The Washington Post ran a story yesterday about postings on the website AutoAdmit, which calls itself "the most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world." These postings included personal attacks and demeaning messages about women at the "top 14" law schools, with pictures and links to a contest where people were invited to vote on the "hottest" female law students at the "Top 14" law schools (Stanford students, happily, stayed out of the fray).
Certainly, those who have legitimately been libeled or whose right to privacy have been violated have recourse through the law. But what about those who simply said offensive things? In a world of Web 2.0, when so much of society's communication and attention span has moved online, do unpopular minority viewpoints still have a voice? Or can they be silenced at the whim of private companies and individuals? AutoAdmit has taken a stand that it will "almost never censor content, no matter how abhorrent it may be," but other sites may not be so speech-friendly. Read more about Free Speech 2.0?