2008 Woodie Awards
Gossip Web site sparks uproar
By: Joe Clark and Shreya Rao
Issue date: 11/9/07 Section: News
Last update: 11/9/07 at 6:39 AM EST
Last update: 11/9/07 at 6:39 AM EST
- Page 1 of 2 next >
Repulsive. Offensive. Disgusting.
Words such as these were used to describe the newly formed Web site JuicyCampus.com, which allows anyone to anonymously post "juicy" information about students, greek organizations, alumni and administrators.
The site, created by Matt Ivester, Trinity '05, has spurred controversy on Duke's campus recently as some users have made attacks against individual students.
Though many have voiced concerns about the site's content, some users on the site call it "amazing" and note that it is a gossip forum meant to be taken lightly.
"I found it absolutely repulsive," said Stephen Bryan, associate dean of students and director of judicial affairs. "I'm extremely disappointed that some of our students have chosen to post such material-specifically where individuals are named."
He added that, since Juicy Campus is not hosted by a current student, it would be hard for the University to take any sort of action to remove it.
The purpose of the site is to enable "online anonymous free speech on college campuses," according to the site's "About Us" page.
It may be difficult for individual students to take legal action against either the site's creator or any of the users, said Stuart Benjamin, a professor and associate dean for research at the School of Law.
"As far as free speech goes, there is almost nothing that you can take too far," he said.
For a student to assert that libel was committed, that student would have to prove that statements were false and were not intended to be a joke, Benjamin said.
"The hurdles for libel are very high," he said. "Libel doesn't include parody, and if the statement is not demonstrably false, you're going nowhere."
Calling someone a slur or inappropriate name does not qualify as libel and cannot be sued for, Benjamin said.
Some administrators said they are still concerned about potential damage to students and to Duke.
"It's sort of a double-edged sword in that many people, myself included, are absolute supporters of free speech, and I feel strongly that we have a right to express our opinion freely," Dean of Students Sue Wasiolek said. "On the other hand, one wonders whether, when speech expressed becomes hurtful and offensive, if it is worthwhile."
Words such as these were used to describe the newly formed Web site JuicyCampus.com, which allows anyone to anonymously post "juicy" information about students, greek organizations, alumni and administrators.
The site, created by Matt Ivester, Trinity '05, has spurred controversy on Duke's campus recently as some users have made attacks against individual students.
Though many have voiced concerns about the site's content, some users on the site call it "amazing" and note that it is a gossip forum meant to be taken lightly.
"I found it absolutely repulsive," said Stephen Bryan, associate dean of students and director of judicial affairs. "I'm extremely disappointed that some of our students have chosen to post such material-specifically where individuals are named."
He added that, since Juicy Campus is not hosted by a current student, it would be hard for the University to take any sort of action to remove it.
The purpose of the site is to enable "online anonymous free speech on college campuses," according to the site's "About Us" page.
It may be difficult for individual students to take legal action against either the site's creator or any of the users, said Stuart Benjamin, a professor and associate dean for research at the School of Law.
"As far as free speech goes, there is almost nothing that you can take too far," he said.
For a student to assert that libel was committed, that student would have to prove that statements were false and were not intended to be a joke, Benjamin said.
"The hurdles for libel are very high," he said. "Libel doesn't include parody, and if the statement is not demonstrably false, you're going nowhere."
Calling someone a slur or inappropriate name does not qualify as libel and cannot be sued for, Benjamin said.
Some administrators said they are still concerned about potential damage to students and to Duke.
"It's sort of a double-edged sword in that many people, myself included, are absolute supporters of free speech, and I feel strongly that we have a right to express our opinion freely," Dean of Students Sue Wasiolek said. "On the other hand, one wonders whether, when speech expressed becomes hurtful and offensive, if it is worthwhile."
Viewing Comments 1 - 10 of 12
Graham-Cracker...
posted 11/09/07 @ 11:25 PM EST
happiness is when the CHRONICLE seems its newsworthy to alsnt and allegedly applaud the actions of an alleged STUDENT who supposedly bragged how he used a "denial of service" program to diasable a website. (Continued…)
Bill M
posted 11/10/07 @ 11:06 AM EST
I just viewed this website and it seem petty tame to me but then we seem to have lower the threshold of outrage a great deal in the last few years.
Everyones seem to be looking for a reason to declare themselves a victim for some reason or other. (Continued…)
mike in houston
posted 11/10/07 @ 11:26 PM EST
Dear Dean of Students Sue Wasiolek, Honor Council Chair Bronwyn Lewis, and any student of Duke University.
Under the rules of the University, if you are aware of a crime being committed on the campus you need to report it. (Continued…)
Bill M
posted 11/11/07 @ 6:52 AM EST
If someone had would had dare of had hung a paper noose anywhere on campus, the leadership of Duke would had used it every resource to track that person down. (Continued…)
Bill M
posted 11/11/07 @ 9:58 AM EST
I been laughing hard after it occur to me that Mr. Clark and Ms. Rao or at least someone at the Chronicle know the identity of a man who had committed a federal felony!
Now a second fact to be consider, there is no federal shield laws for reporters, so if the website that they both hate should turn this matter over to federal law enforcement someone at the Chronicle is going to be given the choice between spending time in jail for contempt or giving up the hacker. (Continued…)
AS
posted 11/11/07 @ 3:10 PM EST
You know, just judging by the posts here and the general quality of writing on campus, it occurred to me that the student body at Duke is really just a bunch of rich dumbasses who paid someone to write their college essays. (Continued…)
Gary Packwood
posted 11/11/07 @ 4:52 PM EST
Dean Louise Goodbody
Did you guys swipe those quotes from the Duke administration and the honors council from the formal archival record of correspondence from Dean of Women Louise Goodbody at Indiana University in about 1910?
There is a building named after her on campus, of course. (Continued…)
Anonymous
posted 11/11/07 @ 8:46 PM EST
They might sue for intentional infliction of emotional distress instead of libel. Ask the law prof to explain that tort, and you may have a story--and a lawsuit. (Continued…)
BillRM
posted 11/12/07 @ 7:16 AM EST
They might sue for intentional infliction of emotional distress instead of libel. Ask the law prof to explain that tort, and you may have a story--and a lawsuit. (Continued…)
RK
posted 11/14/07 @ 5:03 AM EST
Before anyone complains about this site (especially the Honor Council), run to the library and read Plato's The Republic. The Ring of Gyges is playing out right before your eyes. (Continued…)
Post a Comment