Freedom of speech is redefined by blogs. People's opinions are one thing, but when there's print evidence, others' actions will be more aggressive. For instance, the opinionated list of why Seton Hill should not have a football team, displayed by an average student is now physical evidence that one cannot deny. There is always the aspect of denying the opinion you gave verbally, but with posted writing for the public eye, you have no chance of claiming it wasn't you.
Tiffany, I definitely agree with you in that writing is potentially more damaging than verbal communication. People will remember what you write for a long time afterward, which can be a good or bad thing.
But who's saying the writer necessarily wants to deny it? I know the writer of said article, and i also know that his opinions have not changed (much) since writing it.
If Person-X writes something that X is later ashamed of, too bad. Maybe X should let the draft catch some dust before posting.
But if everyone else thinks Person-X should be ashamed or change X's opinion and X isn't ashamed and has the same opinion? Why should X care? Isn't this freedom of speech we're talking about?