VicMan Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 I read this: http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/03/17/sunny.juicy/index.htmlJuicy Campus is a rumor mill site that is used to spread rumors.Normally I can see why a website owner would be protected from damages by libel and slander, but this is a deliberate platform for harmful rumor spreading. The identity of the owner should be forcibly uncovered and he should be held accountable for damages.EDIT: I should have made this clear, but the site takes rumors only relating to people in selected university campusesEDIT 2: Changed title to be more descriptive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musicman Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 Normally I can see why a website owner would be protected from damages by libel and slander, but this is a deliberate platform for harmful rumor spreading....and you're spreading it to others!! GOOD WORK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VicMan Posted March 18, 2008 Author Share Posted March 18, 2008 ...and you're spreading it to others!! GOOD WORKI think it is best that we know about it so that we can ask for people to take action against the website. CNN is talking about the website anyway (I am not sure about the TV, but I know it is making web articles about it) so it is not a secret that the site exists. Even if the victim doesn't know the site exists, other people can use the site to spread disinformation behind the backs of victims; if a victim discovers the site and sees how the slander is being spread he or she can at least file a subpoena to uncover the identities of the people posting on the website.However I know people use proxies to hide their tracks, so that avenue may not necessarily work.That is why creators of such sites need to be held accountable if they are deliberately trying to make "rumor mills."For that matter the Chronicle of Higher Education talks about this too: http://chronicle.com/free/2008/03/2136n.htm - It mentions some steps to oppose the website, but it also mentions "ignoring" as a possibility too.EDIT: Mistakenly put Houston Chronicle in the last section Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
memebag Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 This would be a serious problem if anything someone said about some college kid on the internet ever mattered in any way. It doesn't, so it isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VicMan Posted March 18, 2008 Author Share Posted March 18, 2008 This would be a serious problem if anything someone said about some college kid on the internet ever mattered in any way. It doesn't, so it isn't.According to a Washington Post article one person said that she felt concerned that such comments could jeapordize her job:* http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...30101418_2.html** " "I have no idea who wrote that about me, and I'm not entirely sure I would want to know," says a U-Va. senior named on JuicyCampus as someone who is sexually available. She worries that having her name on the site could jeopardize the job she just landed with a government agency. She wishes the site didn't exist but says nothing can be done. "Of course employers should not rely on JuicyCampus to check out their prospective employees. Also I heard that JuicyCampus pages are no longer indexed by Google so names on the site do not appear in Google searches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
memebag Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 Are you getting paid to advertise this site? I wouldn't know about it if it wasn't for your posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musicman Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 I think it is best that we know about it so that we can ask for people to take action against the website. CNN is talking about the website anyway oh ok that's ok. According to a Washington Post article one person said that she felt concerned that such comments could jeapordize her job: this is the same thing people say about facebook. are you going to start another thread on that as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cottonmather0 Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 It was prominently linked to on the front page of the New York Times this weekend so I would say it's now pretty much in the open. Seems kind of silly and juvenile to me, but that's college for ya. Despite their distaste for the site, some legal experts believed Juicy Campus could not be sued for gossip posted by its users. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VicMan Posted March 18, 2008 Author Share Posted March 18, 2008 People can spread rumors via Facebook just like they can via e-mail, instant messenger, etc. That isn't the intended purpose of the website. I haven't heard of Facebook in particular being a favorite for gossip spreading. But the difference is that the Juicy Campus is *intended* to pass on rumors and encourages them (as in that is the primary purpose of the website). The contents are viewed by anyone and the website is deliberately crafted to receive juicy rumors. The website hides the identities of anyone who posts any content, and that content is visible to everyone. Facebook is intended a method of communication between students. Content on Facebook is not visible to people who do not have accounts. Even for people who do have accounts content is limited depending on friend statuses and privacy settings. In order to join university groups people have to submit university e-mail addresses to prove that they attend the university. BTW this is the New York Times article: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/16/fashion/...&ei=5087%0A I wouldn't have known about the site if I didn't check CNN... Also something tells me that most HAIFers are *1. Out of university and *2. Far too mature to post entries on that website - So this site would not appeal at all to HAIFers. oh ok that's ok. this is the same thing people say about facebook. are you going to start another thread on that as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VicMan Posted March 19, 2008 Author Share Posted March 19, 2008 The State of New Jersey is now investigating the operation of the website: http://www.nj.gov/oag/newsreleases08/pr20080318b.html - It subpoenaed the site's records.Let's see what results from this... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BryanS Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 Like Napster, this web site's days are numbered. Free speech is one thing. Libel and slander are quite another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
editor Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 I doubt any employer is actually going to use what's written on a rumor site as a basis for making a hiring decision. MySpace, yes, because the potential employee has control over the content. But using a site like that one for a reference is like interviewing the neighborhood bully as a character witness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BryanS Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 I doubt any employer is actually going to use what's written on a rumor site as a basis for making a hiring decision. MySpace, yes, because the potential employee has control over the content. But using a site like that one for a reference is like interviewing the neighborhood bully as a character witness.I understand where you are coming from. But you know what? I bet (some) employers do it anyway. As wrong as it is, I have a gut feeling about it. Like watching a train wreck... you just can't turn away (you want to! - but you can't). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VicMan Posted March 20, 2008 Author Share Posted March 20, 2008 This said that the NJ Government is also investigating the relationship between JC and Adbrite, the website's advertising agency. Adbrite canceled its contract and is fully cooperating with the NJ Government: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/19/...in3951612.shtmlI read Matt Ivester's statements and I think he's full of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.