For giggles, let's publicly pillory some teenagers for drunkenness.

So first the local Channel 7 news in Boston (CBS affiliate WHDH) - which is notoriously crappy and tabloidy - thought this was important enough for a top story - drunken high school cheerleaders arrested before a game. I think it was like the third story yesterday night. A slow news night, I’ll grant you, but come on.

The total lack of newsworthiness of the story is NOT what I’m pitting. That’s so par for the course, you barely notice it anymore. But, exactly why, did they feel the urgent journalistic necessity to broadcast the names and photos of those 2 poor idiot teenagers all over the state? God knows they’re not the first high school kids who’ve been drunk at a public event.

OK OK it sounds like they were totally wasted and they did curse out the cops. But, I’m sorry, why does that justify public humiliation on such a mass scale? And wait. Now the Boston Globe is in on it - it’s their #1 story on their website right now. OK, it is a slow news day, but suddenly they’re getting as much publicity - more - than this murderer, this murderer, this embezzler, this pedophile priest, and this smorgasbord of campaign fraud, jesus-stealing, homicide, robbery, etc.

Is this fun for the local news to irreparably destroy the reputations of a couple of admittedly stupid teenagers? Don’t they have any compassion at all? Also aren’t their rules about revealing the identities of minors?

And why must they put me in the position of having to pity and defend cheerleaders?

Come on. If you had half a brain you would realize the mass appeal of cheerleaders loaded out of their minds. You know, dancing around in those short skirts, maybe doing a few flips, and just being all perky in general while being extra suggestible if you know what I mean.

Um, the girls gone wild angle wasn’t lost on me. And basically I think the local news is being about as exploitive as the people who put those tapes out. But I’m sorry does that mean they shouldn’t be pitted for it? These girls are minors.

Damn. Here I was thinking they’d been put in actual stocks, pilgrim-style.

Well, it is Boston, after all.
mmmm… cheerleaders in stocks

Why just arrest them? Why not arrest every minor at the game … they should know better than to go near a place that might have underage drinking.

Don’t laugh, this is SOP where I live.

Minor In Possession laws are often used to arrest and prosecute minors who never actually possessed any alcohol. It makes life so much easier for the police, and if we applied the same logic to homicide we’d be executing more people than cattle.

Oh, damn, I thought you meant they had actually pilloried them. You know, town crier, tomatoes, etc.

Are these people minors? Up here, publishing any personal details about them would be forbidden in such a case.

[Charlton Heston voice]

Soylent Green is PEOPLE!



Shagnasty, have you been listening to Uncle Bonsai lately?

As for the OP, I don’t know how much of a humiliation this will be. I expect the other students at their school (well, the ones who set the tone that everyone else is expected to follow) will greet these two as returning heroes.


Spoilers, Greathouse, spoilers! :cool:

I’m watching the movie for the first time (about halfway through), although I’m very, very familiar with the story, so I’m not really spoiled.

Shit! Sorry about that. It never occurred to me that someone may be watching the film. :smack:

Glad to hear that I didn’t actually ruin it for you, but your comments will have me paying more attention next time.

High school cheerladers caught drinking??? Stop the friggin’ presses!

They may not have been minors if they were 18.

But there’s nothing wrong with posting their names and pictures all over the place. There is not enough shame in today’s society. If you know that you are going to be publicly humiliated if you screw up, you’ll be less likely to screw up.

As Meatros points out, above, they most certainly are minors - 17 years of age, as listed in media reports.

Shaming someone over the age of majority? Yeah, sure. Why not? Shaming minors? No.

Not to mention that the only ones named were the cheerleaders.

I think I’ve seen that movie…

Well, why do you assume its humiliation? Sounds like adoration to me. The fact that teens still get drunk and cuss out cops gives me a glimmer of hope for the future.

Y’know, I’m finding it hard to drum up any moral indignation over this. Couple of 17 year olds get drunk, get stupid and get caught. Frankly they OUGHT to be hideously embarrassed and I betcha that they’ll think twice before doing it again. Might also make a couple of other teenagers think about it before doing it the first time.

When I was in high school I did something dumb and lied to the principal. He found me and my buddy on the courtyard during lunch and marched us both off to his office in front of over a thousand people. We got chewed out and spent an hour or two after school picking up garbage. That was the last time I did something like that, and it wasn’t Sanitation Duty that did it, it was the sheer embarrassment of getting busted in front of everyone else.

Feeling a little public humiliation is a pretty powerful motivational tool for a teenager. Whatever other punishment these two undergo (fine, counseling, substance abuse program, etc) I’ll wager that they will remember having their names and faces splashed all over the evening news long after they’ve forgotten working at Mickey D’s to pay a fine.

While I agree with the sentiment that they SHOULD “pay”. I don’t think it really does any good. Too damn many of the little heathens, as someone already pointed out, will think that something like this is very cool, an opportunity for hero worship.

Too many kids nowadays are just determined to do what they want, and be “bad as they wanna be”. They don’t care…much as we wish that this sort of thing would “teach them a lesson” it won’t.

Not for the sort outlined in the OPs article anyway. Entitled, spoiled classless JDs.