Duke F*** List

The Duke F*** List is a 42 page Powerpoint presentation created in 2010 by a Duke University senior, Karen Owen. The document detailed sexual encounters with Duke male athletes during Owen’s time at the University and was presented as a 'Senior Thesis' to her friends. The in-depth analysis and use of real names created serious privacy concerns for the men mentioned on list.

Karen Owen

Karen Owen received a lot of backlash from this "Senior Thesis" she wrote. When Owen wrote the document, she intended it to only be shown to her group of friends as it was supposed to be a private joke. Just as most things on social media, the document spread around unexpectedly. Shortly after the document was shared, it was also posted on many different websites. Once Owen realized that her document had been shared to more than just her group of friends, she practically disappeared from social media. She knew there was going to be a lot of backlash from the public, therefore she deleted all of her social media. She was also contacted by producers and writers about creating documentaries and books about her, but she declined them all. Owen made it a point to stay out of the public light .

The List

Creation and Spread

The F*** List was created as an inside joke among Owen and her friends in 2010, shortly before graduating. Titled ‘An education beyond the classroom: excelling in the realm of horizontal education’, the document was originally emailed by Owen to 3 of her friends.

But, once something is in the infosphere it is essentially available to the public.

Evidently, one of them leaked the list, which quickly spread around campus and appeared on sites such as Jezebel and Deadspin. These sites released the full version of the “study” without hiding any of the names of those involved. Most of the men were lacrosse players, which exacerbated news and media coverage of the story, as the Duke Lacrosse Case had occurred only 4 years prior.

Methodology

Each athlete was assigned a subject number, followed by details about their sexual encounters with Owen. These details included memorable moments, pros, and cons.’’’ Ratings were assigned on a 10 point scale using physical attractiveness, size, talent, creativity, aggressiveness, entertainment, athletic ability, and bonus. Tie breakers were decided by physical attractiveness.

The Aftermath

Owen quickly made it clear that her intention was never to spread the project past her friend group and release the personal information of the 13 men. Owen failed to understand that an document would not remain private when shared online. She instantly retreated from any public attention, deleting all social media, excluding an extremely private Facebook profile within days of the list going viral. Interestingly, similar results turn up for the men she exposed, with most of them having little to no public online presence. Owen spoke to Jezebel, stating, “I regret it with all my heart. I would never intentionally hurt the people that are mentioned on that.” Proving this point, Owen turned down book and movie deals with the desire to put the event in her past. Many saw her as a potential female counterpart to Tucker Max, who she explicitly mentioned in her thesis, but she wanted nothing to do with this style of vulgar writing. Several people came out and spoke about the fact that Karen Owen's document showed many aspects of college culture, specifically partying culture, that is an issue and must be addressed on a larger scale .

Online Reaction

Online, many people began to attack Owen for her actions and lack of real accountability once the dust had settled. Interestingly, Tucker Max spoke out and defended her actions, claiming that people basically got a hold of her diary and her personal information had been compromised as well.

Ethical Concerns

Privacy

Owen’s actions clearly violated the privacy of the men involved in her sexual past. Richard Mason states in Four Ethical Issues of the Information Age that, “Collections of information reveal intimate details about a person and can thereby deprive the person of the opportunity to form certain professional and personal relationships.” This case clearly violated the males’ privacy, as these bedroom tales are the most intimate information one can find out about an individual. While Owen did elect to send this Powerpoint to her friends, her own privacy was compromised as well that of the list. It is not a coincidence that almost all parties involved have retracted themselves from the online sphere. Much of Mason’s writing discusses companies collecting data online about their users. This situation is more difficult, however, as the information was collected in the most private setting possible. I think Max was correct in comparing the list to a diary. It was meant to be shared with a few friends but instead was spread to the world. Nevertheless, Owen threw away the males’ privacy as soon as she started her thesis.

Anonymity

While Owen originally made an oversight, the news sites that published the list failed to protect the anonymity of the men involved. Kathleen Wallace states in Online Anonymity that, “computer-mediated or online communication may encourage the impression that one is anonymous”. While this communication of information started in person, the men likely expected that the story of their night wouldn’t be spread online. They acted in a manner that was accepted by all immediate parties involved, not with the judgement and opinions of those who ended up being privy to thier actions as a result of the list being posted online. But when Jezebel and Deadspin posted the list without blacking out any of the names, is proof that maybe they should have. Deadspin has since updated the article to exclude names. Names, pictures, education, and extracurricular activities of all the men were instantly spread across the web, not to mention the grotesque details of sexting, dirty talk, and unconventional sexual activities. These websites committed an atrocious oversight when releasing information about people to the entire world, that was really only meant for three friends.