.

  • by cmdr_klarg (629569) on Friday June 15, 2012 @07:53AM (#40333885)

    The more you try to hide something, the more attention it will attract.

  • summary error... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 15, 2012 @07:57AM (#40333925)

    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.

  • did the 3rd party catering / food service push for this??

    fear for their jobs may put at that or they are just poorly funded and take the heat for poor food that they don't have a lot of control over.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by wvmarle (1070040)

      OK too lazy to look up that blog, but if the meal providers are afraid of their jobs, then I'd say that implies they know their food is of poor quality.

      All they have to do is make their food decent. That is: reasonably healthy and balanced, reasonably fresh, and reasonably tasty. No need for five-star dinner quality, it's school dinners, but that also means you shouldn't serve them crap.

      • All they have to do is make their food decent. That is: reasonably healthy and balanced, reasonably fresh, and reasonably tasty. No need for five-star dinner quality, it's school dinners, but that also means you shouldn't serve them crap.

        On this topic: the girl and her dad inquired the school about the type of chicken and sausages they serve, and apparently they are "safe to keep for up to three years". That says it about the quality of the food for me.

        • by Belial6 (794905)
          This is a new thing on trying to imply food is bad for you, or not good quality. It is simply untrue. We have become extremely spoiled in thinking that good food only lasts a few days. Having a ready supply of food from the grocery store who imports fresh food from all over the planet will do that to us.

          Before taking the "It doesn't spoil in 3 days!" as an indicator of quality, you need to first look at what kind of food it is. Sausage is not a specific food, it is a class of foods. No doubt some ty
  • by Joe_Dragon (2206452) on Friday June 15, 2012 @07:59AM (#40333941)

    there is very little meat in these gym mats

  • Bad publicity? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Darkness404 (1287218) on Friday June 15, 2012 @08:01AM (#40333959)
    To be honest, all the British (and the foreign food) all looked fairly decent. Really the only terrible looking food was the "foreign" (being as she is from the UK) US meals. If anything it is a good showcase of what school lunches are from around the world and honestly I'd say it puts the British in more favorable light than the US.

    The public have a fundamental right to see what their tax dollars (or pounds in this case) are doing, whether that is detailed information about Afghanistan and Iraq or school lunches.
  • Yum (Score:5, Informative)

    by zenyu (248067) on Friday June 15, 2012 @08:08AM (#40334035)

    The food she photographed looks pretty amazing compared with what I recall eating in primary school.

  • NeverSeconds (Score:5, Interesting)

    by eternaldoctorwho (2563923) on Friday June 15, 2012 @08:12AM (#40334067)

    I think it's awesome she named her blog "NeverSeconds". I always remember being left hungry in middle/high school by the paltry lunches we got, to the point where I started bringing in my own every day. The worst was pizza day - you got the equivalent of one piece of pizza, a drink, and a "salad" (actually a couple pieces of lettuce and some shredded carrot). That was it. I guess it all worked out, because after the long lines, including many line-cutters, you only got about 10 minutes to eat anyhow.

    My point is: school lunches suck! I fully support this girl in her efforts.

  • by Zelos (1050172) on Friday June 15, 2012 @09:07AM (#40334547)

    You can actually watch the Streisand effect happening in real time as the hit counter at the bottom of her page shoots up. Heading for 3 million pretty quickly :-)

  • by wcrowe (94389) on Friday June 15, 2012 @09:13AM (#40334599)

    I know what would have happened at my school after such a ban. EVERY kid would start taking pictures of their meals and posting them.

    I wish someone would explain to me why the UK is becoming so totalitarian these days.

  • by loupgarou21 (597877) on Friday June 15, 2012 @09:17AM (#40334649)

    I find it refreshing that she's given actual, metal utensils, including a knife.

    I'm 30 now, so you can use that for a frame of reference. Back in elementary school, we were also given metal utensils, including knives. somewhere around middle school/high school (I think it was when I was entering high school), Minnesota passed a zero tolerance knife policy for the grade schools. Now, even a butter knife would get you immediately expelled from school, the cafeteria switched to plastic-ware and no longer had even plastic knives.

    I'm glad to see that not everyone is insane.

  • The charity (Score:5, Interesting)

    by nozzo (851371) on Friday June 15, 2012 @09:19AM (#40334679) Homepage
    The best bit about all this is that Martha has raised around 4 times her £7,000 target for the charity she supports. The proudest 9-year-old ever when she comes home from school and finds out!

Dennis Ritchie is twice as bright as Steve Jobs, and only half wrong. -- Jim Gettys

Working...