Students Lose Harvard Acceptance for Posting "Obscene" Memes on Facebook

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
I thought people associated with Harvard were supposed to be smart. At least ten students who had been accepted as members of Harvard’s Class of 2021 will now have to find another university to attend, as they were caught posting ill-advised memes on social media. The students, who mocked sexual assault and the Holocaust, do not believe they should be punished for posts on an unofficial, hidden group.

…“wildly inappropriate” means any combination of racist, bigoted, sexually explicit, or violent. The group was meant as a Harvard 2021-specific version of a popular Facebook-wide meme-posting group, and its name changed a few times. Still, administrators found out about the group and its contents, and revoked offers of admission for students in the group. A few examples of posts that the Harvard Crimson cites are posts referring to hanging a Mexican child as “piñata time,” and posts mocking sexual assault or the Holocaust.
 
Grimlaking said:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! OK really that's all I have to offer here. You have the right to put stupid crap online. And other people have the right to cut associations to you for that.
Click to expand...

Ultimately a lot of memes are almost political satire in nature.

So would you support the idea of someone saying outloud to a friend "I don't like Obama" - which is their opinion - and determining that as "hate speech" and kicking them out? Because that's kind of what this is.... someone is stating an opinion, someone else saw it (that likely weren't the original target of the message), and they are using that as justification for kicking someone out... their opinion.

People will state their opinions in many ways - often times people such as comedians will do such in the form of satire, irony, or "memes" in general.
 
Cyraxx said:
Ultimately a lot of memes are almost political satire in nature.

So would you support the idea of someone saying outloud to a friend "I don't like Obama" - which is their opinion - and determining that as "hate speech" and kicking them out? Because that's kind of what this is.... someone is stating an opinion, someone else saw it (that likely weren't the original target of the message), and they are using that as justification for kicking someone out... their opinion.

People will state their opinions in many ways - often times people such as comedians will do such in the form of satire, irony, or "memes" in general.
Click to expand...

I think their reasoning for rejecting them is fucking retarded (combing through student's social media), but they have the right to accept/not accept someone for any reason at all. It's their institution. It's not a right of anyone to attend there. They aren't doing anything actually wrong. Just being retarded. Which isn't a crime.
 
Last edited:
Very little good comes from posting on social media, I am driving that point home to my kids on a consistent basis. If you post something, even under an account without your name in it, assume somehow, someone is going to link it to you. I have seen the most stupid ass blow ups on our neighborhood Facebook page that could have been resolved with a polite face to face conversation.
 
Cyraxx said:
Ultimately a lot of memes are almost political satire in nature.

So would you support the idea of someone saying outloud to a friend "I don't like Obama" - which is their opinion - and determining that as "hate speech" and kicking them out? Because that's kind of what this is.... someone is stating an opinion, someone else saw it (that likely weren't the original target of the message), and they are using that as justification for kicking someone out... their opinion.

People will state their opinions in many ways - often times people such as comedians will do such in the form of satire, irony, or "memes" in general.
Click to expand...

The students, who mocked sexual assault and the Holocaust
Click to expand...

thats different than saying i dont like [current president] and it isnt political.
 
Free speech doesn't mean free reign. Harvard is a private institution. They can be as selective as they like. Don't get me wrong. I am all for free speech. But teens need to know that there are consequences for your free speech in the court of public opinion.
 
Being smart and being a good person are two different things.

Good on Harvard to rescind their acceptances. It's a private school with a high reputation so they get to choose who's in and who's out.

We don't need more people using their college education as validation for their shitty opinions.
 
While a private institution can and does have the ability to change their minds about prospective students for whatever reason, the question should be really, should they police what their students are saying in public?
I mean there is some financial loss associated with these student's plans to go to college that they may be able to sue for damages.
Also the university in question should really have these restrictions written some where in the rules for prospective students so that they don't willy nilly make up rules as the situation presents itself.

Also universities in general should be places where students learn. The idea of finding certain types of speech unacceptable and doling out punishment seems absurd.
 
Universities and employers not only look at ability of prospective students/employees but they also look at character. These students they felt where lacking in character and or held values that the school did not want their student body representing.

My kids are teenagers and they don't don't use social media other than watch youtube. I've ingrained in them anything you put on line will be there forever and expect anyone to be able to see it.
 
Hypergreatthing said:
While a private institution can and does have the ability to change their minds about prospective students for whatever reason, the question should be really, should they police what their students are saying in public?
I mean there is some financial loss associated with these student's plans to go to college that they may be able to sue for damages.
Also the university in question should really have these restrictions written some where in the rules for prospective students so that they don't willy nilly make up rules as the situation presents itself.

Also universities in general should be places where students learn. The idea of finding certain types of speech unacceptable and doling out punishment seems absurd.
Click to expand...

if they take federal funding are they still private?
 
Hypergreatthing said:
While a private institution can and does have the ability to change their minds about prospective students for whatever reason, the question should be really, should they police what their students are saying in public?
Click to expand...

Companies do this all the time. It's about upholding their reputation and cutting ties with people they deem are unfit to represent their organization.
I mean there is some financial loss associated with these student's plans to go to college that they may be able to sue for damages.
Click to expand...

Hah, not likely in the slightest. The acceptance letter is not a contract of any kind.
Also the university in question should really have these restrictions written some where in the rules for prospective students so that they don't willy nilly make up rules as the situation presents itself.
Click to expand...

They don't need to have everything imaginable spelled out like that in any type of situation, be it a university, a company, or even an establishment you visit. Good judgement should be observed universally.
Also universities in general should be places where students learn. The idea of finding certain types of speech unacceptable and doling out punishment seems absurd.
Click to expand...

You can't unteach stupidity. Especially when it comes to things like racism and flat out absurdities like denying the holocaust. People don't change their minds about this stuff. They were brought up like that.
 
The idea that these students feel that they were doing nothing wrong is wrong in and of itself. A personal opinion posted online is the same as if they had been sitting around campus telling these jokes and then they were caught by a professor.

Yes almost all good jokes are at someone or something elses expense, but when the joke crosses a line which it sounds like these memes did then they have to grow up and learn a speech has as many consequence as actions can.

It is what it is, I am sure they will get into another college and be just fine. Not like they are going to jail or been assaulted by this.
 
Wasn't Harvard founded on Racist, sexist, bigoted global elitist principles? I find this rather ironic tbh.
 
Megalith said:
I thought people associated with Harvard were supposed to be smart. At least ten students who had been accepted as members of Harvard’s Class of 2021 will now have to find another university to attend, as they were caught posting ill-advised memes on social media. The students, who mocked sexual assault and the Holocaust, do not believe they should be punished for posts on an unofficial, hidden group.

…“wildly inappropriate” means any combination of racist, bigoted, sexually explicit, or violent. The group was meant as a Harvard 2021-specific version of a popular Facebook-wide meme-posting group, and its name changed a few times. Still, administrators found out about the group and its contents, and revoked offers of admission for students in the group. A few examples of posts that the Harvard Crimson cites are posts referring to hanging a Mexican child as “piñata time,” and posts mocking sexual assault or the Holocaust.
Click to expand...
Being smart doesn't mean you have common sense. Which a great deal of kids don't have now.
 
Cyraxx said:
Ultimately a lot of memes are almost political satire in nature.

So would you support the idea of someone saying outloud to a friend "I don't like Obama" - which is their opinion - and determining that as "hate speech" and kicking them out?
Click to expand...

That's ok if someone doesn't like Obama... But I hardly think that opinion is on par with these opinions:

A few examples of posts that the Harvard Crimson cites are posts referring to hanging a Mexican child as “piñata time,” and posts mocking sexual assault or the Holocaust.
Click to expand...

These people were shitbags and they got called out for being shitbags.
 
Cyraxx said:
Ultimately a lot of memes are almost political satire in nature.

So would you support the idea of someone saying outloud to a friend "I don't like Obama" - which is their opinion - and determining that as "hate speech" and kicking them out? Because that's kind of what this is.... someone is stating an opinion, someone else saw it (that likely weren't the original target of the message), and they are using that as justification for kicking someone out... their opinion.

People will state their opinions in many ways - often times people such as comedians will do such in the form of satire, irony, or "memes" in general.
Click to expand...

That's new... Hate speech are "opinions" now.
 
oldmanbal said:
Wasn't Harvard founded on Racist, sexist, bigoted global elitist principles? I find this rather ironic tbh.
Click to expand...

So you're saying that nothing should change, ever? Enough of the country used to be ok enough with slavery that it was legal. That changed. Now if we look to people who think slavery is ok, is that being ironic? You should consider context.

These kids were being incredibly stupid and are paying the price for it. If they were accepted into Harvard, it's likely they'll get into another institution. Their lives aren't exactly ruined, but hopefully they will learn from this lesson.
 
We should all be thankful, otherwise these twats will learn this lesson when they're a VP at Uber and cost their stock owners billions.

Harvard is an elite school where their grads have doors opened to them that will allow them to become highly influential, publicly visible, and wealthy as Crasus if they play their cards right.....one of those cards being "Don't be a complete dick in public". It's a lesson best taught before they get into the corporate world.
 
Again I have no issue. If a private institution wants to restrict someone from coming to their school because they exhibit was is attributed as hate speech intheir online persona, then they can do that. If I ran a school and found an attendee who practiced hate speech they would be out on their ear as well. No apologies. And only a refund for the education they didn't complete.
 
I find Harvard's stand on this rather hypocritical in light of their president's recent commencement speech on Free Speech and Censorship.
http://www.wbur.org/edify/2017/06/06/harvard-memes-rescinds-admission-offers

Guess Harvard president's comments don't cover her own prospective students.

Seems a better approach would be to accept the students on the condition that they write a paper on why their postings might be offensive to some and how that interacts with the right to free expression. In other words, use this as a higher learning experience. Kinda what University is supposed to be for?
 
Dead Parrot said:
I find Harvard's stand on this rather hypocritical in light of their president's recent commencement speech on Free Speech and Censorship.
http://www.wbur.org/edify/2017/06/06/harvard-memes-rescinds-admission-offers

Guess Harvard president's comments don't cover her own prospective students.

Seems a better approach would be to accept the students on the condition that they write a paper on why their postings might be offensive to some and how that interacts with the right to free expression. In other words, use this as a higher learning experience. Kinda what University is supposed to be for?
Click to expand...

Your undergrad at Harvard is 90% getting to meet alumni, guest lecturers, and other students who's parents are richer than yours. At that level of academia education comes second to developing contacts and business relations.
 
Sonicks said:
Companies do this all the time. It's about upholding their reputation and cutting ties with people they deem are unfit to represent their organization.
Click to expand...
I really doubt that accepted high school students can ever be considered to represent the university that accepted them. Schools are not Companies. They're purpose is to teach students, not police their thoughts.
Sonicks said:
You can't unteach stupidity. Especially when it comes to things like racism and flat out absurdities like denying the holocaust. People don't change their minds about this stuff. They were brought up like that.
Click to expand...
The term racism has changed in definition and used to describe anything racial today. Your definition is likely very different than what other people think is racist.
Denying the holocaust is an opinion. It's not illegal (at least here in the US).
What's next? booting people because they disagree with man made climate change?
 
Screw that, when are they hiring for the position of snooping all students social media for bad memes? I think I could handle that.
 
I see there are a bunch of free speech advocates in here no matter what is said. Fortunately real life keeps giving you people wake up calls. There are consequences for those actions that allow those that don't agree with you to do something about it. Don't like it too bad snowflakes as that is what freedom is about.
 
Bowman15 said:
I see there are a bunch of free speech advocates in here no matter what is said. Fortunately real life keeps giving you people wake up calls. There are consequences for those actions that allow those that don't agree with you to do something about it. Don't like it too bad snowflakes as that is what freedom is about.
Click to expand...

Well said. The government says I can say whatever I want on this forum. But now look at what happened to my title, that is called consequences for my actions lol.
 
Hypergreatthing said:
I really doubt that accepted high school students can ever be considered to represent the university that accepted them. Schools are not Companies. They're purpose is to teach students, not police their thoughts.
Click to expand...

First off, this is Harvard, so you doubt wrong and yes they get to be selective about who does and who doesn't represent their "prestigious" school. Whether or not you agree with that it's still not up to you, it's up to them.

Keep in mind that being a private school also doesn't have much to do with this. You keep claiming that schools are for teaching, but higher education, or anything above high school, it is a privilege and not a right. There is a reason higher education requires an admission process. You are granted the privilege to attend a university or community college by them, it's not automatic. Ultimately it's their purpose to teach those they allow in.
 
Sonicks said:
First off, this is Harvard, so you doubt wrong and yes they get to be selective about who does and who doesn't represent their "prestigious" school. Whether or not you agree with that it's still not up to you, it's up to them.

Keep in mind that being a private school also doesn't have much to do with this. You keep claiming that schools are for teaching, but higher education, or anything above high school, it is a privilege and not a right. There is a reason higher education requires an admission process. You are granted the privilege to attend a university or community college by them, it's not automatic. Ultimately it's their purpose to teach those they allow in.
Click to expand...
I never claimed that higher education is a right. Whether or not it's a right or a privileged has nothing to do with them policing the thoughts of their students or prospective students. If they don't believe in free speech, then they shouldn't accept government funds.
Your logic is faulty. They were accepted, that means they were allowed in. By your own logic, their purpose is to teach them. It's not contradicting my statement at all.
 
Hypergreatthing said:
I never claimed that higher education is a right. Whether or not it's a right or a privileged has nothing to do with them policing the thoughts of their students or prospective students. If they don't believe in free speech, then they shouldn't accept government funds.
Your logic is faulty. They were accepted, that means they were allowed in. By your own logic, their purpose is to teach them. It's not contradicting my statement at all.
Click to expand...

Oh, but sorry, this is a private institution that can select its client at its will. It is a nonprofit and it takes grants, but Harvard is really a hedge-fund concern. Harvard is merely acting for in its own interests as it rightly can.
 
Eh. I don't think they should be punished for doing something in as said an unlisted group.

But, Harvard can do as they want. Can't hate on them for revoking the privilege to attend.
 
Reimu said:
Oh, but sorry, this is a private institution that can select its client at its will. It is a nonprofit and it takes grants, but Harvard is really a hedge-fund concern. Harvard is merely acting for in its own interests as it rightly can.
Click to expand...
Didn't the previous administration make colleges take rape cases more seriously by applying leverage by threatening to take away public funding?
http://www.heritage.org/education/report/how-american-college-campuses-have-become-anti-due-process

But now they're not required to allow students freedom of speech and expression because they're a private institution?

Sounds like double standards to me.

I'm sure harvard doesn't need federal funds to run, but i'm sure they don't want to pass up free money.

It's not as if their president gave a speech on... free speech: http://www.harvard.edu/president/speech/2017/2017-commencement-speech
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top