Lynn Matsko Has Her Eyes On Your Kids!

OK, I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, but try as I may I can't come up with any other reason except YOU ARE LYING.

Yes, Ms. Harriton High School Assistant Principal Lynn Matsko, you are the next contest for "To NOT tell the truth."

The story "Pa. school district's webcam surveillance focus of suit" goes like this (USA Today):

The Robbins family says they found out about the webcam photos when Harriton High School Assistant Principal Lynn Matsko called Blake into her office to discuss possible drug use she learned of through photos and instant messages captured on Blake's computer. The photo, Blake's parents say, shows the 15-year-old holding a handful of Mike and Ike candies.

Now we could discuss the issue of it not being the school's business what goes on out side of the school - pro or con. We could discuss the right to monitor students behavior via screen shots or webcam. We could discuss ACLU, right-to-privacy, and Big Brother issues. Maybe for another post. This one is about lying.

Matsko says she did not monitor students' laptops nor authorize anyone else to do so. At a February news conference, she called the accusation "unjust" and "offensive."

So......how did the Mike n' Ike pill popin' kid come to your attention? If you weren't monitoring him or anyone else then you would not have found need to call him to the office and - as proof - show him the photo you had not obtained from monitoring. See, you did monitor him, and possibly others. If you did not then you would not have seen anything that looked like drug use in the kid's own bedroom.

Now this we know - there are 52000 photos of different kids that were collected. Somebody knew that photos were being taken. Somebody saw them. Somebody reported what they saw to you. If you did not authorize them to do so then why did you use the unauthorized photo to charge the kid with drug use?

You see where your "truth" breaks down? If you did not authorize it then you yourself did the monitoring. If no one was monitoring then no one would have confused the Mike n' Ikes with drugs necessitating an office visit with you.

You are lying.

Here is what I think transpired. You could not walk away from such a powerful tool as Big Brother's Telescreen that would allow students to be scrutinized by you or your staff and/or because students and parents signed a policy acknowledging the school could monitor the laptops' contents and Internet usage you felt justified that you had every right to do so.

So why lie about it? Not only will the 52000 photos and your association be found a violation of privacy but now you will be known as the Vice Principal of Spying and Lying. You should have put two and two together and realized you were sliding down a slippery slope. But then again, that requires a bit of wisdom and smarts.

"I'll take Lying for 52000 Alex!"