Class photo called ‘offensive’ and ‘degrading’







An elementary school class picture is causing quite a stir after the photographer Photoshopped a cartoon smiley face over a boy's head.



David Claussen, owner of Broward County Pictures, took the photo of the second grade class at Sawgrass Elementary school, but was notified afterward that two of the students hadn't signed consent forms and needed to be removed.



The local news reports:



The news station could not locate the student or his parents for a comment, but was told the boy is no longer attending Sawgrass Elementary and may not even be aware of the picture's existence.



Parents at the school have had mixed responses to the altered photo, they ranged from feeling that the image is humiliating, to simply calling it "an oversight that has been corrected".



In an email to the local station, Sawgrass P.T.A. wrote:



They said families who ordered the class photo will get a free copy of the new print.

 

I don't even see what the problem is? They never outlined what their beef is: the photo was 'inappropriate'... what does that even mean?





If they are offended because the smiley is black, oh my lord. I quit life.

 

I mean, my first thought was a laugh.



I guess if they left his name out and added him as "not shown in picture" towards the end it would be fine. But if they left his name in and used that face, I guess I might be a little offended maybe? But after thinking about it, if his name is still there in that order, it is kind of like poking fun of their kid, by depicted him as a cartoon. And it is their fault they took his pic without the consent form, but that is a little odd they need a consent form in the first place. The reason kids didn't make the class pic when I was growing up was because they were absent, not because they didn't sign a form, since when did this happen?!?



If the kid by chance had big eyes, they might make his feel bad, but if the pic looks nothing like him, but his name is still there, that would make me a bit upset. They are claiming my kid looks like this? So for me, as long as they took out the name and put it at the end all is good and it is quite hilarious. But if the name is still there....I think the reaction was somewhat justifyable. Though taking it again and making it free was dumb, they should have just taken the name out of order.

 

I don't think there is a problem. The only thing is that the photo should not have been taken without consent to begin with, that is if consent was absolutely required.

 

It would be funny and inappropriate if they photoshopped something like J.J. from good times in. I dont see the offensive or degrading but I am far from sensitive.

 

You people are obviously all horrible raysiss! It is offensive because it is unusual and a black kid, duh? Some people are just WAITING to get their panties in a twist on somebody else's behalf. For the rest of us, no harm no foul here.

 

Should have just used the walmart rollback smiley. It's lellow, so nobody can get offended. Other than walmart might try to sue you for copyright infringement...

 

That wasnt' my point at all, it had nothing to do with color. I am saying if they left in his name in that order, it is depicting him as a cartoon, which could be considered degraing. All they had to do was move his name. But there are plently of yellow smiley faces on clip art that walmart doesn't own. They have a specific looking smiley.

 

Not offensive. People are retarded.