‘Degrading’? Anger After Photographer Replaces Kid’s Face With Brown Smiley Face
- Posted on April 6, 2012 at 7:43am by
Jonathon M. Seidl
- Print »
- Email »
You’d think school pictures are pretty non-controversial. Not so for one school in Miami, FL.
An odd school photo has some up in arms after it was discovered the photographer edited it so that the head of one boy was covered with a brown smiley face in the final version. Why? It seems two of the students at Sawgrass Elementary hadn’t signed consent forms, so they had to be removed from the photo. That’s where things get a little odd, explains WPLG-TV:
Claussen [the photographer] said he was able to use the photo editing software Adobe Photoshop to lift one of the kids out, but had explained to them that there was a problem with the second student. He was sitting in the front row, right in the middle.
He showed me the notes he had written down on a white piece of paper as the pair discussed what to do. He said he would have gladly come out there to reshoot the image. Instead there was talk about putting a star over his face and then, he said, the P.T.A. asked him to place a smiley face. [Emphasis added]
People who saw the photo told WPLG it was “degrading” and “offensive,” with one adding it was humiliating.
“The PTA notified photographer after finding out that a child didn’t have a signed media release form from the parent,” an email from the PTA to the news station said. “Broward Schools Photography covered the child’s face using an inappropriate sticker. The PTA disagrees with how the photography company handled it and worked with the photographer to have the picture retaken this Thursday. Immediate action was taken on behalf of the PTA. We love and protect our children.”
It’s unclear why the two students were included in the picture if they had not signed permission slips. Additionally, the boy and his parents could not be found, and there’s doubt about whether he even still attends the school or even saw the photo.
The photographer has been apologetic and is now being allowed to return to the school to retake the picture.
Still, it’s unclear where the anger should be directed: the photographer who apparently followed the orders of the PTA, or the PTA who allegedly gave them but is now upset.
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 679 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 530 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 426 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 373 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 329 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 280 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 288 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 169 Comments- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 148 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 280 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (92)
ContinentalArmy
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 9:46amSounds like a Racial Set Up!! The Photographer just used common sense( a rarity these days) matched the smiley face with the kid’s skin tone, what is the big deal? This Racist B.S. needs to STOP!!!
Report Post »NeoFan
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 10:12amCan you imagine if he had used a white smily face?
Report Post »Gman42
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 10:21amI wonder if the president had two sons, would the other one look like that?
Report Post »delinski
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 10:38amGman, that is hilarious. I wish I had thought of it! Good one!
Report Post »ddbaseball134
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 11:02amDamn you Gman! I can‘t stop laughing about you’re comment. Best ever!
Report Post »TXPilot
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 11:46amIf he had used a more traditional yellow smiley face, I’m sure some Asian group would have been immediately upset……
Report Post »VanceUppercut
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 11:58am@ContinentalArmy
Oh, so I see that you’re all still working that “it’s racist to call someone a racist” angle. Keep it up, it just may work out for you.
Report Post »yougottabekidding
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 12:05pmThe problem is the parents of the smiley face are offended by the body their kids face was placed on.
Report Post »Everyone needs their two minutes of stupidity!
Detroit paperboy
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 12:17pmI think it’s freakin hilarious !!!
Report Post »Jaycen
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 1:16pmThere’s nothing more wishy-washy or douche-baggy than a PTA/PTO.
I have direct experience with an idiotic PTO in Missouri. The PTO used to charter our Cub Scout Pack.
The PTO had to buy insurance for an event, and afterward started discussing the Pack, wondering if their insurrance covered the Pack. Instead of coming to the leadership, they went to a lawyer, who suggested that if they were uncomfortable with the arrangement that they drop the charter.
The fact is, the BSA covers every scout and leader with a $1M policy of PRIMARY insurance. Members of the Chartered Organization (the PTO in this case) are actually covered at $2.5M of primary insurance if they’re hurt at an event.
The PTO refused to discuss it with us, so we showed up at the next meeting, and were told by several parents and teachers (most of whom had boys in the Pack) that they just couldn‘t understand why we couldn’t find another Chartered Organization, but they all still wanted their boys to be in our Pack – In other words, “We don’t want to take any responsibility, but please take responsibility for our children”.
The Pack found another Chartered Org, but my wife and I ended our 10 year relationship with the PTO and took our son to another Pack.
Report Post »Uranium Wedge
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 6:40pmThey could have used a slightly less creepy sticker.
Report Post »bigfatslob
Posted on April 8, 2012 at 3:37pmSave Zimmerman !
Report Post »pavepaws
Posted on April 8, 2012 at 8:10pmGood gravy. Really!!
Report Post »ghostsouls
Posted on April 8, 2012 at 10:34pmLet‘s see can’t use brown, might offend Hispanics, can’t use black, might offend African Americans, can’t use yellow might offend Asians, Can’t use green might offend Italians, can’t use white might offend Caucasians, can’t use red might offend Native Americans, can’t use blue, might offend someone that has Cyanosis, can’t use orange might offend people with tans, and on and on……….
Report Post »TWO BITS
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 9:43amAny adult involved in this “cover-up” should be humiliated. This photograph benefits or flatters no one. One can only hope things run smoother in the classroom.
Report Post »mtcountrygrl
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 4:32pmJust shows the stupidity of our school system. Check the slips BEFORE the picture. If a mistake happens, retake the picture. Geeze
Report Post »Marcia
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 9:25amI don’t think it was degrading OR humiliating. After best efforts are made to contact the parents and the parents still don’t give permission or sign a consent form, his face has to be obscured and he cannot be revealed. His arms are brown so they put a brown smiley face on him. I just don’t see what the issue is.
Report Post »ChiefGeorge
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 10:32amAre not children dipicted in cartoons for children as to their appropriate colors? I mean this is waaay overblown but you have to expect this because we’ve become a culture insistent on color matters instead of character matters. Its all about race these days the Trayvon Martin case aside. We’ve become wholely focused on race because those PC folks are trying desperately to bring the multi-culture together by pointing out racial differences and their contributions to the USA. We then get a whole generation of you got it..racists running around going my people did this, my people did that…I’m proud of my racial heritage blaaa blaaa. White children when I was growing never had such a teaching about their own heritage as to what European country their peeps came from and celebrating all the achievements Whites had made by merely their race and ethnic IDs. Its gotten so bad out there I dare not say a word in public as I would be instantly labeled and processed as a redneck racist before I could even change their minds on this subject. As far as I am concerned, the MSM, schools have done a huge diservice to us all by promoting race. We need to promote humanity and its best achieveable values and not ones based on race and gender.
Report Post »jtwestside
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 9:25amSo black folks are the new Mohammed? No depictions allowed or everyone will be offended and riots will ensue!
Report Post »Joisey
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 9:15amThe Left is looking under every rock around to gin up racial strife and hatred. Welcome to the Obama Re-election Campaign.
Report Post »JustPeachy
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:38amFor crying out loud, the PTA told the photographer to do this and then get upset when he does?!?
And what a thing to be “offended” about.
Some people REALLY need to get a LIFE.
And get the stupid permission slips signed BEFORE the pictures are taken. End of problem even before one begins.
Herman Cain was right: Stupid people are running this country and I will add that they’re found EVERYWHERE! LOL
Common sense, PTA- – common sense. Do others have to hold your hands? Do we need to pack your lunches and wipe your snotty noses? Come on–time to grow up already!
Report Post »ozchambers
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 9:06amNo one should be upset about this. It’s just a little snafu easily fixed, not a news story for crying out loud!
Report Post »Impenitent
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:32amif he didn’t want to hear the complaints of the pta, the photographer should have used an occupy mask…
Report Post »JustPeachy
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:39amThe photographer needs to find better customers!
Report Post »Kerstile
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:32amSomething smells about this story. I call hoax. There are about 10 million things that could have been photo-shopped in. Logos. Artwork. Etc. Etc. Etc.
Report Post »barber2
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:30amWhere are Jesse and Al ? Hey, let’s gather a March Against Brown Smiley Racist Faces. Grab your hoodies…
Report Post »pavepaws
Posted on April 8, 2012 at 8:14pmHow about just using a hoodie?
Report Post »ginger100
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:28amI’m Offended! That everyone else has blurry face
Report Post »burnteye86
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:25amWhat color smiley face would they have used had he been a White Hispanic? or a European Asian? or a Mongolian South African?
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:37amThe traditional smiley face is yellow, but that would be highly offensive to Chinese Americans.
Report Post »VanceUppercut
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 12:00pm“The traditional smiley face is yellow, but that would be highly offensive to Chinese Americans.”
And people with cirrhosis.
Report Post »misteryuck
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:24amWhat is the big deal? Did he use the wrong shade of brown?
Report Post »Grasshopper42
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:18amHome school your children. End of problem.
Report Post »grandmaof5
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:17amBeing a past two term president of the PTA/PTSA in FL, I would never have allowed this to happen! #1, a class photo historically was taken and IF parents wanted to buy it, they did. #2, the PTA should have done a bit of research to find out why this family couldn’t pay for the picture, not that it should matter. They are punishing two innocent children for the actions of their parent(s)/guardian. In their yearly budget they should appropriate money just for these situations. How about taking some of the “lobbying” money and use it where it belongs, for the students. And how could that principal allow the PTA to edit out two members of a class – it is no longer a class picture when they are deleted. Pictures were always a big deal in our home. Whomever was responsible for this decision needs to be replaced!
Report Post »Exrepublisheep
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:32amThe article says there was no permission slip to print the photo of the child, I didn‘t see where the parents didn’t pay for them.
Report Post »nzkiwi
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:44amHi Grandma. Nice to see you.
Report Post »mdeputy7
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:50amI don’t think you understand the issue here. The issue is not that the parents couldn’t afford the picture. The issue is that they did not want their child’s picture taken. Maybe they are in some sort of witness protection….I know that seems to go a little far into the maybe’s, but you never know. I mean they are no longer at the school after the picture was taken.
Report Post »grandmaof5
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 9:00amMorning to you too, NZ, how are things on the other side of the world? Family good I hope! Have a blessed Easter as I have to get off my ‘soap box’ and feed cats (24). I rescue and foster, and they are watching me through the window! Very intimidating.
Report Post »momrules
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:16amWhen I was a kid……..way back when……….the school announced what day would be picture day. Mama would polish us up that morning, we would get our pictures taken and later when they came back Mom and Dad would figure out what they could afford to buy. They then sent the money , via us, to our teacher with the order.
No permission slip, no pre-pay, no smiley face for not buying anything.
Boy, the world has gotten complicated.
Report Post »TomFerrari
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:35amAnd no “media releases.”
Personally, looking at the child’s hands, and, considering they used photoshop, are we sure this “sticker” isn’t a photoshop edit? Because, if it is a photoshop edit, I suspect they took a sample of the child’s skintone and applied it to the smiley graphic.
Would they have been happier with a yellow one? A white one?
Why are they refusing to sign a release? Are they hiding? From whom?
I’m a realist with optimist tendencies. In today’s world, I acknowledge the legal nonsense. That said, releases should be signed BEFORE taking the photos. End of problem. Didn’t get your release in on time? Not in the pics! Just as if you were absent that day.
The while photo thing has always been a ripoff anyway.
Report Post »Why pay high prices for prints when a parent or teacher or principal with a cell phone can take just as good a picture these days, then post the pic online for free??? No copyright, no release!
nzkiwi
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:40amHasn’t it just.
I don’t think I like it, sometimes. Common sense used to be regarded as laudable. A virtue.
Now you can get sued for it by some idiot and their “no cure, no pay” lawyer.
Report Post »Harryc123
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:16amWell of course he didn’t have a signed release from his parents. They probably couldn’t find them.
Report Post »barber2
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:33amFunny and SAD. Bad parenting which will be perpetuated through those raised that way…
Report Post »burnteye86
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:15amMy High School wouldn’t put my picture in the year book (1975) because I wasn’t wearing a tie. But I didn’t know till the end of the year when the book came out.
Report Post »Nemo13
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:11amIt looks very realistic. I can’t see why the complaints.
Report Post »blanco5
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:08amOh, please.
Report Post »FlyoverConservative
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:08amSome people need something to get upset about.
Report Post »VanceUppercut
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 12:02pm“Some people need something to get upset about.”
Really, Republicans have made fake outrage into an art form.
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:02amThe kid’s hands look brown too, is that “degrading and offensive”? Get over it.
Report Post »nzkiwi
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:01amMicroscopic brains at work.
I forgot school photo day at my children‘s school and hadn’t signed or paid. They took the photo anyway and, when it was pointed out to me, I paid and got a print (thank goodness).
Who would do that to a school photo? “And this is my best friend under the brown smiley face” .Honestly? Are your schools becoming so PC (or whatever) that they have to do that?
It simply beggars belief.
Report Post »grandmaof5
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 9:04amI agree, NZ, this could have been handled much better. My kids never had a permission slip for class pix (back in the Stone Age) but times were safer. Got on my soap box and missed the permission slip part. Fortunately, EX, brought it to my attention.
Report Post »NOTAMUSHROOM
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 7:53amI suppose they really would have been pissed if he’d put a white smiley face on him.
Report Post »randy
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 8:30amExactly!
Report Post »THXll38
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 7:51amThat is a pretty funny picture LOL.
Report Post »NickDeringer
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 7:48amSlow news day?
Report Post »MAULEMALL
Posted on April 6, 2012 at 7:54amReally slow response day
Report Post »