Follow us on Instagram
Try our free mini crossword
Subscribe to the newsletter
Download the app

Web posts prompt site reassessment

In response to a number of questionable comments posted on the Shades of Princeton website that make light of discrimination, the site's student founders might overhaul or scrap the online forum.

While it is an independent website, the University has addressed its concerns to the founders and "at this point we do not anticipate it will be up or supported by the University this fall," Vice President for Campus Life Janet Dickerson said.

ADVERTISEMENT

Founded by several members of Sustained Dialogue — a campus group that promotes discussion of social and racial issues — the website was launched in April as a forum for students to share incidents of discrimination.

According to Brian Kirk '06, a Sustained Dialogue director and one of the website's founders, the initial posts adhered to the forum's mission, but many of the later comments were "prejudicial and ignorant."

"I never expected the length that some students would go to to subvert our cause. It takes physical effort to do this," Kirk said.

While the comments are anonymous, the website's founders were able to tell that they came from various computers throughout campus.

One of the questionable comments read: "I feel repeatedly discriminated against because I refuse to wear my collar up. In fact... I don't even own a collared shirt! THis is due to my low economic status. I'm gay too... oh and my thighs are too big. Gosh, I should just leave campus... Ok, good bye cruel world!!"

After submitting a comment, the site says it will be added to a queue for a site administrator to review.

ADVERTISEMENT
Tiger hand holding out heart
Support nonprofit student journalism. Donate to the ‘Prince’. Donate now »

During the forum's three-week pilot run last term, many of the controversial comments were posted around Houseparties weekend, between 3 and 4 a.m. However, students also submitted some of the website's most insightful posts during this period, according to Kirk.

The group is "disgusted and disenchanted" by the offensive comments and plans to completely overhaul the site, Kirk said. It is still uncertain whether the site will be relaunched or a new awareness tool will replace it.

According to Kirk, the group is not disappointed with the website as a whole and does not regret its mild censorship policy.

Despite early concern from the university's attorneys and the administration that certain comments could cause students pain, the group only restricted posts that specifically identified people or organizations. When offensive postings started to surface in May, Princeton's administration asked the site founders to shut it down.

Subscribe
Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

"The intention of the site is to promote harmony, but if the site is being used in a negative fashion it undermines the purpose of the site," Director of Communications Lauren Robinson-Brown '85 said.

At the same time that the administration expressed its concern, the website started to receive emails from students troubled by the comments or the site's censorship policy.

About 100 students sent in critical letters.

But the offensive comments, according to Kirk, could be constructive because they reveal another side of the University.

"It's very telling of the student body. Because these comments exist, we know there is a problem on campus," Kirk said.

Some students wondered whether new limitations would be detrimental to the site's mission.

"We shouldn't limit what people say because once we do that we defeat the purpose of the website," said Dylan Tatz '06.