Careless Talk Costs Nuggs

The way Hampstead is going about its business is getting more Sztazi-esque by the second. Whilst we are all already aware of how the school treats its students when it comes to having the right papers uniform and only taking exams that will please Comrade Szemalikowski, the Hitler Youth-style intelligence gathering now extends to visitors as well.

The Trash has gained an exclusive look at the leaflet that is given to all visitors to the school (see images below.) Whilst the majority of the guidance on said leaflet seems fairly standard, such as “wear your visitor’s badge” and “follow your host’s instructions”, some of it would make any sane person question what went through their mind when writing it.

On the back under their ‘Mobile Phone Policy’ they write that “we ask all visitors to support our mobile-free school by switching phones and other electronic devices to silent and only using them in staff-only areas”, because students are such impressionable creatures that they would never produce a mobile phone in school unless they saw an adult flaunting theirs. To say that Hampstead is mobile free is to be kidding yourself; the collection box of confiscated mobiles in the reception at the end of every day is testament to that. In this day and age, students will have phones; the most you can ask is that they put them away whilst in the classroom.

Where the leaflet becomes truly insidious is when it asks that visitors “Do not: agree to keep anything confidential that a student may say to you”. There are many instances wherein a student may need to confide in a visitor without the school knowing, especially with a senior leadership such as the one Hampstead has that has been known to act in a bullying and intimidating way. There are many things a student may not feel comfortable sharing with the school, and we have come across instances wherein a student needed to report about the school to someone impartial without reprimand; when the school was applying for Rights Respecting status being one such instance.

If visitors to the school are not allowed to talk to students in the knowledge what is said between them will be kept away from the school, there are few other avenues of recourse when attempting to report about the misdoings of the school itself. The only other way a student might protest a decision made by the school would be to go to their parents, who may be apathetic, or to a publication such as The Trash. Far more gravely, the inclusion of this guidance for visitors suggests the leadership of the school is actively trying to control the student voice and what is said to members of the public, or otherwise ascertain what is said off the record. Once again, Big Szemalikowski is watching you.