Dear Ethicist,
I am the author of a weblog or "'blog". Recently, the intern at my office sent around a link that I found humorous and wanted to share with my readers. The link was to a short anti-drug film produced by a group of mentally-handicapped teens in England. I, and others in my office, found the film to be unintentionally hilarious, and I immediately posted the link (with the disclaimer "it's lowest-common-denominator day") on my 'blog.
Shortly after posting, a reader posted an angry comment in the comments section of my site:
"Why do think it is necessary to perpetuate the humiliation of these disabled kids on (your site)? Don't they face enough challenges in their life without the like of you taking cheap shots.
Do you need the extra hits so badly?
Do the yourself a favour and remove the link!
There but for the grace of god..."
I will admit that I was surprised by this reaction, as I assumed my readership to share the same sophisticated, un-PC, "know-the-rules-to-break-the-rules" sense of humor common to my friends and aquaintances. As a critic of the war on drugs, I would have linked to any anti-drug film I found on the web, and since the youngsters involved and those like them will, for obvious reasons, never know they were being made fun of, is it wrong to keep the link up?
Lindsay Robertson
New York, NY
Comments