Baker Small (BS), what were you thinking?
For those who are out of the loop, let me share a story with you, sadly this is not a work of fiction.
I went onto Twitter last night and saw this tweet from Baker Small being shared by parents along with some comments about it being so inappropriate.
Being a Saturday night and being a mum of three children with SEN, I was sat at home wishing I could I have a drink but knowing that alcohol wasn’t possible due to children not sleeping. So I went looking for more details. Guess what I found?
This company were not just celebrating a win, they were laughing at the parents who had lost. Somehow, the child at the centre of this didn’t appear to be even considered. Of course, this tweet has now been deleted. BS – may I introduce you to Screenshots? Deleting tweets is never enough.
Families challenged the Twitter account, the responses from them were even more provocative:
May I point out one huge difference, BS? When parental solicitors champion their wins, they do not ridicule their opponents. They champion their win and share so families can have hope!
As the evening progressed, one mum had had enough and put a formal complaint into the relevant authorities:
Now, at this point, anyone would have realised that it was perhaps time to just bow out and walk away. However, BS decided to just block parents – BS, can I just explain that having a live twitter feed on your website sort of made this pointless and the fact that people just have to sign out of Twitter and find you, without signing in, and all your tweets are still available – I’m always available at a cost to offer social media training.
Then the childish tweets arrived:
The Morning After
The cold light of morning saw a quick apology:
Quite meaningless when the parents they needed to apologise to had all been blocked.
At least they didn’t try the “we were hacked” excuse. They owned their total balls up!
BS obviously have heard that it is more important to have engaged followers and that high numbers of followers means nothing. Sadly, they appear to have misunderstood what “engagement” means.
BS also offer a service for families, however, given the impression parents received last night, I’m not sure they will be queuing up for that service.
Let’s also hope that LAs look at this and think twice before using them. BS gave enough information that anyone so inclined could do a bit of research and discover the identity of the parents mentioned.
What do you think?
Would you use them?
I have had two families say they had help from them, and I am sure there are a few others. However, when this level of contempt is aimed at us, it really doesn’t sit well.
The whole Children and Families Act is supposed to be about working together and child centred approaches. It would appear that the child, the one who lost access to an educational provision their parents really wanted, was not a consideration last night.
Oh and in case you wondered, I am, obviously, one of the parents blocked by them.