CONTROVERSIAL NET DESTINATIONS RAISE FREE-SPEECH QUESTIONS STUDENTS: CONCERNS RAISED ABOUT CAMPUS GOSSIP ONLINE AFTER SILLINESS TURNS TO HARASSMENT.

Byline: Connie Llanos 

Staff Writer

Naughty messages scrawled on school bathroom stalls have taken on a new cyber-twist with a Web site that promises college students "always anonymous ... always juicy" gossip.

But some of those posting on JuicyCampus.com have put up such nasty comments that a growing chorus of students and lawmakers is denouncing the site and calling for action.

On Tuesday, the California Attorney General's Office said it will review a request by state Assemblyman Alberto Torrico, D-Fremont, to investigate the site.

Torrico's request comes as New Jersey officials are investigating the site after a student complained she had been terrorized by postings that included her address.

"With the proliferation of the Internet, chat rooms and social networking sites where people can post anonymous comments, there is this notion that the Web is no holds barred," Torrico said.

"What I am saying is that there should be some responsibility and repercussions. We should begin to look at these sites. We should be doing whatever we can to protect people's reputations and their safety."

New Jersey officials said they are trying to determine whether the site violated the state's consumer fraud act by suggesting that it doesn't allow offensive material while providing no enforcement of that rule and no way for users to report or dispute the material.

The operators of JuicyCampus.com were not available for immediate comment Tuesday, saying in an e-mail form on the site that it takes 24 hours to respond to inquiries from the news media.

Gareth Lacy, spokesman for California Attorney General Jerry Brown, said the office will review Torrico's request, but cannot yet say whether the site will be investigated for criminal activity.

However, the latest flap over the controversial site raises continuing questions about how far freedom of speech should stretch on the Internet.

"The Communications Decency Act basically immunizes Web sites from liability for carrying defamatory content unless the content is created by the Web site," said Rex Heinke, a Los Angeles First Amendment lawyer.

Heinke said a legal case over the site is unlikely. He said the usual legal remedy for those looking to sue for defamation would be to track a site's traffic and find the IP address of any posters.

"What they are saying (at the JuicyCampus.com site) is that they make it hard for people to find out who that person is," Heinke said.

Heinke added that constitutional freedoms make it difficult to shut down a site just because someone doesn't like the content.

"That is a clear violation of the First Amendment," he said.

Still, some students think the site goes too far.

"The problem with this site is that it's anonymous. It's an open forum for sexist, homophobic remarks that are hurtful and it's done on an individual basis," said Gaby Carrasco, a 20-year-old English major at Loyola Marymount.

"People use first and last names and it's the students that are being targeted."

Carrasco said she has joined with 850 other students in an online petition on a Facebook page called "banjuicycampus."

"The plan is to encourage students not to go on the Web site and limit the site's hits, hoping to eventually shut the site down," Carrasco said.

So far, JuicyCampus.com has pages featuring about 50 colleges across the country -- including the University of Southern California, the University of California at both Los Angeles and Santa Barbara, California State University, Long Beach, and Loyola Marymount.

At Pepperdine University, the Student Government Association earlier this year voted 23-5 to try to restrict access to the site from the university network.

"It is very unusual for students to ask the administration for any kind of restriction," said Andy Canales, president of the association.

"But we heard numerous concerns from students about fearing for their safety and about how someone might react to the kinds of things that are being said about them on this site," Canales said.

"In light of the numerous school shootings of our generation, it is a very real concern for young people that what starts as words can sometimes end with guns."

John Kempe, a 19-year-old Pepperdine student majoring in international studies, echoed Canales' concerns.

"This Web site is kind of like a bathroom stall," Kempe said. "If you write something malicious on the wall, something like 'Call Suzy for a good time ...,' as a campus we would erase it. Well, this is the same."

Despite the students' efforts, however, officials at Pepperdine have refused to block the site.

"We believe students wanted to block the site because it is revolting, repugnant and disgusting," said Jerry Derloshon, Pepperdine's spokesman.

"But we did not, as a university, want to get into the business of banning Web sites ... That is a very slippery slope anywhere, but especially slippery in higher ed(ucation)."

Whether to ban or restrict access to Web sites has long been a question at campuses across the country and even internationally.

The University of Massachusetts shut down a poker Web site that was created by its students, while Fullerton College restricted students' visits to MySpace.

In Canada, 1,600 state schools banned students' access to video-sharing sites such as YouTube in an effort to curb cyber-bullying.

But most of those restrictions were not because of content.

Maureen Rubin, an expert in media law and the First Amendment, said attacks on free speech -- regardless of how offensive that speech may be -- can create big problems.

"Our country is built on the foundation of free speech," Rubin said. "The First Amendment is our most sacred constitutional protection ...

"And while we hope that people always act responsibly when using technology, if they don't, they are constitutionally protected."

connie.llanos(at)dailynews.com

818-713-3634