ABattJudd said:

---

My wife works at a small Christian school that runs from PreK to 8th grade. They start their spring pictures today.

They've had a few parents up in a wad because Lifetouch, the company doing their pictures (as well as school pictures all over the US) has a tie to the Epstein files.

The guy who was CEO of the company that owns the company that owns Lifetouch was listed in the files, apparently as creepo. His company acquired Shutterfly, which owns Lifetouch, in 2019. He stepped down as CEO in 2021.

Parents are now afraid of having their kids' pictures taken by this company. I admit my understanding of the whole situation is limited, but this kind of stupidity is just...well...stupid.

---

Yeah, we have a few school districts in my area that have chosen to move away from Lifetouch. I tried to explain to the Facebook comment sections that Lifetouch wasn't "in the Epstein files". They just couldn't comprehend it. They saw it on Facebook and just assumed it was all true. You also can't explain to them that their kids' photos are all over Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Tik Tok, etc. and those are all about 100000% more likely to be a problem than friggin' Lifetouch.

Again:

Now tell those same over-reactors to sell all individual holdings and mutual funds that own any shares of any company tied to anyone listed in the Files. Or anyone that has ever rubbed shoulders with any of these people...you know...just to be safe.

Good luck.

Sidenote:

School pictures are a racket.

There is no reason a teacher with an iphone can't knock this out.

If your local school board is so far down in the weeds that they're choosing who does 2nd grade spring photos, they're doing it wrong!

A couple of reasons why I brought this up:

1: Yes, my wife does have to deal with it since she's the one who coordinates their picture day.

2: It's not just a small Christian school dealing with this. There are several schools and districts that are distancing themselves from LifeTouch over this.

3: Parents have heard that "LifeTouch is in the Epstein files," and that their pics were used by the Epstein *******s. That's not true. It's not like LifeTouch was using these kids to make the WayFair catalog.

4: Stupidity and the overzealous promulgation thereof should always be called out.

My kids' high school also gets its photos and yearbook done through Lifetouch.

So what?

Some parents are just looking for something to be outraged all day about.

fullback44 said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Iced-T14 said:

---

You're surprised that parents don't want their kids photos taken by a company ran by a pedophile? Are you also surprised that farmers want to keep foxes out of their henhouse?

---

The company isn't "run by a pedophile". Good grief.

---

I don't think that's the point, these parents dont want to support a company whose owner / CEO is connected to that guy, nothing wrong with that, its no different than people not drinking bud light because they went all woke on everyone, or using Target the WOKE idiots. its a moral issues for these parents and I think its 120 % their right to have that type of moral issue.

Now will anything actually change? I doubt it, but they can cause some problems down the road "after the fact" and they probably will ...

basically they are setting off these parents moral gauge ... maybe we need more people like them.. too many of us dont look at stuff like that (including me!)

---

The guy in the files hasn't been connected with the company for about 5 years now, and even when he was he was the CEO of a larger company that purchased them.

TRIDENT said:

---

I'd be concerned if the actual photographer was a creepo...but not a retired CEO.

---

Did you say CEO???

That is it.
JAIL HIM AT ONCE.

94chem said:

---

Cancel the pictures and send kids home with the hours for Olin Mills.

---

Olan Mills.
My parents have a picture taken in Dallas by Olan Mills from probably 1972.

All these kids with pictures now connected to Epstein crimes. Not a good look.

jwhaby said:

---

MelvinUdall said:

---

jwhaby said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

jwhaby said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

jwhaby said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Iced-T14 said:

---

You're surprised that parents don't want their kids photos taken by a company ran by a pedophile? Are you also surprised that farmers want to keep foxes out of their henhouse?

---

The guy has been gone from the company for ~5 years.

---

What if you don't want to support the businesses of pedophiles? Is that a good enough reason, or does the actual photographer need to be a pedophile?

---

So, if an employee of let's say Bank of America gets arrested for child rape, does that mean the entire company is guilty and should be boycotted and shut down?

---

You're being obtuse. Your argument is ridiculous. There's clearly a difference a Bank of America employee (like a teller) and the CEO of the company, but you already know that. It's clear that Leon Black is no longer the CEO of Apollo, but has he divested of all ownership? If not then he still has a financial tie to Lifetouch.

There's a reason why the Weinstein Company went bankrupt and there's a reason why Subway removed Jared Fogle as a spokesman. These were high profile people, just like Leon Black.

There's a difference between not wanting to support a business that unknowingly hired a low-level employee that was a pedophile, and not wanting to support a business that was founded and run by a pedophile. Hope this helps.

---

This is not the situation in the OP. This is a CEO of a company that owned another company that, finally, bought Lifetouch. The guy never owned nor worked for Lifetouch, let alone founded it. hth

---

I'm sure there are other photography companies that schools can use. It's strange that you're falling all over yourself to support this one. Strange hill to die on.

It's pretty simple in my book. Was Leon Black or the company he founded ever associated with Lifetouch and did he ever receive monetary benefit from the association? If so, can't hurt to distance oneself. This is just my opinion. If you don't mind the association, then support the company. It's a free country.

---

Clutch those pearls harder…as others have said, Microsoft says hello…will you be boycotting those products as well?

---

It's not that deep, bud. Maybe the school board calls a meeting and says instead of going with Lifetouch, we will be using Jostens, Strawbridge, Cady, Dorian, or a myriad of other companies that provide photography services.

---

Given your responses in this topic, I would say it very deep for you.

True story. My teacher wife had a parent reach out to have her child excluded from pics. The same parent previously told my wife that she doesn't have time to concern herself with her child's school progress.

My wife was venting, and I was just thinking... that tracks.

Stive said:

---

Again:

Now tell those same over-reactors to sell all individual holdings and mutual funds that own any shares of any company tied to anyone listed in the Files. Or anyone that has ever rubbed shoulders with any of these people...you know...just to be safe.

Good luck.

---

hey, again, some people have a moral compass, its there right to do that. not my or your decision to be honest

agAngeldad said:

---

Opt out of having your kid in the photo. No one looks at those photos after the first day you get them back. Can't believe how much money we spent on kids' photos only to have them in a box....

---

No disagreement here. They do probably go in the Yearbook though, which honestly feels pointless with kids' entire lives recorded digitally.

fullback44 said:

---

Stive said:

---

Again:

Now tell those same over-reactors to sell all individual holdings and mutual funds that own any shares of any company tied to anyone listed in the Files. Or anyone that has ever rubbed shoulders with any of these people...you know...just to be safe.

Good luck.

---

hey, again, some people have a moral compass, its there right to do that. not my or your decision to be honest

---

I don't think anyone here is arguing that we shouldn't have moral compasses. But we're also allowed to point out how absurd and/or hypocritical many of them are.

Martels Hammer said:

---

the company's database of pics being used by connected individuals as a menu of sorts

---

Any evidence this ever happened even once? Ever? Let's hear it. The CEO is long since gone. Who are these 'connected individuals'? Names please.

maybe absurd to you and others, but not to them..

anyway, yeah not here to argue this, I kind of back those with the moral compass in this situation

fullback44 said:

---

maybe absurd to you and others, but not to them..

anyway, yeah not here to argue this, I kind of back those with the moral compass in this situation

---

It's not just absurd, it's grossly unfair and slanderous. It gives weight and influence to kneejerk mob mania. It's sad that even in today's environment with all this knowledge at our fingertips, people willfully stay ignorant.

93MarineHorn said:

---

fullback44 said:

---

maybe absurd to you and others, but not to them..

anyway, yeah not here to argue this, I kind of back those with the moral compass in this situation

---

It's not just absurd, it's grossly unfair and slanderous. It gives weight and influence to kneejerk mob mania. It's sad that even in today's environment with all this knowledge at our fingertips, people willfully stay ignorant.

---

Actually, despite all of the knowledge and information available, people have gotten a whole lot dumber.

Burnsey said:

---

Martels Hammer said:

---

the company's database of pics being used by connected individuals as a menu of sorts

---

Any evidence this ever happened even once? Ever? Let's hear it. The CEO is long since gone. Who are these 'connected individuals'? Names please.

---

why would I have names? Why isn't it clear from my writing that I didn't support that idea and why did you only quote just enough to possibly make it look like I did?

I truly wonder if some of you have ever worked for a portfolio company in your career.

Yellerjacket said:

---

ABattJudd said:

---

My wife works at a small Christian school that runs from PreK to 8th grade. They start their spring pictures today.

They've had a few parents up in a wad because Lifetouch, the company doing their pictures (as well as school pictures all over the US) has a tie to the Epstein files.

The guy who was CEO of the company that owns the company that owns Lifetouch was listed in the files, apparently as creepo. His company acquired Shutterfly, which owns Lifetouch, in 2019. He stepped down as CEO in 2021.

Parents are now afraid of having their kids' pictures taken by this company. I admit my understanding of the whole situation is limited, but this kind of stupidity is just...well...stupid.

---

Yeah, we have a few school districts in my area that have chosen to move away from Lifetouch. I tried to explain to the Facebook comment sections that Lifetouch wasn't "in the Epstein files". They just couldn't comprehend it. They saw it on Facebook and just assumed it was all true. You also can't explain to them that their kids' photos are all over Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Tik Tok, etc. and those are all about 100000% more likely to be a problem than friggin' Lifetouch.

---

They've got the word "touch" in their name. Obviously they're up to no good.

A buddy of mine (who's an Ag and might read this) and I worked in the sports department at a local paper, and for something like the fall sports preview he was tasked to get headshots of the high school volleyball players.

They were all in uniform with school name on the front and number on the back. The coach gave him a printed roster with names, numbers, positions and so on, so to move the process along to get to his next assignment, he took a headshot then had them turn around and took a pic of the number on the back.

I don't think he had made it back to the office before a parent or coach called to ask why our staff photographer was taking pics of the girls' butts in those tight volleyball shorts. Back then, after explaining what happened to the caller, we all had a big laugh. Nowadays, he'd likely be hanging from the gym rafters before he could get out the door.

You're talking about the same parents are soooo concerned they plaster their kids photos all over the internet- especially FB for the real perverts and pedos to basically have a catalog to look at- those parents?

K.

I somewhat know the feeling, having worked for a company whose CEO was indicted for a major case of tax fraud.

Just because the leader is an awful person doesn't mean that everyone else is.

I don't want my children's photos taken. And we also don't post our children's photos on any social media. We are very careful.

Ever notice Charlie Kirk didn't allow his children's faces to be photographed. When my children become 18, they can make a choice how much they want to open their lives to the world. I am not making that choice for them.

The amount of outrage in the thread overthis nothingburger is wild. Logic has gone out the window.

Rapier108 said:

---

Iced-T14 said:

---

You're surprised that parents don't want their kids photos taken by a company ran by a pedophile? Are you also surprised that farmers want to keep foxes out of their henhouse?

---

The guy has been gone from the company for ~5 years.

---

Facts are inconsequential when it comes to faux outrage.