Harvard Pulls Student Offers Over Online Comments (go.com)

Reader joshtops shares a report: Harvard University's student newspaper says the school has revoked admission offers to at least 10 prospective freshmen over offensive online messages. The Harvard Crimson says the students posted images and comments in a private Facebook group mocking sexual assault, the Holocaust and racial minorities. The newspaper reported that several group members said at least 10 people were told by Harvard in April that their acceptances had been withdrawn.

Comments

Seems reasonable.

[Guspaz]

Harvard is a private school, not a public school. Their call to reject students based on this sort of thing.

Re:Seems reasonable.

[605dave]

No, it doesn't say those things. It says if you're an asshole you're not welcome here.

Re:Seems reasonable.

[Anonymous Coward]

Chilling effect? I'd disagree-- Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences.

You can say these things without being prosecuted by law, but don't be surprised when nobody likes you and nobody wants you around.

Re:Seems reasonable.

[Rakarra]

Oh yeah? Define 'asshole'. I dare you.

You can say some things are intolerable without having to be able to define an exact line between asshole and not-asshole.
From the summary:

a private Facebook group mocking sexual assault, the Holocaust and racial minorities

Yeah, that falls pretty solidly within realm of 'asshole.' No tough call here.

Re:Seems reasonable.

[Frosty Piss]

Who gets to define "asshole." ?

Harvard gets to decide. It's a private school.

Re:Seems reasonable.

[computational super]

Ah, the classic reductionist, "you have free speech no matter what we do to you in retaliation for it as long as you were able to say it in the first place" anti-free speech canard.

Re:Seems reasonable.

[bsolar]

Harward University's definition of "asshole" evidently includes people mocking sexual assault, the Holocaust and racial minorities... and that's the only definition which matters when discussion Harward University's decision to revoke these admission.

You are still entitled to your own definition of "asshole", which might differ: just don't expect it to have any weight whatsoever on Harward University's.

Re:Seems reasonable.

[MightyYar]

Antifa? Alrighty. So let me get this straight - Harvard can have almost completely arbitrary entry criteria, so long as it doesn't violate a government-protected class. Harvard can select kids preferentially based on community service, extra-circulars, grades, essay answers, interviews, etc. All in an effort to get whatever they deem to be a "Harvard" caliber candidate. Yet, somehow, Facebook posts are a line you aren't willing to cross?

Re:Seems reasonable.

[MightyYar]

but what will it be tomorrow?

That is scary!

They might start only admitting kids who have done community service, out of some quaint notion that "good" people (by Harvard's arbitrary definition) might volunteer to help others.

They might start only admitting kids who answer an arbitrary essay question in some way that Harvard deems acceptable.

They might start only admitting kids who were on team sports because Harvard has decided that they arbitrarily value this "ability" to work together as some kind of character worthy of Harvard.

It's a truly slippery slope we are on when these colleges get to decide what kind of a person attends.

Re:Seems reasonable.

[prunus.avium]

Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences

Um, yes, that's exactly what it means. That is, in fact, the definition.

No. It means that you are free from governmental consequences. Private entities are still free to tell you to fuck off.

Re:Seems reasonable.

[TWX]

No, you may be labeled antisemtic, or labeled racist or islamophobic, but labels are usually applied by others. Those others in-turn have their own labels, etc.

Granted, you can be those too, but you do not have to be those things in order for someone that disagrees with you to label you as such.

Re:Seems reasonable.

[GLMDesigns]

That's true. But the point is - if Harvard can do what it wants because it's a private entity then why shouldn't the bar owner? Who should decide? The business (who chooses to cater to smokers) or the government?

Now, if you're arguing that it's the government's role, then the fact that Harvard is a private business is irrelevant.

If you're a libertarian, who believes in freedom and limiting government power then you would say that each of these businesses (Harvard, the bar and the bakery) can make their own choice.

Re:Ridiculous

[lactose99]

Schools have codes of conduct, many of which prohibit forms of what would be perceived as hateful behavior (whether that's righteous or not is not the point here). Would not surprise me that this crossed the line, hence the rescind.

Private group?

[sanf780]

So, how did Harvard get into a Facebook private group? I do not use Facebook, but in my humble opinion, a private group means that unauthorized entities cannot access that group.I understand robots that scan words like "bomb" and maybe the NSA, but not real people with no affiliation to the group or the service or national security.

Be warned, millenials! Nothing is private on the interwebs.

Re: Seriously?

[c6gunner]

You're comparing mocking sexual assault, racism and the holocaust to religious beliefs?

Uh, yeah? Have you ever read the Bible/Koran/Torah? They make 4chan look tame in comparison.