NYC Teacher Sues Principal For Sexually Harassing Her At Work Because She Broke Up With Him

16 hours ago  |  

Photo Credit: Public School Review

After a teacher at a Brooklyn high school decided to end her relationship with the school’s principal for cheating on her, the sweetheart turned scorned lover made her life at work miserable. According to The New York Daily News, the teacher, Jordan Barnett, is now suing principal Steve Dorcely for sexual harassment while working together at Urban Action Academy, which allegedly lasted two years.

Barnett accuses Dorcely of making inappropriate sexual comments and gestures towards her and accusing her of discriminatory actions that she did not commit.  He also gave her poor performance reviews, embarrassed her in front of others and had her investigated four times in the past six months.

Dorcely was quite the creep according to the court documents. While Barnett was discussing having two cysts in her breasts due to stress with a colleague, Dorcely overheard and commented “That’s because no one is sucking on your breasts.” Another incident occurred when Barnett bent over to plug in her phone charger and Dorcely came up behind her and told her “Put your butt on me.”

Barnett ended their relationship after finding out that Dorcely was having an affair with another woman at their job.

Barnett is seeking an undisclosed amount in the lawsuit.



Richard Roaf stands in front of a room of strangers, looking for conservative spies. He scans the room, then hunches over a computer to check names. To be extra sure, he asks everyone to introduce themselves.

Hazel Sheffield is a British multimedia journalist living in London.


Sign up to get Backchannel’s weekly newsletter, and follow us on FacebookTwitter, and Instagram.

Roaf is only half joking about spies. He’s gathered this group in the back room of a union building in Bristol, England to teach its members to make viral videos for Momentum, a grassroots campaigning wing of the Labour Party. Many credit its cutting-edge digital tactics with transforming the Labour Party, the democratic party in British politics, from an object of ridicule to a genuine contender for control of Parliament.

Momentum’s approach has bucked convention. Instead of paying for Facebook ads, Momentum has focused on building software, apps, and other digital tools to reach left-leaning Britons organically. Momentum spent £2,000 on Facebook advertising; the Conservative party spent £1 million. The Conservative Party can afford it: It raised £25 million in the three months running up to the election—three times the amount taken by Labour. Yet by last summer’s election, nearly one in four UK Facebook users had watched a Momentum video.

The Labour Party’s leader, Jeremy Corbyn, lost the election. But Labour gained 30 seats in parliament, taking its total to 262 and toppling the Conservative majority. Overnight, Corbyn went from a political laughing stock to a serious threat to the Conservative government. Momentum’s campaigning tactics are forming the basis of a playbook, and progressives around the world are watching—including those in the US, who are looking for a path to rebuild for future elections. Momentum’s success is making progressives realize that if they want to win, they’re going to have to run their campaigns a lot more like startups.

Just weeks after Jeremy Corbyn was elected leader of the Labour Party in September 2015, his supporters started planning how to support him. Corbyn has served as the parliamentary representative for Islington, North London, for 34 years. For many young people and poor people, Corbyn’s election offered hope that the austerity policies of the Conservatives might come to an end. But for the center-left of the Labour Party, his election was untenable. Corbyn’s supporters realized they would have to act swiftly to keep him in office.


  • Inside Baidu’s Bid to Lead the AI Revolution

  • The Spectator Who Threw a Wrench in the Waymo/Uber Lawsuit

  • Corporate Boards Are Complicit in Sexual Harassment

  • The Fake News Culprit No One Wants to Identify: You

Within weeks of Corbyn’s election, a supporter named Jon Lansman started Momentum, a grassroots organization that aimed not only to protect Corbyn’s position, but also to see him elected prime minister. By 2016, Momentum had a paid, formal membership structure, and cells in different UK cities. Within each cell, groups organized themselves into circles of interest—a structure borrowed from the Occupy movement. By the time of the election, the group had roughly 27,000 members, all committed to using their skills to aid Corbyn.

Roaf was recruited by Momentum to put together a team of four or five video producers. He quickly realized that the demand to help outstripped the number of positions available. Rather than form a traditional, top-down organization, Roaf used the Momentum email list to create a network of independent producers.

Roaf seized on a responsive way of working. Sometimes, video makers would come to him with fully formed videos, ready for distribution. Other times, Roaf and other Momentum members would work with producers on their ideas. “Before, when I tried to get in a touch with the Labour Party, they had a fixed way of doing things,” Roaf says. “Momentum is more flexible and keen for people to get involved.”

The most successful Momentum video, “Daddy, why do you hate me?” showed a girl asking her Tory-voting father why she couldn’t go to university like him. Its purpose was to rally younger voters around intergenerational inequality. It attracted six million viewers.

Social media often silos political messages, showing campaigns only to those who have already been converted. But remarkably, Momentum’s strategy managed to reach new supporters. In the last week of the campaign, just 5.3 percent of those who watched a Momentum video had already “liked” Jeremy Corbyn’s Facebook page.

This distributed way of organizing—training individuals to act on behalf of the broader movement—has been embraced by progressives, according to Rapi Castillo, a New York-based software developer. During the 2016 American primaries, Castillo, a Bernie Sanders supporter, was one of the developers behind Coders For Sanders, a volunteer coding network that morphed into the Progressive Coders Network after Sanders’s unsuccessful presidential bid.

Open-source software hosted on Github now forms the basis for what Castillo calls a “knowledge base,” where coders can collaborate to build tools quickly. “As we move forward it’s going to grow more and more,” he says. “That’s why we are so excited about what’s going on in the UK.”

Coders for Corbyn was inspired by Castillo’s group. “They saw the tech in our campaign and they wanted to apply it in the leadership run,” Castillo says. One UK coder, Greg Dash, was working as a social researcher in 2015. He contacted Castillo about the Bern Kit: an online toolkit full of apps. It was created by Coders for Sanders to provide Bernie’s supporters with campaigning tools. Dash, along with Coders for Corbyn, used that open-source software to create the Corbyn Kit, which now contains everything from Jerimojis (emojis of Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party) to an app that blocks fake or troll Twitter accounts.

Dash, who was recruited after the election to work as a political advisor within the party, says that devolved campaigning has become a core component of the Labour party’s digital strategy. “This is just the way that politics is evolving,” he says. “We are keeping up with it and the [Conservatives] are not.”

Claire Sandberg, the digital director for Bernie Sanders’ presidential run, watched the 2017 UK election results from London. She had come over to introduce Momentum campaigners to approaches that worked for Sanders—like using peer-to-peer texting, Slack groups, and apps to organize volunteers.

In particular, Sandberg had high hopes for one Momentum project: My Nearest Marginal, an app that tackles the problem of how to distribute door-knockers to seats that need them most. On the app, campaigners can submit their postcode and find their nearest marginal seat, along with dates and times of door-knocking events and carpools of volunteers. Though Sandberg had seen similar organizing tools in the US, none had been so effective. My Nearest Marginal cost almost nothing to create. Yet it mobilized roughly 100,000 people to share their stories on doorsteps around the country.

My Nearest Marginal gave volunteers a fast way to plug in and start talking to voters. But, more importantly, it gave them a bird’s eye view of electoral strategy. “What was different about these campaigns was really how they empowered volunteers to lead campaigning on their own,” says Sandberg. “Establishment campaigns never would have permitted [that].”

On election day in the UK, the volunteers contacted voters across a variety of networks. They devised ways to use existing technology, such as WhatsApp, to distribute political messages rapidly. On election day, Momentum pushed WhatsApp messages telling people to go and vote. A link encouraged recipients to forward the message to friends, leading to a WhatsApp cascade that reached 400,000 people. A phone canvassing app, developed by the Bristol branch of Momentum, made 100,000 calls. A website set up by Momentum captured more than 10,000 pledges from people who agreed to take election day off work and go door-knocking.


  • The Tech Resistance Awakens

  • Virginia’s Election on Tuesday Will Test the Power of Silicon Valley’s New Activists

  • What Congress Should Ask Tech Executives About Russia

Jeremy Corbyn lost, but the Labour Party destroyed the Conservative majority, significantly weakening the ruling party’s position in parliament. Labour gained 35,000 members in the four days after the general election. It grew to more than 550,000, making it the biggest political party in Europe. This was its own kind of victory. Sandberg had barely allowed herself to dream that the UK election would turn out like it did: “I was afraid to hope the result would be so dramatic.”

Though Sandberg no longer works for Sanders, she and many of her colleagues in the US have kept in close communication with UK activists, as they prepare for the 2018 midterms. “The channels for coordination that we used to share ideas are still open,” she says. “We recognize that we’re in a common global movement to replace the neoliberal economic system of the past 30 years.”

This network may prove crucial for the future of left-wing politics. Recently, British conservatives started their own grassroots campaign, Activate, to replicate the success of Momentum. But the campaign tech employed by the left relies on a groundswell of volunteers. Conservatives might have money, but they don’t yet have a social movement on which to pin their campaign. And grassroots movements, by their nature, can’t be mandated.

Castillo says that in the upcoming 2018 US midterm elections, the Progressive Coders Network will look to adapt Momentum tactics—including software, videos, and My Nearest Marginal.

They’re just waiting for the right candidate. “We believe tech has to be a supporting arm,” Castillo says. “We listen to the thought leaders.”

The 8-minute ‘Death Stranding’ trailer is the wildest thing I’ve ever seen

FACEBOOK SAYS IT built Messenger Kids, a new version of its popular communications app with parental controls, to help safeguard pre-teens who may be using unauthorized and unsupervised social-media accounts. Critics think Facebook is targeting children as young as 6 to hook them on its services. Facebook’s goal is to “push down the age” of when it’s acceptable for kids to be on social media, says Josh Golin, executive director of Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood. Golin says 11-to-12-year-olds who already have a Facebook account, probably because they lied about their age, might find the animated emojis and GIFs of Messenger Kids “too babyish,” and are unlikely to convert to the new app. Facebook launched Messenger Kids for 6-to-12-year olds in the US Monday, saying it took extraordinary care and precautions. The company said its 100-person team building apps for teens and kids consulted with parent groups, advocates, and childhood-development experts during the 18-month development process and the app reflects their concerns. Parents download Messenger Kids on their child’s account, after verifying their identity by logging into Facebook. Since kids cannot be found in search, parents must initiate and respond to friend requests. Facebook says Messenger Kids will not display ads, nor collect data on kids for advertising purposes. Kids’ accounts will not automatically be rolled into Facebook accounts once they turn 13. Nonetheless, advocates focused on marketing to children expressed concerns. The company will collect the content of children’s messages, photos they send, what features they use on the app, and information about the device they use. Facebook says it will use this information to improve the app and will share the information “within the family of companies that are part of Facebook,” and outside companies that provide customer support, analysis, and technical infrastructure. “It’s all that squishy language that we normally see in privacy policies,” says Golin. “It seems to give Facebook a lot of wiggle room to share this information.” He says Facebook should be clearer about the outsiders with which it may share data. In response to questions from WIRED, a spokesperson for Facebook said: “It’s important to remember that Messenger Kids does not have ads and we don’t use the data for advertising. This provision about sharing information with vendors from the privacy policy is for things like providing infrastructure to deliver messages.” Kristen Strader, campaign coordinator for the nonprofit group Public Citizen, says Facebook has proven it cannot be trusted with youth data in the past, pointing to a leaked Facebook report from May that promised advertisers the ability to track teen emotions, such as insecurity, in real-time. “Their response was just that they will not do similar experiments in the future,” says Strader. At the time, advocacy groups asked for a copy of the report, but Facebook declined. RECOMMENDED DAVID PIERCE YouTube’s Quest to Make TV Work Everywhere ADRIENNE SO Review: Amazon Fire HD 8 Kids Edition ELIZABETH STINSON All the Face-Tracking Tech Behind Apple’s Animoji Tech companies have made a much more aggressive push into targeting younger users, a strategy that began in earnest in 2015 when Google launched YouTube Kids, which includes advertising. Parents create an account for their child through Google’s Family Link, a product to help parents monitor screentime. FamilyLink is also used for parents who want to start an account for their kid on Google Home, which gets matched to their child’s voice. “There is no way a company can really close its doors to kids anymore,” says Jeffrey Chester, executive director for the Center of Digital Democracy. “By openly commercializing young children’s digital media use, Google has lowered the bar,” he says, pointing to what toy company Mattel described as “an eight-figure deal” that it signed with YouTube in August. Chester says services such as YouTube Kids and Messenger Kids are designed to capture the attention, and affinity, of the youngest users. “If they are weaned on Google and Facebook, you have socialized them to use your service when they become an adult,” he says. “On the one hand it’s diabolical and on the other hand it’s how corporations work.” In past years, tech companies avoided targeting younger users because of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection ACT (COPPA), a law that requires parental permission in order to collect data on children under 13. But, “the weakness of COPPA is that you can do a lot of things if you get parental permission,” says Golin. In the past six months, new apps have launched marketed as parent helpers. “What they’re saying is this is great way for parents to have control, what they are getting is parental permission,” says Golin. Several children-focused nonprofit groups endorsed Facebook’s approach, including ConnectSafely and Family Online Safety Institute (FOSI). Both groups have received funding from Facebook. A Facebook spokesperson says, “We have long-standing relationships with some of these groups and we’ve been transparent about those relationships.” The spokesperson says many backers of Facebook’s approach, including Kristelle Lavallee of the Center on Media and Child Health, and Dr. Kevin Clark of George Mason University’s Center for Digital Media Innovation and Diversity, do not receive support from Facebook.

LET’S FACE IT: the internet can be a nasty place. Between predators, malware, explicit content, and other bad actors, parents can find themselves in a never ending cycle of doom and gloom as they try to fend off every threat their kids might face online.

It’s a tricky situation without a perfect solution, and it can be tough to know where to start. There are parental blocks, antivirus software, kid friendly browsers, and the temptation to avoid the stress and ban the internet altogether. But Dave Lewis, a global security advocate at Akamai Technologies, says the most important thing actually has nothing to do with technology: it’s all about having an open conversation with your kids.

The framing of that conversation is key, Lewis says. When you’re talking with your children about the dangers of the internet, you should be engaging and non-confrontational. “Kids really are information sponges, so if you package it in a way that makes them feel like they’re learning something, you’ll get a better return on that investment,” he says.

Instead of throwing down all of the scary things that can happen once they log on, Lewis suggests parents act as positive guardians, putting the right tools in place to keep their kids safe while also teaching them how to do it themselves. That means being aware of where your children should be going at their age, which he says is important as kids become tech savvy earlier. “There’s no reason for a kid around seven to have a Facebook or Twitter account,” he says, “They don’t need that level of exposure to the world, they still need a chance to be kids.” (It’s also against Facebook’s Terms of Service.)

Kids also need to be aware of the dangers of responding to messages from strangers, and Lewis suggests parents ensure kids feel safe coming to their parents with concerns about those things, so they feel comfortable letting an authority navigate that situation in a safer manner. This is going to be even more important as more companies make products specifically for kids, like Facebook’s trying to do with its new Messenger Kids.

Once that part’s covered, there are some specific tools Lewis suggests parents take advantage of before handing the reins to their kiddos. First comes setting up parental controls and filters: You can use software like Net Nanny and Qustodio to block out the web’s nastiest sites, as well as control how much screen time the kiddos get each day. If you’re really concerned about what your kids are doing on the internet, you can even block certain domains at the router level. And if you’re not ready to spend some dough on more heavy software, iOS and Android both offer parental controls to keep kids safe on the go.

Basic security tools are important, too. Lewis suggests installing a firewall and antivirus software on computers, as well as ensuring that you’re up to date on software patches. The safer your computer is, the safer your kids will be. He also says keeping your computer in an open space can help ensure that your kids aren’t heading anywhere they shouldn’t be, and that you’re available for any questions they might have.

You can also turn on some cautionary settings in individual apps. In Snapchat, for example, you can set “Who Can Contact Me” to “My Friends” to block out strangers. In Facebook, lock down their account to control who can see their profile and all of their posts. On Instagram, turn on “Private Account” to keep prying eyes from seeing what your kids are up to.

Can parental controls protect your kids completely? Absolutely not. The nastiness of the internet will always try to find its way onto your kid’s screens. But if you follow Lewis’s advice, hopefully you’ll get a little closer to parental zen.