Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Education Social Networks

First-Known TikTok Mob Attack Led By Middle Schoolers Tormenting Teachers (arstechnica.com) 135

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: A bunch of eighth graders in a "wealthy Philadelphia suburb" recently targeted teachers with an extreme online harassment campaign that The New York Times reported was "the first known group TikTok attack of its kind by middle schoolers on their teachers in the United States." According to The Times, the Great Valley Middle School students created at least 22 fake accounts impersonating about 20 teachers in offensive ways. The fake accounts portrayed long-time, dedicated teachers sharing "pedophilia innuendo, racist memes," and homophobic posts, as well as posts fabricating "sexual hookups among teachers."

The Pennsylvania middle school's principal, Edward Souders, told parents in an email that the number of students creating the fake accounts was likely "small," but that hundreds of students piled on, leaving comments and following the fake accounts. Other students responsibly rushed to report the misconduct, though, Souders said. "I applaud the vast number of our students who have had the courage to come forward and report this behavior," Souders said, urging parents to "please take the time to engage your child in a conversation about the responsible use of social media and encourage them to report any instances of online impersonation or cyberbullying." Some students claimed that the group attack was a joke that went too far. Certain accounts impersonating teachers made benign posts, The Times reported, but other accounts risked harming respected teachers' reputations. When creating fake accounts, students sometimes used family photos that teachers had brought into their classrooms or scoured the Internet for photos shared online.

Following The Times' reporting, the superintendent of the Great Valley School District (GVSD), Daniel Goffredo, posted a message to the community describing the impact on teachers as "profound." One teacher told The Times that she felt "kicked in the stomach" by the students' "savage" behavior, while another accused students of slander and character assassination. Both were portrayed in fake posts with pedophilia innuendo. "I implore you also to use the summer to have conversations with your children about the responsible use of technology, especially social media," Goffredo said. "What seemingly feels like a joke has deep and long-lasting impacts, not just for the targeted person but for the students themselves. Our best defense is a collaborative one." Goffredo confirmed that the school district had explored legal responses to the group attack. But ultimately the district found that they were "limited" because "courts generally protect students' rights to off-campus free speech, including parodying or disparaging educators online -- unless the students' posts threaten others or disrupt school," The Times reported. Instead, the middle school "briefly suspended several students," teachers told The Times, and held an eighth-grade assembly raising awareness of harms of cyberbullying, inviting parents to join.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

First-Known TikTok Mob Attack Led By Middle Schoolers Tormenting Teachers

Comments Filter:
  • by bettodavis ( 1782302 ) on Monday July 08, 2024 @04:41PM (#64610977)
    Of how kids back in the day treated teachers. Give them nicknames, doing offensive jokes about them and laughing behind their backs.

    The only difference is that they know now, by watching the evidence splattered in tiktok.

    Which I think is actually bad and should be be banned for kids usage.
    • by sjames ( 1099 )

      There is a difference. Practically nobody tried to frame the teachers back then. Of course, the kids don't get all the blame. Our long running moral panic about pedophilia and willingness to shoot first try later greatly amplifies the potential damage.

    • > Give them nicknames, doing offensive jokes about them and laughing behind their backs.

      Thanks mild childish stuff, kids these days are much more sophisticated in how they attack teachers. Some have had life changing injuries.

  • by wakeboarder ( 2695839 ) on Monday July 08, 2024 @04:45PM (#64610993)
    You would face stiff legal action.
    • The science behind risky behavior in teens is well documented. Taking risks (and thus making some bad decisions) is part of growing up, almost as if we are designed to find our limits.

      • But you never find your limits if society doesn't periodically give you a beating for your behavior.

        • > But you never find your limits if society doesn't periodically give you a beating for your behavior.

          Thats a brain dead assumption.

          It only works if you're one of the troublesome kids who did bad things.

          Most kids simply grow up and gain maturity by observing what not to do, from the bad ones as well as emulating role models.

          Social media screws with the role model side of things which is why most of the normal kids, i.e the ones who dont think it's ok to mug a pensioner for some cash for a pack of ciggies

          • The science of risky behavior also suggests that there's a feedback mechanism. When risky behavior meant fucking with a lion, the feedback mechanism was very effective. When the feedback mechanism is a stern talking to by the teacher and parent, not so much.

            Your example of kids who act right because they are not pieces of shit is a straw man. We're not talking about them. We're talking about the degenerates.

    • If you do this as a child, your parent receives that legal action. Children are like walking liability extensions of their parents.

  • by Joe_Dragon ( 2206452 ) on Monday July 08, 2024 @05:02PM (#64611047)

    send them to Bel Air!

  • I am confused how they shared such an elaborate plan in just a few seconds. Did they lose attention while watching it?

  • Middle school (Score:5, Informative)

    by stabiesoft ( 733417 ) on Monday July 08, 2024 @05:13PM (#64611093) Homepage
    Hmm, I recall a teacher in middle school who made the toughest kid in the school come back in tears from a paddling. Funny, the kid was more respectful after. There should be serious repercussions to these kids if they defamed the teachers in a public forum. Serious. From scrubbing the floors to detention to possible expulsion all on their permanent record, so maybe no USC for them. There should also be a serious financial cost to the parents if there was real defamation. Costly. Like price of a nice S series Benz or Range Rover for the teacher. Maybe the parents then might not be able to afford that Benz for the kids 16th birthday or that summer in Europe this year.
    • > I recall a teacher in middle school who made the toughest kid in the school come back in tears from a paddling.

      It took me about 30 seconds to realise you were not talking about a kid being shouted at by a teacher for not playing nice in the paddling pool.

    • One of my earliest and most traumatic memories from my young childhood is being punished with a slipper by my teacher. She took me into the empty hall next to the classroom for this.

      The teacher was also my mother!

  • by Bruce66423 ( 1678196 ) on Monday July 08, 2024 @05:14PM (#64611095)

    On the whole the evidence is overwhelmingly against. Let's follow the science, people.

  • Make fake accounts for kids, with them making derisive comments about their friends and their love for unfashionable clothing brands

  • Solution (Score:5, Interesting)

    by The Cat ( 19816 ) on Monday July 08, 2024 @06:18PM (#64611223)

    Sounds like a shortage of dads to me.

    Dad comes home, hears about the problem, yanks the phone out of the kid's hands, throws it over the house and watches it shatter in the driveway.

    "If you ever post about your teacher online again the sun will go out."

    The memory of the look on dad's face at that moment will solve the problem permanently.

    • Re:Solution (Score:4, Insightful)

      by quantaman ( 517394 ) on Monday July 08, 2024 @10:29PM (#64611557)

      Sounds like a shortage of dads to me.

      Dad comes home, hears about the problem, yanks the phone out of the kid's hands, throws it over the house and watches it shatter in the driveway.

      "If you ever post about your teacher online again the sun will go out."

      The memory of the look on dad's face at that moment will solve the problem permanently.

      That sounds like child abuse.

      It's not teaching the kid not to cyberbully, it's teaching the kid that problems can be solved with violence and intimidation (ie. bullying).

      • Re:Solution (Score:4, Funny)

        by The Cat ( 19816 ) on Tuesday July 09, 2024 @12:14AM (#64611655)

        It's not teaching the kid not to cyberbully, it's teaching the kid that problems can be solved with violence and intimidation (ie. bullying).

        This is the speech. Learn it well.

        "Hi. I'm your father. I am one of five people on this Earth important enough that God Himself mentioned me by name in humanity's general regulations.

        I have orders to keep you alive, and I'm going to carry out those orders whether you like it or not. The next time you run in the street, the last thing you will see before I yank you out of your socks is a fast-moving shadow.

        Oh sure, I might go to jail for a long time, but at least I won't be 'the dad who was too much of a pussy to keep their kid from being run over by a paint truck.'

        Understand? Good. Dismissed."

        • First, the one situation is nothing like the other. It sounds like you're working through some childhood trauma publicly here, which is OK (I am willing to support you going through it) but it doesn't speak to what we're talking about at all.

          Second, instead of yanking your kid by the arm to get them out of the street, how about walking with your child and holding their hand and helping them understand through that process that you stay out of the street?

          Third, society can and should help. Anyone else rememb

          • by The Cat ( 19816 )

            t sounds like you're working through some childhood trauma publicly here

            Your passive-aggressive communist bullshit isn't going to work with me, so save it.

            instead of yanking your kid by the arm to get them out of the street, how about walking with your child and holding their hand and helping them understand through that process that you stay out of the street?

            Children do not understand abstract danger. But they do understand when dad is upset. Keeping a child safe requires fathers to substitute the latter for the former.

            When a child does something dangerous, it is the father's duty to make that child so afraid of what their father might do that they never seriously consider doing it again.

            We have many examples of the alternative in society: Children who have no fathers. Those resu

      • Not at all, it teaches the kid that violence generates violence in the opposite direction, and that when you bully, there will always be a bigger bully who will bully you in return. Even as an adult. A visit to the state prison also can help.

        • It is, ultimately, the only way that order is maintained. Used appropriately and legitimately it enables society to work. The only question is when a child discovers this truth and how they respond. Pretending that there is always an alternative merely shows a lack of thought; there was no alternative to the destruction of Berlin in 1945 to exterminate the Nazi regime.

          • by Saffaya ( 702234 )

            There was no alternative to make the former-colonists submit than to put the White House on fire - The english circa 1812.

            See how stupid your line of reasoning is?

            • Good to see there's someone else out there like me who jumps to a conclusion that isn't obvious to the average reader. Want to show your working for that comment please?

          • It is, ultimately, the only way that order is maintained. Used appropriately and legitimately it enables society to work. The only question is when a child discovers this truth and how they respond. Pretending that there is always an alternative merely shows a lack of thought; there was no alternative to the destruction of Berlin in 1945 to exterminate the Nazi regime.

            Used appropriately, I don't think that use was appropriate.

            The state monopoly on violence needs to be based on well defined rules justly executed, that's how it maintains order. Fits of rage and unpredictable violence are precisely the kinds of violence that destroy order instead of creating it.

            • The Nazi regime was never exterminated. In fact, tons of them - including many high-ranking officials - merely took off the Nazi uniform and continued on with their daily lives as if nothing had ever happened and faced no real punishment or consequences for the war or the slaughter of millions. Nazism (or at least its ideas) are still around, perhaps stronger than ever.

              You can't bomb an ideology out of people.
        • Not at all, it teaches the kid that violence generates violence in the opposite direction, and that when you bully, there will always be a bigger bully who will bully you in return. Even as an adult. A visit to the state prison also can help.

          Well now I understand where all those abusive cops and bosses came from.

          In fact...

          Well there ya go [wikipedia.org]. I just looked that up on a hunch and a bunch of abuse in the childhood (including potentially from the father).

      • problems can be solved with violence and intimidation

        Is this not how the law is enforced?

      • Sounds like a shortage of dads to me.

        Dad comes home, hears about the problem, yanks the phone out of the kid's hands, throws it over the house and watches it shatter in the driveway.

        "If you ever post about your teacher online again the sun will go out."

        The memory of the look on dad's face at that moment will solve the problem permanently.

        That sounds like child abuse.

        It's not teaching the kid not to cyberbully, it's teaching the kid that problems can be solved with violence and intimidation (ie. bullying).

        Wrong. It’s teaching a phone junkie that actions have consequences.. And I agree 110% with destroying a phone to make that point. I’d even do it slowly and make the child do it.

        Child “abuse”?? I have no fucking idea how you were labeled insightful here. Seriously.

        • Sounds like a shortage of dads to me.

          Dad comes home, hears about the problem, yanks the phone out of the kid's hands, throws it over the house and watches it shatter in the driveway.

          "If you ever post about your teacher online again the sun will go out."

          The memory of the look on dad's face at that moment will solve the problem permanently.

          That sounds like child abuse.

          It's not teaching the kid not to cyberbully, it's teaching the kid that problems can be solved with violence and intimidation (ie. bullying).

          Wrong. It’s teaching a phone junkie that actions have consequences.. And I agree 110% with destroying a phone to make that point. I’d even do it slowly and make the child do it.

          Child “abuse”?? I have no fucking idea how you were labeled insightful here. Seriously.

          Taking the phone away and selling it is consequences. That's not what the described punishment was about.

          Read it again "yank", "throw", and "shatter", followed by a vague existential threat. Imagine being the child in that scenario with the father acting with rage and unpredictable violence, it would be terrifying.

          The goal there is not taking away the phone, it's a show of power and violence which the explicit goal of traumatizing the child. In other words, abuse.

    • Why should low-IQ teachers that supports/forces you to study bad curriculums and are members of unions who think the purpose of schools is to give teachers work, not to provide children with an education be protected against satire?

      You really need to see The people vs Larry Flynt again, especially the scene in the court about satire. I am surprised to meet snowflaky attitude on Slashdot of all places.

  • by Frobnicator ( 565869 ) on Monday July 08, 2024 @06:19PM (#64611225) Journal

    Yeah, this is a failure of the lawyers. LOTS of laws were being broken.

    While the speech is covered under the first amendment generally, the behavior is covered under the state's hazing law, the state cyber-bullying law, the state's harassment law, the state's stalking laws, and the state's harassment laws.

    There is also civil law. The teachers and district don't need criminal charges in place to go for civil charges, and since it has a much lower legal standard of "more likely than not" they've got a higher chance of success. It's true the kids wouldn't go to jail, but they could face enormous fines for the damages they inflicted. The school district and the teachers all should be filing civil lawsuits against the students and the parents/guardians.

    The first amendment isn't a defense against harassment or stalking, and it sounds like they did both and plenty more.

    • Yeah, this is a failure of the lawyers. LOTS of laws were being broken.

      While the speech is covered under the first amendment generally, the behavior is covered under the state's hazing law, the state cyber-bullying law, the state's harassment law, the state's stalking laws, and the state's harassment laws.

      There is also civil law. The teachers and district don't need criminal charges in place to go for civil charges, and since it has a much lower legal standard of "more likely than not" they've got a higher chance of success. It's true the kids wouldn't go to jail, but they could face enormous fines for the damages they inflicted. The school district and the teachers all should be filing civil lawsuits against the students and the parents/guardians.

      The first amendment isn't a defense against harassment or stalking, and it sounds like they did both and plenty more.

      That sounds like a failure of common sense.

      You think middle school students have sufficient understanding of the harm they were committing to be subject to criminal penalties or even "enormous fines"?

      They're kids, they thought it was a joke, a mean joke that could get them in trouble, but not a joke that could cause significant emotional trauma and career ruining reputational damage to the victims.

      In this case I think the punishment was appropriate for the perpetrators, suspension and lessons to ensure the

      • One of the roles of punishment is to deter the wider population from repeating the behaviour. The tap on the wrist - not even a slap - of the punishment you are proposing is not sufficient to achieve meaningful deterrence.

        Of course ultimately the responsibility here is with the parents who have bought up evil little creatures without any moral sense. Whilst the parents may be able to claim that they didn't know what little Johnny was doing online / bullying in the playground / sexually harassing other stude

      • You think middle school students have sufficient understanding of the harm they were committing to be subject to criminal penalties or even "enormous fines"?

        No, and I don't think their parents do either, but paying those enormous fines and being subjected to criminal penalties for the actions of their children might teach them, and it's their job to teach their kids so making them aware is the first step.

        It's not the school's responsibility to teach your kids not to be little assholes. It's yours.

        In this case I think the punishment was appropriate for the perpetrators, suspension and lessons to ensure the student population understood the harms of what they were doing.

        Agreed, but the parents are the actual cause and I hate to see them get off without consequences.

        • Not little assholes, but future US presidents. Parents look up to and praise people like their children mimic... Democracy at work-- they've found somebody who actually represents them who is just like them.

      • The "they are just kids being kids" argument is alright when they are 5 or 6 years old, middle schoolers should know better.

        Also, the punishment should mostly be targeted at making the parents of the little blighters feel the wrath, so that they will be encouraged to give Junior the treatment his behavior has earned.

    • true the kids wouldn't go to jail, but they could face enormous fines for the damages they inflicted. The school district and the teachers all should be filing civil lawsuits against the students and the parents/guardians.

      And if you REALLY want to know what the cost is for those who utterly fail to discipline their children properly is, just ask the tax-paying parent 6 months after the civil lawsuits are settled why they’re pissed about an increase in local taxes to pay for “unbudgeted litigation.”

      No. Our world is in fact not benefitting from throwing more greedy lawyers at it.

  • Expel them (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cascadingstylesheet ( 140919 ) on Monday July 08, 2024 @06:21PM (#64611231) Journal
    Why tolerate this? The 'serious discussion' should be along the lines of "okay son, where the hell are you going to go to school now?"
    • by gtall ( 79522 )

      And Johnny will look up at you can calmly say he does not need to go to school. Your only recourse is then to throw him out of the house at which point you have promised him a youth of delinquency, and he'll certainly grow up into a fine outstanding adult after that, yes?

      There is no silver bullet, every one of the kids is different and lives in different circumstances. You have to find a way to get under his/her skin and change his/her behavior. If you cannot find a way to do this, then you cannot find a wa

    • No training for parents who are usually the real problem!

      We REQUIRE minimal training to drive a car or do much of anything that causes harm to society but the most damage we can do is to pop out disturbed children!

      At least force the parents into training when their children misbehave. Failure to learn results in society protecting itself by relocating the child. Love your child? prove it. Love your lousy parent? prove it.

      Monsters are raised not born.

  • by zawarski ( 1381571 ) on Monday July 08, 2024 @07:20PM (#64611325)
    ⦠millennials also suck at parenting.
  • Need to bring back beating children when they act up. Not for stupid shit like not cleaning your room, but if you put someone else in danger, you should expect corporal punishment.

  • They are everywhere (Score:4, Interesting)

    by dlarge6510 ( 10394451 ) on Tuesday July 09, 2024 @04:17AM (#64611915)

    > the first known group TikTok attack of its kind by middle schoolers on their teachers in the United States

    Late to the party? We've been dealing with unruly cyberbullying and teacher assaulting gangs of little yobs in the UK for years.

    Many schools are finding that the cause is the mental health issues having access to social media via smartphones in school are to blame. So now schools are banning such devices. Kids either have no phone, or a dumbphone. Smartphones are for "outside of school" hours and school provided tech such as laptops/tablets are used instead during lessons when needed.

    Every school that has done this in some form (limiting smartphone usage in school to essentially nothing) confirmed massive improvements.

    Who'd have thunk eh?

    Still, any kids wanting to have a go at the teacher will arrange it using a sneakernet and get 'em at the school gates.

    When I was a kid, you knew who such kids were as when I was in school in the 90's we had much better and stricter teachers who would easily make your life difficult with detentions, getting the parents involved, exclusions etc. The kids who pushed the buttons were the kids who you typically wanted to stay away from, the type who would push you up against the fence should you even look at them when walking past them. I learned to walk looking down at the ground in those days, still largely do even now when I'm 43. I avoid making eye contact passing anyone in the street, you learnt that as a kid. Eye contact was a direct challenge to others, if they don’t know you and you looked, glanced into their eyes for a brief moment they would see that as a chance to have a duel.

    But since then, over only the last 20 years, it's gotten worse. The teachers are more and more either wet blankets who think they need to "nurture" the kids that are bad, totally ignoring the fact that such kids simply pretend to be "on the mend" or just get even worse as they see the teacher as a viable target. Or they are simply unable to dish out any discipline at all. I used to have the wet blanket type of teacher as my year 11 form tutor and trust me, although he was able to shout very well when he really needed to, he was usually so timid and quiet that watching him try and direct the class was a joke. When he did eventually shout he would finally shut most up, the good kids who were just taking advantage. Things changed when I moved into 6th form, keeping him as our form tutor he was much better as we, being 6th form students, were the clever and more educated kids who were much more cerebral and way easier to deal with. Our numbers were also much lower, all the rest of the kids leaving school after year 11, only us few continuing to 12 and 13 before going to college or university. The difference to my classroom experience between year 11 and earlier and 6th form was staggering.

    But then there were some teachers you knew you should NEVER cross, they would deal with you like a P.E teacher would simply because you were chatting when working silently. The bad kids would frequently try them on too and frequently they ended up outside the room, whether they actually went to the headmasters office or no I can’t say, I doubt they had the self-discipline to do that.

    But yep, the kids these days, thanks to smartphones giving 24/7 access to all sorts of dynamic and immediate influence, well I'm glad I never had an interest in teaching from what I’ve been hearing. There is nothing worse than letting a bunch of immature human brains throw immature and primitive ideas, thoughts and emotions at each other IRL, now they can do it with other immature brains in realtime with any kids from any culture across the world. That would make an unholy mix of incompatible cultures and influences, now with deep fakes and A>I, all without any context sent to brains that are actually developing to ingore context or to make it up to fill in the blanks.

    Yeah, what a great idea that all was.

  • This is why we can't have nice things. Middle schoolers have no reason to be on social media anyway, so take it away. It's already happening, actually. Five or ten years from now it'll be normal that you don't get social media until much later, and phones will have to stay in backpacks in middle school, and be left in lock boxes at the side of the room in high school.
  • I'm definitely in two minds on this. Did the schoolkids create fake accounts parodying their teachers and make jokes about them? (yes, calling Mr Oggins a paedophile is a joke, not an accusation). So far, no problem. Were the profiles they made public or private? If public, were they clearly parody accounts or did they attempt to masquerade as actually real accounts of the actual real people? Did they do anything with the accounts, such as send them to the newspapers and try to pass them off as real? Or wer

  • a group of poorly performing middleschool girls accused a teacher of pedophilia and innappropriate touching. as the investigation continued, the girls statements made the front page of news outlets, the investigation finding that they were lying because they were unhappy with their poor grades and had decided to 'ruin the teachers life' was on page 18. Oh, yeah, forgot to mention, with all the hate that the teacher got, he killed himself. So, the girls got what they wanted.
  • Nothing will change and no amount of "talk with your kids over the summer" is going to do anything without material consequences. The worst kids should be considered for expulsion and others should have graduated discipline applied. Eject the kids from whatever extra-curricular stuff they've signed up for, that sort of thing.

    The pain mostly needs to be felt by the parents though, so suspensions and stuff that force the parents to make arrangements for their kids can be pretty effective.

    Also, when was it dec

  • As in teachers quitting in even greater numbers than currently. I guess we're not far away from building a completely feral and vile society.

"There is no statute of limitations on stupidity." -- Randomly produced by a computer program called Markov3.

Working...