In
the spring of 2009, the Girl Scouts of the USA were getting indigestion from
them all, thanks to an industrious 8- year- old scout named Wild Freeborn.
Wild, a Girl Scout in Asheville, NC, set out to sell 12,000 boxes of cookies so
that she could win a free week of Scout camp for her entire troop. Wild’s
father, a Web site developer, helped her advertise her mission online.
So he
promoted Wild’s cookies on Facebook and Twitter. He even made a YouTube video
of Wild bouncing on the couch. And the Asheville community “ate it up.” But
then the Girl Scouts governing body got wind of Wild’s Internet activity and
blew the whistle, stating that Internet cookie sales were forbidden and were
not fair.
 |
| http://msnbcmedia1.msn.com |
From
the ethical standpoint of the Girl Scouts, they have a duty to protect their
member’s safety, and the idea of an 8-year-old on YouTube makes us all a little
nervous. Even though the mission was innocent, there is still a huge issue of
if something had happened to Freeborn the Girl Scouts could have been held
liable. Yet, I don’t think that the organization handled it correctly by going
after the 8-year-old herself. It only gives the impression that her hard work
and innovation were discouraged.
The organization stated that Internet sales
were forbidden, but that is not the issue here. At least, it shouldn't have been. The
issue for the organization should have been the child’s safety, and this could
have been addressed more efficiently.
The
Girl Scouts argued that in addition to the dangers of the Web for an 8- year-
old girl, there was a question of “fairness” in hitting the Internet for sales.
Cookie sales, the Scouts argued, were designed for local communities and not to
be promoted broadly on the Internet. This claim makes the organization look
silly. Why are discouraging a little girl from trying as hard as she can to
send her whole troop to camp?
If
they had stated it as a safety issue and that only, the organization would have
had a better chance.
In
the case of Wild Freeborn, her ethics were in the right place. She wanted to
sell more cookies and maybe Internet sales were prohibited; but was utilizing
social media prohibited? I think not. In all reality, this child’s campaign was
more in tune with the world we live in today, which could have been a viable
learning experience for both her and her troop.
No comments:
Post a Comment