So Cormack, who teaches at Stevens Institute of Technology and just on civic engagement, was surprised when they expressed excitement. They were “all on board” — with Kamala Harris, Biden’s vice president, who had yet to become Trump’s direct challenger.

No matter. They thought the VP was, in a word, hilarious — and worth their attention.

Harris’ 2023 “” video had already gone viral. In it, she recounts her mother giving her sister and her “a hard time sometimes,” saying, “‘I don’t know what’s wrong with you young people. You think you just fell out of a coconut tree?’” Harris cracks up, then continues with her mother’s lesson: “‘You exist in the context of all in which you live and what came before you.’” 

Cormack’s students not only knew the video — they could recite it from memory. She thought to herself, “O.K., there’s .”

What Cormack witnessed was the ascension of Harris in the minds and social media feeds of young people. It was the prequel to a new phenomenon: the candidate-as-meme, at a time when both candidates desperately need young people to pay attention to them. Whether it translates into votes from this stubborn demographic in November remains an open question.

At the moment, it seems to be working for Harris, 59, whose social media effort is driven by an army of volunteers creating a firehose of memes on her behalf.

By the time Biden dropped out of the race on July 21, Harris had actually been young people’s feeds for weeks. Fans posted cleverly cut treatments of her speeches, her , (in and out ), even her love of .

As early as , one X user posted, “I’m ready to fall outta the coconut tree for you, girl. Stop playin.”

‘It’s hard not to love her’

For one fan, the attraction began much earlier.

Ryan Long, 22, a senior at the University of Delaware, discovered Harris in November 2016, when she won her Senate seat. She popped up on his cultural radar in earnest four years later, when she became Biden’s vice president. Her appearances often took on a life of their own, he recalled: She’d say “a lot of silly and amusing things” in official settings. “I’ve always found her so, so funny.”

Harris’ self-professed geek tendencies soon prompted him and his housemates to decorate a whiteboard with the saying, “I love Venn diagrams.” It stayed up for about a year. The hilarity of the “Coconut Tree” video made it “really popular on ” about a year and a half before it hit the mainstream, he said.

Long admitted to not typically following politics. But by the beginning of July, when a poll in his X feed suggested that Harris had a better chance of beating Trump than Biden did, he got excited.

“It was a silly, unrealistic excitement,” he said. But that night, he spent about three hours cutting together his favorite bits of Harris footage.

why did I stay up till 3am making a von dutch brat coconut tree edit featuring kamala harris and why can’t I stop watching it on repeat

— ryan (@ryanlong03)

���DzԲ�’s of Harris speaking, laughing and dancing has garnered about 4.3 million views on X and helped create a template for the genre. “She is a fresh face at a time that there [is] so much disillusionment in politics, especially among young people,” he said. 

Now that she’s the Democratic nominee, she offers the potential to bring a lot of young people along for the ride, Long said. 

In that sense, she is much like Trump, who “has this huge cult of personality. He’s able to make riffs, say things off the cuff, make people laugh, make people excited, make people sad, make people just feel their emotions. And I think Kamala Harris does that for a whole other subsection of voters.”

By comparison, Biden’s push to reach young voters via social media and all but non-existent to many.

For his part, Trump has benefited from the efforts his own devoted fans, who have reveled in his ties to and his after the attempt on his life last month. The campaign has also gotten a boost from a small on the right who have become a “shadow online ad agency” for his campaign, spending the past year producing similar content for the GOP nominee. The group, which calls itself , operates anonymously, its memes “riddled with racist stereotypes, demeaning tropes about L.G.B.T.Q. people and broad scatological humor,” The New York Times last December.

‘Authentic and true’ narratives attract Gen Z

To be sure, the reaction to Harris on social media has been unprecedented. Jessica Siles, a spokesperson for the Gen-Z-led advocacy group , said she had stopped counting how many conversations she has had with people about what it means to be “brat.”

That adjective comes compliments of British singer Charli XCX, who on July 21 , “kamala IS brat,” defining the term as “that girl who is a little messy and likes to party and maybe says some like dumb things sometimes.” She’s honest, blunt — and a bit volatile.

It all adds up to a kind of authenticity “that young people really resonate with,” said Siles. 

Even U.S. Education Secretary Miguel Cardona tried to get in on the act, posting on X in the lime green color of the moment that “Defending public education is part of the essence of brat summer.” To some, it appeared, as the kids say, a little cringe. One critic, invoking the iconic scene from “30 Rock,” , “How do you do, fellow kids?”

Defending public education is part of the essence of brat summer.

— Secretary Miguel Cardona (@SecCardona)

Most Gen-Zers were indeed kids the last time a meme-worthy candidate ran for president. Siles, 24, was just 8 years old when Barack Obama ran his first presidential campaign. She said seeing a candidate talk about who they are unapologetically while boasting impressive career accomplishments “is just super refreshing to young voters.” 

Gen Z grew up with these. “So I think we’re kind of uniquely qualified to be able to tell who’s posting something authentically or not,” she said. Young people don’t take the time to create, edit, post and share videos of “people they’re not truly excited about.”

Harris began resonating with Siles after she watched a video of the vice president talking about her mother’s cancer. Siles remembered that it “showed a different side that we don’t always see of elected officials and politicians that I thought was really powerful.”

In the three days after Harris announced her candidacy, Siles’ organization got more applications to join and start new chapters than in the prior two months.

The group, whose chief of staff is all of 16, earlier this year by making mischief in the race: It scooped up unused Web domain names for groups such as GenZforTrump.org and guided viewers to that targets young voters in battleground states. It also launched a digital ad campaign on Instagram and Snapchat.

David Paleologos, director of the in Boston, said there’s no question that social media has trained young people’s attention on Harris, who needs the votes: Exit polls from 2020 suggest that Biden beat Trump by 24 percentage points among voters ages 18-29. Harris hasn’t quite reached those margins among potential young voters in the recent polling, he said, but she’s close — up by about 20 points. 

In order to reach 2020 levels in the next three months, she’ll need a social media strategy of “messaging memeology,” Paleologos said, which strings together “a seemingly haphazard sequence of posts that paint a picture, much like the colorful stones in a mosaic.”

However, he said, one risk of that is staying power: “It only lasts until the next meme about someone else captures that young person’s short attention span.” Research also shows that young voters are the least participatory in elections.

Just like clockwork, since she announced Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her running mate on Aug. 6, the have .

‘I hate how I can feel the propaganda’

To be sure, not all young people are totally sold on the coconut memes or the high energy. In , a 19-year-old user from southwestern Missouri who goes by the username “Meatball” looks into the camera and confesses, “I hate how I can feel the propaganda of the Kamala campaign working on me.” 

In the video, posted July 24, she continues, “Part of me is like, ‘Yass queen, purr! Brat Summer! Kamala Harris!’ And then I’m like, ‘Oh my God, that’s a politician, actually. That’s the vice president of the United States.’ Like, I’m still going to vote for her, but I don’t like feeling like I want to vote for her.”

In an interview via text messages, Meatball, who asked to withhold her name for safety reasons, said she posted the video after getting “countless” Harris-related videos on her “For You” page — a few from Harris’ official account. “I wanted to see if anyone else was experiencing this disconnect between wanting to participate in something fun and not trusting politicians,” she said.

It’s safe to say they do: In three weeks, her video garnered 1.8 million views and more than 289,000 “likes.” 

But Meatball said she wishes older generations understood that Gen Z’s opinions “aren’t less thought out just because we share them in unconventional ways” like TikToks. “Meme culture is complex and has been developing since the creation of the internet chat room. Just because an older person doesn’t understand what we’re saying doesn’t mean we aren’t saying anything at all.”

Long, the Delaware student who posted the X video of Harris, predicted the memes and videos will have a big effect. 

He has worked in e-commerce marketing and has seen the power of social media to convert views into sales. “I think the same principle applies for elections: It’s going to turn people out. It’s going to get them excited.”

The Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in Washington, D.C., was the latest act in a bipartisan effort to bolster federal regulations on social media platforms like Instagram and TikTok amid a growing chorus of parents and adolescent mental health experts warning the services have harmed youth well-being and, in some cases, pushed them to suicide. 

In an unprecedented moment, Meta founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg, at the urging of Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley, stood up and turned around to face the audience, apologizing to the parents in attendance who said their children were damaged — and in some cases, died — because of his company’s algorithms. 

“I’m sorry for everything you’ve all gone through,” said Zuckerberg, whose company owns Facebook and Instagram. “It’s terrible. No one should have to go through the things that your families have suffered.”

Senators argued the companies — and tech executives themselves — should be held legally responsible for instances of abuse and exploitation under tougher regulations that would limit children’s access to social media platforms and restrict their exposure to harmful content.

“Your platforms really suck at policing themselves,” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, a Rhode Island Democrat, told Zuckerberg and the CEOs of X, TikTok, Discord and Snap, who were summoned to testify. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which allows social media platforms to moderate content as they see fit and generally provides immunity from liability for user-generated posts, has routinely shielded tech companies from accountability. As youth harms persist, he said those legal protections are “a very significant part of that problem.” 

Whitehouse pointed to a lawsuit against X, formerly Twitter, that was filed by two men who claimed a sex trafficker manipulated them into sharing sexually explicit videos of themselves over Snapchat when they were just 13 years old. Links to the videos appeared on Twitter years later, but the company allegedly refused to take action until after they were contacted by a Department of Homeland Security agent and the posts had generated more than 160,000 views. The by the Ninth Circuit, which cited Section 230. 

“That’s a pretty foul set of facts,” Whitehouse said. “There is nothing about that set of facts that tells me Section 230 performed any public service in that regard.”

In an opening statement, Democratic committee chair, Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, offered a chilling description of the harms inflicted on young people by each of the social media platforms represented at the hearing. In addition to Zuckerberg, executives who testified were X CEO Linda Yaccarino, TikTok CEO Shou Chew, Snap co-founder and CEO Evan Spiegel and Discord CEO Jason Citron.

“Discord has been used to groom, abduct and abuse children,” Durbin said. “Meta’s Instagram helped connect and promote a network of pedophiles. Snapchat’s disappearing messages have been co-opted by criminals who financially extort young victims. TikTok has become a, quote, ‘platform of choice’ for predators to access, engage and groom children for abuse. And the prevalance of [child sexual abuse material] on X has grown as the company has gutted its trust and safety workforce.” 

Citron testified that Discord has “a zero tolerance policy” for content that features sexual exploitation and that it uses filters to scan and block such materials from its service. 

“Just like all technology and tools, there are people who exploit and abuse our platforms for immoral and illegal purposes,” Citron said. “All of us here on the panel today, and throughout the tech industry, have a solemn and urgent responsibility to ensure that everyone who uses our platforms is protected from these criminals both online and off.” 

Lawmakers have introduced a slate of regulatory bills that have gained bipartisan traction but have failed to become law. Among them is the Kids Online Safety Act, which would require social media companies and other online services to take “reasonable measures” to protect children from cyberbullying, sexual exploitation and materials that promote self-harm. It would also mandate strict privacy settings when teens use the online services. Other proposals would to report suspected drug activity to the police — some parents said their children overdosed and died after buying drugs on the platforms — and a bill that would hold them accountable for hosting child sexual abuse materials. 

In their testimonies, each of the tech executives said they have taken steps to protect children who use their services, including features that restrict certain types of content, limit screen time and curtail the people they’re allowed to communicate with. But they also sought to distance their services from harms in a bid to stave off regulations. 

“With so much of our lives spent on mobile devices and social media, it’s important to look into the effects on teen mental health and well-being,” Zuckerberg said. “I take this very seriously. Mental health is a complex issue, and the existing body of scientific work has not shown a causal link between using social media and young people having worse mental health outcomes.” 

Zuckerberg by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, which concluded there is a lack of evidence to confirm that social media causes changes in adolescent well-being at the population level and that the services could carry both benefits and harms for young people. While social media websites can expose children to online harassment and fringe ideas, researchers noted, the services can be used by young people to foster community. 

In October, 42 state attorneys general , alleging that the social media giant knowingly and purposely designed tools to addict children to its services. U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy warning that social media sites pose a “profound risk of harm” to youth mental health, stating that the tools should come with warning labels. Among evidence of the harms is which found that Instagram led to body-image issues among teenage girls and that many of its young users blamed the platform for increases in anxiety and depression. 

Republican lawmakers devoted a significant amount of time during the hearing to criticizing TikTok for its ties to the Chinese government, calling out the app for collecting data about U.S. citizens, including in an effort to surveil American journalists. The Justice Department is reportedly investigating allegations that ByteDance, the Chinese company that owns TikTok, used the app to surveil several American journalists who report on the tech industry. 

In response, Chew said the company launched an initiative — dubbed “Project Texas” — to prevent its Chinese employees from accessing personal data about U.S. citizens. But employees claim the company has . 

YouTube and TikTok are by far the platforms where teens spend the most hours per day, according to a 2023 Gallup survey although Neal Mohan, the CEO of Google-owned YouTube, was not called in to testify.

Mainstream social media platforms have also been exploited for domestic online extremism. Earlier this month, for example, a teenager accused of carrying out a mass shooting at his Iowa high school reportedly maintained an active presence on Discord and, shortly before the rampage, commented in a channel dedicated to such attacks that he was “gearing up” for the mayhem. Just minutes before the shooting, the suspect appeared to capture a video inside a school bathroom and uploaded it to TikTok. 

Josh Golin, the executive director of Fairplay, a nonprofit devoted to bolstering online child protections, blasted the tech executives’ testimony for being little more than “evasions and deflections.” 

“If Congress really cares about the families who packed the hearing today holding pictures of their children lost to social media harms, they will move the Kids Online Safety Act,” Golin said in a statement. “Pointed questions and sound bites won’t save lives, but KOSA will.” 

The safety act, known as KOSA, has faced pushback from civil rights advocates on First Amendment grounds, arguing the proposal could be used to censor certain content and . Sen. Marsha Blackburn, a Republican from Tennessee and KOSA co-author, said last fall the rules are important to protect “minor children from the transgender in this culture” and cited the legislation as a way to shield children from “being indoctrinated” online. The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, endorsed the legislation, that “keeping trans content away from children is protecting kids.” 

Snap’s Evan Spiegel and X’s Linda Yaccarino both agreed to support the Kids Online Safety Act.

Aliya Bhatia, a policy analyst with the nonprofit Center for Democracy and Technology, said that although lawmakers made clear their intention to act, their directives could end up doing more harm than good. She said the platforms serve as “peer-to-peer learning and community networks” where young people can access information about reproductive health and other important topics that they might not feel comfortable receiving from adults in their lives. 

“It’s clear that this is a really tricky issue, it’s really difficult for the government and companies to decide what is harmful for young people,” Bhatia said. “What one young person finds helpful online, another might find harmful.”

South Carolina’s Sen. Lindsey Graham, the committee’s ranking Republican, said that social media companies can’t be trusted to keep kids safe online and that lawmakers have run out of patience.

“If you’re waiting on these guys to solve the problem,” he said, “we’re going to die waiting.” 

Recent surveys of young people show that parents’ concerns may be justified: More than half of U.S. teens spend at least four hours a day on these apps. Girls, who are , spend an average of nearly an hour more on them per day than boys. Many parents are searching for support. 

Perhaps more than anyone, Carla Engelbrecht and Devorah Heitner are qualified to offer it. They’ve spent years puzzling over how families can help understand media from the inside out, and how schools both help and hurt kids’ ability to cope.

Engelbrecht is a longtime children’s media developer. A veteran of Sesame Workshop and PBS Kids Interactive, she spent seven years at Netflix, most recently as its director of product innovation. Engelbrecht was behind the network’s Black Mirror “” episode in 2018, which allowed viewers to choose among five possible endings. 

Engelbrecht is now in public beta testing for , a new social media platform for kids under 13. She calls it a “course correction” for young people’s social media, aiming to teach them to be more mindful, thoughtful and responsible online.

Heitner is an who specializes in helping parents and educators understand how digital technology, especially social media and interactive gaming, shape kids’ realities. Her books include 2016’s and her new work . 

Speaking to either one would be enlightening, but we decided to facilitate a broader conversation by inviting them to come together (virtually) to share insights and offer a bit of advice for both parents and schools. 

Their conversation with ����Ӱ��’s Greg Toppo was wide-ranging, covering the effects of the pandemic, the pressures kids feel online and the women’s experiences communicating with their own children.

The solutions they offer aren’t simple. In Heitner’s words, parents seeking to learn more about their kids’’ media usage should pull back their surveillance and “lead with curiosity.” 

The conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

����Ӱ��: Devorah, tell us a little bit about your new book.

Devorah Heitner: I wrote Growing Up in Public because I was speaking for years about Screenwise in schools and all these other environments, and people said, “O.K., I get that we want to think about quality over quantity with screen time. But we also want to understand what kids’ subjective experience is and not just focus on how many minutes are good or bad.”

People lie about that anyway. People are sort of oblivious to their own screen use sometimes and get over-focused on their kids’. A lot of adults are recognizing: If I could have had a Tumblr or a Twitter or Instagram as a kid, I could have really done a lot of damage to my prospects and opportunities by so openly sharing.

What are we doing to our reputations?

As I started digging into that question, I recognized that parents are really part of the surveillance culture with kids. So are schools, with grading apps like or [which keep track of kids’ location, among other functions]. I really started understanding in a fuller way how kids are scrutinized. Kids are growing up very searchable, very public, and some of that is awesome. They have a platform, they can be activists. Some of it is problematic. 

The title of your book, Growing Up in Public, says so much about kid’s lives these days. I saw this term the other day: not FOMO, “Fear of Missing Out,” but FOMU, “.” Are those competing interests for young people?

Heitner: Well, there’s definitely a fear of messing up and especially being called out. There’s a lot of “gotcha” culture going on, and kids documenting each others’ screw-ups. And as much as you patiently explain, as I have to my own 14-year-old, the concept of mutually assured destruction, if you’re on a group text with somebody for long enough, both of you have probably said a few things you don’t want repeated outside of that context.

I think it’s modeled by adults, but this kind of “gotcha” culture is very insidious and terrifying. And it should be terrifying. 

Carla, tell us a little bit about yourself.

Carla Engelbrecht: I’m a longtime product developer and researcher in the kids’ space. I’ve spent a lot of time making products for kids. I’ve seen for years kids wanting access to Twitter and Facebook and MySpace and , all through the generations of social media. And they always want what is not made for them. They’re aspirational.

Kids are just plopped into this. And just as you wouldn’t give a new driver the keys to the car and just say, “Go!” — you need to teach them how to drive — there’s the same concept for me with media use. We need to teach our kids. Parents don’t know what they’re doing, because none of us have really been through this before, and they abstain. They need support in learning how to do this. Where Devorah talks about things from that guidance perspective, I’m looking at: How can we build a product for kids that helps them learn? 

It seems to me like Betweened is a site for parents as much as anybody. 

Engelbrecht: There’s definitely two audiences here. There’s absolutely a path where I could build a product for kids and launch them onto it. But I wouldn’t be addressing all the pain points.

Kids want short-form content. They want to create. They want to connect with their peers. In order to successfully set kids up to do that, parents need tools, too. And so it is really a product for both kids and parents.

Carla mentioned all these different apps coming down the road. Devorah, I’m thinking about you saying to someone recently how you’ve been working on this book for five years. A lot has changed in five years. We didn’t have TikTok five years ago. 

Heitner: Screenwise came out in the fall of 2016, which was a memorable time for many reasons: a lot of social forces happening in our world with Trump’s election. 

And then you have the pandemic in 2020. That’s around the time I had sold the book and was trying to interview people. Suddenly, I’m not in schools anymore. I’m on Zoom with kids, which is a whole research problem: How do you get a wider range of kids, not just the super-compliant kids who show up to a Zoom? And the pandemic was an accelerant to a lot of things happening already with kids in tech.

It was certainly not the beginning of kids being too young and not [the federal Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act gives parents control over what information websites can collect from their kids]. But it accelerated, and there was kind of a push toward things like Kids Messenger [on Facebook] and other things that I even experimented with at the time. 

The pandemic started when my son was 10. We were like, “Oh, what can we do to help him communicate with friends?” We experimented with Messenger. It was a fail for us, but I also talked to the people at and [two mobile phone companies marketed for children]. There are people, in different ways, trying to come up with solutions because they have understood that both the adult apps and the adult devices, like a smartphone that does all the things, might not be the ideal thing to give a 10-year-old. 

What’s changed since 2016 is there used to be more worry about one-to-one computing in schools. Now, every school pretty much is one-to-one. It’s really the outlier schools that don’t have tech or aren’t giving kids individual tech. Even as late as 2015, 2016, I was helping schools negotiate that with parents. And parents were like, “I don’t know. I’m not sure about screen time. I don’t know if I want my kid getting a Chromebook.”

Try to find a school now that doesn’t give kids iPads or Chromebooks or something. That’s probably one of the bigger differences. And then just the explosion in server-based gaming like Roblox and Minecraft and the ways kids interact in those digital communities. You see a lot of very complicated, weird ideas among adults who care about children. Like “I’ll wait until eighth grade to give a kid a phone. Meanwhile,my third-grader plays Roblox on a server with strangers.” 

Engelbrecht: Or has access to text messaging through their iPad.

Heitner: Exactly. And they’re very smugly waiting till eighth grade and I’m like, “For what? For your kid to make voice calls?” That’s the one thing they don’t want to do.

Carla, you come from a game design background. People have lots of terrible takes about video games, which I’m sure you’re used to. How has that background informed what you’re doing and what Betweened looks like?

Engelbrecht: A lot of people come to video games and they’re just like, “They’re evil,” or “They’re awful,” or “They’re violent.” And you can say the same thing about television. You can also say the same thing if you only eat broccoli. Anything in excess is not good for you — like running a marathon every day. I take a very pragmatic approach to most things we can actually find good in.

When I look at video games, I can’t classify them as evil. I instead look for the good things. And it’s the same with social media. Social media as part of a balanced media diet gives parents a lot of opportunities to connect, gives kids a lot of opportunity to express creativity and develop skills. 

I’ll give you an example on the games side of things: Years ago, I did a South by Southwest talk called “What Can Teach Us About Parenting.” Left 4 Dead is not a game that kids should ever play. It’s a violent, first-person zombie apocalyptic shooter. It’s also one of the most beautifully designed cooperative games ever. I’m terrible with thumb sticks on video game controllers. I can’t walk in a straight line in a video game. I’m not great at the actual zombie-killing side of things. But I’m really good at running around and picking up health packs and checking in on people who have been damaged by zombies.

So there are different roles that people can play. I can still participate in the game, even though the primary way of playing Left 4 Dead is not what works for me. 

Also, if I’m playing with people, it fosters communication. I have to talk to people and someone needs to say. “Hey, I need help,” and I can come over. That’s what I’m looking for in games and social media: What are those underlying skills that, with a thoughtful perspective, you can leverage for good?

I wanted to switch gears a little bit and talk about something you mentioned earlier, Devorah: casual surveillance. I think about the stories we hear about parents not even just surveilling their kids — tracking their phones or their cars — but just keeping up in a way that we never even dreamed of. I wonder: Where did this come from? And how do you think a site like Betweened is going to help? 

Engelbrecht: I wish I knew exactly where it came from, but it certainly seems it’s symptomatic of the same thing: Everything has just kind of crept up on us. It’s like, as phones started to be introduced, we just thought, “Oh, well, I need to charge my phone, so I’ll charge it next to my bed.” And then the next thing you know, you’re checking it first thing when you wake up. It’s this slippery slope without the mindfulness of what it’s doing. Something has to happen to stop you, to make you take a step back and think, “How far have I gone? What boundaries have I crossed or what new boundary do I need to establish?” And to Devorah’s earlier point, the pandemic accelerated a lot of this.

Heitner: Part of it is we do it because we can. Even in relationships. I’ve known my husband since before we each had cell phones, but we didn’t used to check in as often because we didn’t have cell phones. It had to really rise to the level of an emergency before I would call him at work.

Remember the days of 9-to-5 office jobs? He left in the morning and was at his job. I was a grad student then and I would go up to Northwestern and not even really have any reachability by phone. Now we have phones, and the expectation is pretty much down-to-the-minute: If I’m 11 minutes late, I’ll probably text and say, “I’m 11 minutes late.” There’s just so much expectation for contact and communication and knowing where other people are. We don’t use location surveillance for that, but a lot of families do, and a lot of people have watches and will check into each other’s location on watches.

Because it’s there, people do it. And then there’s also just tremendous worry right now about kids. Given that we as a society think it’s a good idea for everyone to have assault weapons, parents are a little nervous. That anxiety creeps into everything.

My older daughter is 31, and I remember getting her first cell phone when she was 12 or 13. I remember the intense peer pressure she felt to have a phone. And I really didn’t like it at all. But I kind of justified it by saying to myself, “This is going to keep her safe.” And I remember thinking to myself, “You’re so full of shit. You’re just really trying to smooth things over.” And I guess I wonder: As parents, do we have an overextended sense of peril about our kids these days?

Heitner: There’s a sense of peril. Also, the Internet and online news and targeted algorithms just fuel that worry and outrage. It’s a bit of a vicious cycle.

Engelbrecht: In some ways, it’s almost like there are more risks that could stick with you. There wasn’t social media when I was in college. A bad decision in college couldn’t chase me through my entire life. In that sense, there are risks that feel much larger.

I think about my daughter and I don’t want something to chase her for her entire life. That part of it feels very real. And then it feels out of control. I don’t have the tools or know exactly how I can best help her except for having hard conversations and trying to put some bumpers around her. But there’s not a lot of tools to put the bumpers around her.

Devorah, one of the things you have said is that the kind of surveillance a lot of parents are undertaking is really undermining the trust their kids feel, and backfiring because kids won’t open up to them when they really need to. Can you talk a little bit more about that?

Heitner: You just see kids really getting focused on going deeper underground. If their parents are like, “I’m going to get Bark and read every single thing they text,” then you see some kids who are like, “O.K., I need to go deeper underground, I need a VPN or to only text on Snapchat, or I need to do something where I can be more evasive.” And that concerns me, because then there’s no way to make use of the parent when the parent might be useful.

Engelbrecht: I think about how to create space to allow the kid to have a second chance at telling me the truth. For example, if there’s an empty bag of gummies and the kid is the only one who could have eaten it but says they didn’t, how can I create space to talk about making mistakes versus lying or intentionally hiding the truth? Saying, “I’m going to ask what happened to the gummis again, but first I want you to take a moment to think about your answer — it’s OK to change your answer, because I want to understand the truth. We all make mistakes and we can talk about it. But intentionally hiding the truth has consequences.”

If I later find out that the child lied, then there’s consequences. The hope is that eventually, a parent can say, “If you end up at a party where there’s alcohol, don’t drive home. Call me for a ride home. If you try to hide that there was alcohol and make poor decisions, then there’s additional consequences.”

It’s important to be able to say, “I made a mistake” and talk about what to do from there. Hopefully, that provides an alternative to the arms race of increasingly sneaky strategies that Devorah described.

Heitner: That makes a lot of sense. I was just going to say: The surveillance — schools just push it really hard. Every time I go to a school, they’re like, “Are you logged into ?” or “Are you logged into ?” They’re just really pushing it so hard.

Are schools culpable in this? Sounds like you’d say, “Yes.” I don’t know if you’d call it surveillance, though. One of the functions of schools is to keep track of things, right?

Heitner: But what about the location tracking? My kid has to scan a QR code to get into the cafeteria. I skipped lunch every day of high school and ate with my drama club friends in the theater. Was that so bad? They have 3,500 kids QR-coding themselves into study hall. It’s pretty locked down. It’s pretty Big Brother, or if you read Cory Doctorow. 

Engelbrecht: Homework tracking means having full visibility of my daughter when part of what she needs to learn is the executive function skills to actually be able to plan and follow through and do her homework. I don’t want to be in the place where I’m policing her homework. Now that she’s in seventh grade, it’s time for her to be learning those skills before there’s the consequences of missing your homework in high school or college.

So to me, it’s kind of that same thing: The information is there. Should it be provided? How do you use it? And, for me it’s: How do we better equip administrators, teachers or parents to stop and think about how to leverage this information? So maybe a kid who’s consistently missing their homework, yes, the parents should have more visibility as part of a support program to get the kid back on track and help them learn the skills. But to Devorah’s point, it doesn’t mean everyone needs to be badging into lunch.

Devorah, your message to parents is: There are all these things happening. There are all these things you have to keep track of. There are lots and lots of risks to kids being on social media, especially teenagers. But you shouldn’t panic. And I wanted to just throw this out to both of you: Instead of panicking, what should parents do? 

Heitner: Carla, you’re talking about creating a new community space for kids that’s more of a learning space, and that’s one alternative. Another alternative, in addition to, or potentially instead of, for parents who don’t have access to that, is just leaning into one or two spaces they really want to mentor their kids in.

Maybe their kid’s really involved in Minecraft. And if they want to join [a free voice, chat, gaming and communications app], the parents are waiting and saying, “O.K. You can join your library Discord with or your school Minecraft club on Discord, but not general Discord.”

Parents will tell me their kids are playing or they’re on YouTube. But I’m like, “What channels? It’s just like if somebody says, “I’m watching TV.” Well, what are you watching? Because that really is a big differentiator in terms of the experience.

Engelbrecht: It goes back to your “Fear of Messing Up.” I think so much about how it’s important for parents to wade in and get involved with their kids. This has been the advice for decades, whatever the newfangled thing was. I was just doing some writing about encouraging parents to actually do with their kids. It’s an opportunity to bond. It actually requires some planning and practice. It’s physical activity. I assume most parents are like me, that they’re not a great dancer and it’s uncomfortable and you don’t want to mess up.

But modeling that I’ll do something that’s out of my comfort zone and connect with you over something that I know you enjoy, can be very simple. It doesn’t mean a parent has to suddenly learn all aspects of Roblox or Discord, because they can be intimidating. But just find an entry point and connect with the child and participate with them. It just has so many benefits. It’s true whether they’re into Tonka trucks or Roblox. Parenting means, “Get in there with your kid.”

Devorah, you use the phrase, “Lead with curiosity.”

Engelbrecht: Oh, I love that.

Heitner: You want to be curious and have your kid share it with you. Their expertise and experience as well and their discernment — what do they like or not like about this app? How would they change it if they could? Staying curious is an alternative to spying — being curious and asking kids to be curious even about their own experience. Do I actually feel less stressed when I scroll this app? That’s maybe a lot of mindfulness to expect of kids, who have a lot going on and a lot coming at them. But it’s important for all of us to be curious about how our experience is going.

Engelbrecht: That’s one of the ways I’ve been thinking about it from a product perspective: just how to help build in some scaffolds for mindfulness — things like when you start an app, actually having a timer that’s like, “How long do you want to spend on it right now?”

I set a timer for myself when I use TikTok because I spend a very long time on it. So being able to put that in there as a scaffold, to start being mindful and thoughtful about it. We’re posting content, but we’re actually not posting endless scrolls where you could spend all day.

I don’t want to prioritize the traditional tech metric of “time on task.” To me, success is like, “You can come and use Betweened for 20 minutes and then know you can come back another day and there’s lots of interesting stuff for you.” But it’s not all-consuming, must-do-this-all-the-time. And that’s a different perspective on tech products. It’s not how most products are developed.

But some justices said the public deserves to know when the official is using their account as a private citizen.

“What makes these cases hard is that there are First Amendment interests all over the place,” said Justice Elena Kagan. 

In the lawsuit, , a California couple, said two Poway Unified School District board members violated their free speech rights when they blocked them on Facebook and Twitter, now X. Even if the accounts were personal, the parents argued, the members used them to discuss official school business.

“What you have is both of the petitioners using ‘we’ and ‘our’ when they talk about what the [school] board is doing,” said Pamela Karlan, who represents Christopher and Kimberly Garnier, parents of three children in the San Diego-area district. “Anybody who looks at that is going to think this is an official website. It looks like an official website. It performs all the functions of an official website.”

The board members insist that as private citizens, they had a right to restrict content. They objected to the Garniers repeatedly posting the same comments,and argued that the couple’s lengthy responses alleging racial discrimination and financial management were distracting and made it difficult for others to engage online. 

Their attorney compared the board members’ social media accounts to personal property.

“The state itself did not control or even facilitate their operation of the pages,” said Hashim Mooppan. He added that his clients, Michelle O’Connor-Ratcliff, a current board member, and T.J. Zane, who left the board last year, “wielded no greater rights or privileges than any other private citizen denying access to their own property.” 

Despite concerned parents and community activists packing school board meetings in recent years, the majority of public comment on schools, and on government policy in general, takes place online. That’s why the court’s decision will have implications far beyond education. The court on Tuesday also heard a similar case from Michigan that essentially asks the same question: When does a public official’s social media activity amount to “state action?” The cases are among five the court will hear this term that on the role free speech plays in the digital sphere.

“I don’t think it’s immediately apparent which way they’ll go,” said Kristin Lindgren, deputy general counsel for the California School Boards Association, which submitted a brief in support of the board members. 

Lindgren, who listened to the three hours of oral arguments Tuesday, said the three liberal justices appeared more sympathetic to the public’s right to know if their representative is acting in an official capacity, while the conservative majority focused on the board members’ freedom to discuss district issues as private citizens. “I don’t think the court wants to remove a public official’s private First Amendment rights to speak off the cuff.”

Regardless of the court’s ultimate opinion, she said it’s clear that both board members and the public need guidance on the issue.

Appearance matters, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the said when it ruled in favor of the Garniers. The opinion said the board members, “clothed their pages in the authority of their offices,” and that First Amendment protections “apply no less” to the internet than they do “the bulletin boards or town halls of the corporeal world.”

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, one of the court’s conservatives, said it may come down to whether constituents can get their information elsewhere. 

“A lot of this will depend on whether it’s reposting or exclusive posting,” he said. “That’s the kind of practical information that people are going to need.”

The disclaimer issue

Justices devoted much of their time to the question of whether a public official must inform constituents when they’re speaking privately or in an official capacity. 

“Government officials can operate in their personal capacity and in their official capacity,” Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said, agreeing with Mooppan, the members’ attorney. But she added, “Why should they get to choose whether or not they’re doing one or the other without making a clear disclaimer? How do we know which you have chosen?”

Karlan noted that the Poway district even requires board members to “identify personal viewpoints as such and not as the viewpoint of the board.” But O’Connor-Ratcliff, she said, didn’t do that and predominantly used her Facebook page to communicate about school activities such as visiting classrooms during instructional time. “The only reason she has the power to do that is because of her official capacity.”

Mooppan countered that requiring officials to post such disclaimers is too heavy a burden and would have a chilling effect.

“Some of those people aren’t going to do it, and they’re gonna lose their First Amendment rights,” he said. “That’s the exact opposite of how the First Amendment normally works.”

The court’s opinion is likely to hinge on the extent of a public official’s authority, said Katie Fallow, senior counsel at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University. For example, individual school board members don’t speak for the entire board.

But the second case, , focuses on a city manager, who has more power to act individually. In that case, the Sixth Circuit ruled that the public official was acting completely on his own. 

Fallow predicted the Supreme Court is unlikely to adopt the Sixth Circuit’s “very narrow” view.

“The court seemed to be indicating that it would use a test that considered whether a public official was using a private social media account to carry out the duties or exercise the authority of government,” she said. “The question is how broad and flexible that test will be.” 

On Tuesday, the court will consider whether those officials — in one case, board members for the San Diego-area Poway school district — can block constituents from responding to posts on platforms like Facebook and X.

“Government accountability … goes down the toilet if officials can effectively ‘mute’ their critics,” said Cory Briggs, an attorney who represents Poway parents Christopher and Kimberly Garnier. “Nobody is required to read the comments on social, but preventing them from being expressed in the first place ensures that nobody ever hears dissenting voices.”

Michelle O’Connor-Ratcliff, a current board member, and T.J. Zane, who served from 2014 to 2022, argue that they were acting as private citizens and, therefore, had a right to cut off the Garniers’ ability to reply. They complained that the couple essentially trolled them, repeatedly posting the same comments — in one instance, more than 200 times in a 10-minute period — and cluttered up their feeds.

But the Garniers say both O’Connor-Ratcliff and Zane identified themselves as government officials and that, by all appearances, used social media as an extension of their board positions. Blocking them — no matter how annoying or off topic their posts might have been — was a violation of free speech and their First Amendment right to petition their government, according to . The U.S. Appeals Court for the 9th Circuit agreed.

In an age when the public is far more likely to air concerns about government online than attend an official meeting, the case has major implications not just for how parents engage with school board members, but for how citizens in general interact with their elected leaders. It’s one of two cases before the court on Tuesday that pose the same question — whether an official’s use of a private social media account amounts to “state action.”

involves a city manager in Port Huron, Michigan, who blocked a resident after he complained about local efforts to prevent COVID transmission. In that case, the federal appeals court took the opposite view, saying the manager did not act “under the color of law.” The split between the lower courts prompted the Supreme Court to take up the cases.

Like the Garniers, some First Amendment experts want the court to uphold the 9th Circuit’s decision. Katie Fallow, senior counsel at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, said if an official discusses government business on social media, the First Amendment still applies, even if using the account isn’t a formal part of the job.

“They use it to talk to the public about their policies and solicit input from constituents,” she said. “The question is, ‘Does the public consider this to be the source of official pronouncements?’ ”

Fallow has experience with the issue. The Knight Institute in 2017 because he blocked critics on Twitter. The Institute won the case at the appellate level, but the Supreme Court dismissed it because Twitter’s former owners in 2021 following the uprising at the U.S. Capitol. (Trump’s account has since .)

O’Connor-Ratcliff and Zane — like Trump — opened their accounts before they took public office. “Once elected, they keep using it,” Fallow said. “They want their brand and their followers.”

Neither O’Connor-Ratcliff, Zane, nor their attorney agreed to an interview prior to oral arguments, but representatives for other elected officials have been closely following both cases. 

The California School Boards Association wrote in to the court that if the Garniers win, boards would have to “police” members’ social media accounts and could potentially face more litigation . During elections, the association added, incumbents would be limited in controlling unflattering posts while challengers would be free to restrict negative comments.

Board members need a “practical test” that clarifies “when social media activity transforms from personal to state action,” the association wrote. Because of the “rapidly evolving nature” of social media, the rules should apply across all current and future platforms, the brief said.

The filed a brief in the case because “federal government officials also use social media accounts,” and whatever the court decides would apply to those officials and employees.

Years of conflict

The Garniers, who have three children in the district , have a troubled relationship with Poway officials that goes beyond social media posts. In 2013, Christopher, who once worked as a coach in Poway schools, filed a wrongful termination lawsuit against the district. Then in 2015, a judge granted the district a against him requiring that he stay away from his children’s school and its former principal. He was accused of making verbal threats, disrupting a meeting and pounding on car windows — allegations he denied.

Christopher, who is Black, argues that he was singled out because of his race and that the district treats minority students unfairly. It’s an issue that surfaced in comments his wife posted on the board members’ Facebook pages. According to court documents, Kimberly posted: “I have children of color in the district, and I don’t want them going to school and seeing a noose.” 

Christopher’s replies focused on both racial and financial matters. Following several of O’Connor-Ratcliff’s posts, he wrote that the board members, among other officials, “refuse to meet with our interracial family.” In another lengthy Facebook reply, posted multiple times, Christopher argued that Black students in the predominantly white district were disproportionately suspended and that he didn’t receive all the discipline data he requested through a public records request.

He was an outspoken critic of former Superintendent John Collins, who to not reporting more than $300,000 in consultant income, a misdemeanor. Collins was sentenced to five years probation and had to repay the district $185,000. 

“Trustees lack the intestinal fortitude to fire this man,” Christopher replied in response to several posts from 2015. Briggs, the Garniers’ attorney, said his clients thought financial oversight had not improved since the board fired Collins in 2016.

“How many times should constituents be allowed to express admittedly legit criticism of their elected representative’s performance?” Briggs asked. “The answer can only be: as many as it takes to get [them] to do better or to get [them] voted out of office.”

‘Strange bedfellows’

The case predates the pandemic. But the COVID era — with its virtual government meetings and restrictions on in-person gatherings — has only intensified the level of vitriol on social media.

Data shows that Americans who rely on social media for news tend to be younger and more likely to have school-age children. Forty percent were in the 30-49 age range, according to . Online threats of violence against public officials, meanwhile, have increased, , especially toward judges and prosecutors. But at the height of debates over mask mandates and vaccines, superintendents and school board members were also targets of online intimidation and bullying.

Jonathan Zachreson of Roseville City, California, has been on both sides of the issue. During the pandemic, he advocated for reopening schools and against a vaccine mandate for students. State Sen. Richard Pan, who wanted to for students, even blocked him on Twitter (now X).

Now Zachreson is on his town’s school board. After he was elected, he said the district advised members on the legal issues surrounding social media. To him, there’s no gray area.

“Either don’t talk about school business or don’t block people — it’s like one or the other,” he said. 

But he added that as with public meetings, there should be limits on “disorderly” behavior, like spamming. The question, he said, is whether the Supreme Court will draw that line.

Andrew McNulty, a Denver attorney, said he can’t predict how the court — with a 6-3 conservative majority — will rule on the cases. He’s particularly interested because he represents a Denver Public School parent who filed last month against a board member who blocked her on Facebook.

“There’s so much conservative backlash about censoring speech,” McNulty said. The court has also agreed to hear cases from on whether tech companies can be sued or penalized if they block or limit content. And it will consider in which Missouri and Louisiana accused the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of conspiring with social media companies to suppress opposition to COVID vaccines, mask mandates and school closures. 

Until now, against Trump was the most high-profile case over the issue. But Democrats have also been sued for blocking critics. In 2019, progressive New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez with a former Republican state lawmaker and talk show host she blocked on Twitter. 

“The First Amendment makes strange bedfellows,” McNulty said. “It crosses the ideological spectrum.”

With the back to school honeymoon now officially over, seasoned educators have taken to the social media platform to share their best classroom tips with hashtags like #teachertwitter, #badteacheradvice, and threads from newbie teachers looking for a little direction.

“It’s that time of year,” one teacher, @heymrsbond posted. “The honeymoon has worn off…pace yourself. Celebrate the wins loudly.”

Between pleas to ignore the now infamous advice “” was a reminder not to sweat the small stuff. 

“Sometimes it’s best to let the small things go,” tweeted Anne-Marie Longpre, a teacher from Toronto. 

What if a student comes to class unprepared every day, continually dipping into a dwindling classroom supply of yellow Ticonderoga pencils? Should the teacher reprimand the student?

“Just give him the bloody pencil,” Tweeted Ms. Chris Robinson, a teacher from Northern England. 

 Showing students their teacher is human was strongly recommended.

 “Let your kids see you mess up,” offered Señora Campbell, a Spanish teacher in Texas.

Whether they’re new to the classroom and wondering how coworkers manage being on their feet all day, when the best time to eat lunch is, or they’re just looking for a boost in morale, here’s what Teacher Twitter recommends to new educators:

1. New teachers don’t have to figure everything out on their own. Find a mentor:  

Find a mentor. That person doesn’t have to be at your school or teach your grade, but should be at your level–elem, middle, or high. Spend an hour or so over a beverage & just talk about being a teacher: joys, fears, & maybe some practical tips. Know you someone for support.

— 𝔻𝕣. ℝ𝕠𝕓𝕖𝕣𝕥𝕤 (@elainej)

2. Opponents of “Don’t smile until Christmas” say smile away:

My mentor teacher told me the infamous “don’t smile until Christmas” line my first teaching. I was miserable. I didn’t like teaching until I could be my whole self doing it

— Sarah “Mili” Milianta-Laffin (@MiliLaff)

3. Minimize distractions with this trick: 

4. Check yourself … before you overstress yourself: 

5. Students won’t remember every lesson, but they will remember how you made them feel: 

6. If a student comes to class unprepared, there may be more to the story: 

7. Invest in good shoes — and an emergency supply drawer full of snacks: 

8. Don’t react to everything:

9. Lunch is a protected time that should not include work:  

10. Make space for classroom surprises: 

11. Makes friends with all of your colleagues, not just other teachers:  

12. Teachers are human. Mistakes will be made:

As one of 27 district leaders on a national COVID recovery task force, Virginia Beach schools Superintendent Aaron Spence helped craft a list of the issues his counterparts across the country would need to consider as they reopened schools.

But during one meeting earlier this year, he said he interrupted the conversation with a more personal request. “When are we going to talk about us?” he asked the group. Spence, like , had been enduring a virtual battering on social media over when to bring students and teachers back to the classroom.

If he delayed reopening, critics would suggest leaders in neighboring districts were more capable of managing the return to school. And if he celebrated students getting back on campus, “80 people would say, ‘You’re killing our children,’” said Spence, who took a year-long break from Twitter for his peace of mind. “There was no way to win.”

Spence resurfaced on social media last month to congratulate this year’s graduating seniors. But with the uproar over critical race theory now eclipsing the frustrations over school reopening, the tenor of online conversations hasn’t necessarily improved. have called it quits this year than normal, including those in the nation’s top three school districts. But the vast majority of superintendents will be back this fall, and many are stepping into the role for the first time. With the as the school year gets closer and breaking out at board meetings, district leaders are bracing for another turbulent year.

“People are just so angry right now,” said Susan Enfield, superintendent of the Highline Public Schools near Seattle. “I think that sometimes stepping away from social media is the healthy, appropriate thing to do — especially if you’re a parent or have children in the district.”

Over the past year, Enfield, who has been Highline’s superintendent for nine years, has become a virtual shoulder to lean on for district leaders across the country. She mentors new superintendents and teaches in a leadership certification program for AASA, the national superintendents’ organization.

But she has faced plenty of criticism on her own. This year alone, she’s been called everything from an “f-ing idiot” to “a know-it-all c-word,” she said. Some of the heat even came from within.

“I had staff accuse me of for wanting to bring children back at their parents’ request,” she said, adding that 45 percent of parents polled wanted to return in March, almost half of them non-white. “I felt that was a mandate.”

Then in April, the district’s central office was vandalized. The words “Racist superintendent. Hazard pay. Reparations now” were sprayed across the front of the building in red and black paint.

‘Things that used to seem like regular good jobs that had a public face now seem like dangerous, high-risk activities.’ —Sarah Sobieraj, sociology professor at Tufts University

Aside from moments when she dreams of being a personal shopper at Nordstrom, Enfield said she still loves the work and has learned to separate the political nature of the position from her role as a district leader.

“The work of serving children is a gift, even on the hard days,” she said.

While she hasn’t left social media, Enfield refrains from getting into back-and-forth exchanges with those tweeting hateful comments. And she advises other leaders to put their health and family first.

‘The intensity of the emotion’

That’s what Candace Singh, who has led the Fallbrook Union Elementary School District near San Diego since 2011, had to do after receiving messages about reopening schools that she said her and her family’s safety. Warnings, such as “You better watch out,” and “Watch your back,” unnerved her enough that she closed her Twitter account for three months. She said she needed to “get her sea legs again” and balance her role as a mother, daughter and wife.

“Because that language is now accepted in the public discourse, where it never would have been tolerated before, [it’s] very unsettling for people in my position,” she said.

At the height of the crisis, she was on Zoom 12 hours a day and never left her kitchen counter. She started to feel like she was getting sick, so she set some boundaries around her time. She limited the amount of news she would follow and began to take daily walks around her neighborhood near the ocean, listening to “meditative” music and podcasts and catching up with friends and family by phone.

“If you’ve been a superintendent for any length of time, you’re used to this being a job that comes with criticism. You’re making decisions that not everyone will agree with, nor should they,” she said. “This took that and literally lit it on fire because of the nature of the intensity of the emotion and deeply political direction this took.”

‘When tempers flare’

In Tennessee’s Shelby County Public Schools last year, Superintendent Joris Ray received on social media regarding his decision to keep schools virtual in the fall. One tweet sent to him said, “You deserve to be tortured in the worst way possible,” and someone showed up at his house to challenge him over the issue, according to the district. Last month, the Guilford County Schools in North Carolina for Superintendent Sharon Contreras and other district leaders because of a spike in angry emails, voicemails and posts on social media — one of which Contreras, in uppercase letters, of running a “far-left, anti-white racist, indoctrination gulag” and being “an aficionado of BLM thugs,” officials said.

The outrage in many communities over critical race theory has made district leadership even more perilous in recent months, with some administrators even leaving their jobs due to .

But district leaders aren’t the only ones feeling under attack.

“The temperature and rhetoric is too hot on all sides,” said Erika Sanzi, the director of outreach at nonprofit Parents Defending Education and an outspoken opponent of what the organization views as indoctrination in the classroom. “The threats are not unique to district leaders — parents who oppose ideas and practices infected with critical race and gender theory are also being threatened, doxxed and harassed. All of it is wrong.”

And the angry tone on social media over masks, policies for transgender students and school equity initiatives is spilling over into .

One man in June for disorderly conduct at a Loudoun County Public Schools board meeting, where members addressed transgender student policies. In Utah, a Granite School District meeting ended early when a dozen disruptive, burst in, yelling obscenities at board members. And Sanzi pointed to Michelle Leete, from her position with the Virginia state PTA last week after shouting “Let them die” at a rally outside a Fairfax County school board meeting, in reference to parents opposed to critical race theory. The Virginia PTA on Saturday that Leete wasn’t speaking for the organization and that they didn’t “condone the choice of words.”

‘They tie your salary to what they think you should tolerate.’ —Candace Singh, superintendent of the Fallbrook Union Elementary School District near San Diego

Kenneth Trump, president of National School Safety and Security Services, a nonprofit consulting firm, said his team has noticed an increase in concerns about the safety of school and district leaders at board meetings, and because of the “broader context of violence in public places” in recent years, some districts have increased security.

Those who continue to engage with the public on social media “can take their time to pick-and-choose how to respond to threats,” he said. “But when tempers flare at in-person meetings, they may have less time or no time to think through a laundry list of potential ways to respond.”

Sarah Sobieraj, a sociology professor at Tufts University, sees the hateful comments toward superintendents as part of of threats against officials over the past year, including those working in and . While both men and women in leadership positions have felt the impact, women in the public eye, she said, have borne the brunt of the backlash and the commenters often discredit them because they are women.

Taking a break from social media or having a staff person monitor the posts are among the ways leaders handle the onslaught, “but you can take all of the precautions that people might suggest, and still find yourself on the receiving end of this kind of harassment,” said Sobieraj, whose father was a district superintendent.

The public might not have a lot of sympathy for leaders who earn six figures and are expected to make tough decisions.

“They tie your salary to what they think you should tolerate,” Singh said.

But Sobieraj said attacks on social media are now a factor leaders weigh when deciding whether to go into public service — one that can discourage women and minorities from pursuing those roles.

“Things that used to seem like regular good jobs that had a public face now seem like dangerous, high-risk activities,” she said.

Enfield added it’s important for district leaders to find ways to stay above the fray because superintendent longevity is a key to improving student achievement. One reason is because superintendents hire principals and well-prepared school leaders contribute to growth in student learning.

“One of the least sexy, least talked-about factors in districts that are getting results is leadership stability,” she said.

But she said superintendents also need to know when to step away. She’s decided that the 2021-22 school year will be her last in Highline, but the burden of leading schools during the pandemic was only part of the reason. She hopes to continue serving as superintendent in another district.

“Every leader has a shelf life,” she said. “You figure out when your shelf life comes before someone else figures it out for you.”

Lead Image: The district office in the Highline Public Schools was vandalized in April. (Highline Public Schools)