Search Results: when should i call

Hillary Clinton called for the repeal of Section 230 of the (way out of date IMHO - 1996!!) TeleCommunications Act, which protects online platforms from being held liable for users content on social media.

"We should be, in my view, repealing Section 230, which gave early platforms on the internet immunity because they were thought to be just "pass-throughs" and that they shouldn't be judged for the content that is posted," Clinton said "But we now know that that was an overly simple view, that if the platforms, whether it's Facebook or Twitter/X or Instagram or TikTok, whatever they are, if they don't moderate and monitor the content, we lose total control," she continued. "And it's not just the social and psychological affects, it's real life."

Clinton said the social media companies should have their immunity stripped so "guardrails" could be self-imposed WITHOUT regulations as the potential of being sued for third party user content would guarantee this self-serving outcome.

Many free speech advocates are torn by the issues raised. Some have said "This has nothing to do with censorship of either conservative or liberal views. These social media companies are publicly traded, private corporations accountable to their shareholders above all other considerations - that's capitalism. If, as private corporations they choose not to host material they believe to be inflammatory, false or misleading content that unfortunately would create another scenario whereby the private corporations are now the gatekeepers for an increasing number of Americans source of news." Others have stated "However, the imposition of rudimentary "guard rails" would be prudent and the issue of gatekeeping would have to be addressed as a known consequence of putting those guardrails in place.".

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/media/hillary-clinton-says-social-media-companies-need-moderate-content-we-lose-total-control.amp

Here's the conundrum. I'm trying to figure out if I should do this as concerned parent or collegial practitioner. I should preface this by saying that I have almost no hope of changing the pace or priority of content. I don't think ANY observation (wearing any hat) about how he prioritizes different content or pace would have any effect whatsoever.

That said, if my observations wearing any hat will likely not have any effect other than communicating concern, should I still contact the teacher just to say I'm concerned but I don't want to be nagging and say "That's not how I would do it...". I keep on trying to compare this to a tradesman coming to my house; if an electrician, framer, mason, siding, windows, plumber, roofer, whatever were at my house (NOT LIKELY I do all of that work myself and have only had two occasions where a job was beyond me) would I say to them as the knowledgable homeowner "That's not how I would do it..." But that analogy fails because I still have an opportunity to influence the job. Addressing the teacher, my possibility club changing anything will likely have no effect. If anything just food for thought for a veteran teacher who is probably set in his ways.
I've had parents of kids in my classroom who were also teachers and I have gotten feedback that the pace (not my presentation or prioritization) is relentless. My reply was that it's an AP course that earns them college credit in high school and we treated as such. The problem here is it's a two-year course and the first year teacher did not keep a pace that the second year teacher didn't have to rush but that's not her call, that's departmental - all teachers use the same pace.

I don't know. I'm leaning towards saying nothing and just helping my kid the best way I can at home. What do you think? Have you or your parents ever intervened with a teacher about academic or curriculum concerns because they had specialized knowledge or even if they were just playing parent? How did that go?

Okay so this happened to me years ago.

I was getting ready and set for prom or homecoming whatever; I was in an online school at the time I was going to, and this happened in like the early of 2020, right before the COVID struck. You’re one of the prom committees to take part in planning for the prom, so you’ll be wanting to take a date with a girl from your school, right? But then my mother knows of this, and she’s a narcissistic parent. She says and wants for your sister, who is a brainwashed, manipulated version of her, to take her as your prom date, and you denied that because, knowing the sister, all she’ll do is report back to the mom and say what happened with you out of prom while she spies and watches your move. What my sister would do is she’ll watch me from afar when I meet with my former best friend I had at the time who was anointed to be one of the prom committees also or whatever and talk to girls. The sister will feel to come over to intervene in it, saying hi, hello, I’m his sister, or you go to walk with your friend out to the hall or something, go to the bathroom together just chatting and having fun whatever during the night, but then she’ll pull you wise and say you shouldn’t be talking to girls like that; they are worldly. The religion is JW’s (Jehovah Witness), and the way the sister and mom think is that those who aren’t part of their religion are labeled to them as bad people, but that person doesn’t think of people that way because not everybody in the world is bad and there’s genuine good people out there, you’d just need to get to know people to know their character and respect them as we all are humans and should never be treated differently no matter our religion. But they are critical and judgmental of people even if they show they are good with pure intentions but still find something criticized or call them worldly.

So tell me y’all answers or opinions on this?