Surveillance camera planned for Carleton’s Bald Spot to deter underage drinking – NOT!

Griff, this is a worthy topic. Do you have any numbers from the ambulance crews or hospital ER that reveal the nature of this problem?

The Northfield Mayor’s Task Force on Youth Alcohol and Drug Use has a link to a video about campus binge drinking. Here’s the blurb:

On the afternoon of September 16, 2004, a joyous 18-year-old, Lynn Gordon Bailey Jr., pledged Chi Psi Fraternity at the University of Colorado. The next morning he was found dead, a victim of an irresponsible hazing ritual involving alcohol. A sad situation, but made even worse because it was so preventable.

Every year, a staggering 1,700 college students face the same fate. Another 100,000 are victims of sexual assault as a result of heavy drinking. But no one working on a national level to change a culture that puts our young people in peril. Until now.

HAZE is a feature documentary, created with the intent of placing a focus on the issues of binge drinking, alcohol-laden hazing rituals, and rapid-fire drinking games. Simply stated, the film’s goal is to save lives and prevent harm. Harm that would never have happened if a few crucial steps had been followed by friends, by fraternity brothers and sisters, family members or peers. HAZE won’t end irresponsible drinking but it will be the first chapter in an educational process for parents and young adults–teaching us what to do and what to look out for in order to “save a life.”

http://mayorstaskforcenorthfield.org/archives/415

Britt: That’s not entirely accurate. Photocop was declared unconstitutional as an unreasonable search and by the government. However, the Carleton Bald Spot is private property. Any illegal activity, especially if the students have prior warning, will probably stand constitutional muster.

Dan and others,

Here’s Joe’s message:

Dear all,

I’m writing to respond to the mis-information and mis-quoting concerning “webcams,” plans for installation on the bald spot, and use of said cameras to monitor under-age drinking.

In short, my colleagues and I are confused by this information; the College has no intentions or plans to implement such measures and we are surprised by the information being shared here. Please feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions about this matter.

I do however wish to offer some information which might have contributed to the confusion. I did recently have a philosophical conversation in a campus office with a few of my colleagues about whether or not our students would like to have a “webcam.” It is the sort of thing that some colleges have; for some people, it is a fun way to enhance a phone call to family or friends. At this point, this is simply an idea to be discussed with students in the fall.

Sincerely, Joe Baggot

Griff, Carleton’s office of media relations is more than willing to field your calls of inquiry whenever you wonder what’s happening here. This might be helpful in avoiding posting inaccurate information in the future.

Soooo–really they are not going to use spy cameras to bust underage drinking–good job, ace reporter.

It should be noted that this is almost certainly a hoax:

(1) The only two “parents” claiming to have spoken to Mr. Baggot reported doing so within four minutes of each other, with the latter email being a response to the first. Four minutes is hardly enough time to read an email, call an official about it (after finding his number), and write back. So these two writers are almost certainly the same person.
(2) Neither writer appears in the Parents Directory.
(3) The second writer shares a name with Carleton’s first president.
(4) Mr. Baggot later wrote an email to the list denying that anything of the sort is being considered.

Griff fooled by faux news? Ah,well, hoaxes go way back in Carleton history. Does anyone remember the story of Joe Fabeetz who won election to the Carleton CSA Senate in 1977?

That’s the biggest nerd on campus, thank you very much. At least as of 2008. I think I’ve been usurped since then, though I don’t know by whom.

Anyway, I can’t take all the credit here. Lots of people were atwitter about the supposed plans, and most of the observations I cited were made by others.

“Compromised” isn’t really the right word. Since the administration wants parents to be able to subscribe to the list easily, there’s no authentication process to ensure that those who sign up are actually parents. Anyone with an email address (fake or otherwise) can subscribe and post, including present and former Carleton students.

There are probably a few ways this can be fixed, but I can’t think of any methods that wouldn’t scare off a large portion of the subscribers.

I’m not sure the list is aware that the messages were hoaxes per se, but as Dan and Eric pointed out above, the misinformation has been corrected.

Griff, I think you’re wrong on this one. Nobody at Carleton was “taken in” by the hoax. The first response from the administration was to correct the misinformation. What should they have done differently?

Furthermore, I can’t see how knowledge that this was a hoax would help the parent list. What good would come from having the parents distrust each other as possible trolls? Keeping the atmosphere friendly, with the (false) assumption that the earlier hoaxsters were merely “misinformed”, is in my opinion the best possible action.

Griff : You said “I admire the hoax”. The cleverness? the manipulation of e-systems information? What?

The sort of e-based “citizen journalism” you want to promote will never be successful if the hoax is a subject of admiration by those promoting citizen journalism as a positive influence… IMO.

Am I just being too ‘prissy’ about this? I don’t think so; this is not a line that can be ridden on both sides … again, IMO.