blog self-censoring

http://www.boston.com/yourlife/health/blog/2007/05/fleas_fall_1.html

i'm intrigued. i understand that what i post on the 'net is different than what i post in my offline diary. once it's on the 'net it's available for public consumption and we have to be responsible for what we chose to post.

but with schools and companies looking at our postings and searching for reasons to not accept us ... how can they give more credit to a drunk picture on myspace than the polished resume on their desk. both are very incomplete pictures of a person.

and now semi-professional blogs pushing people to think and discuss controversial topics. seems that unless it's your profession you should stay away from it. imagine publishing a blog where you play devil's advocate for a controversial subject just to get people to think and discuss (isn't that what america is about??). you can't admit to it being a devil's advocate position - you'll lose credibility on the site; you can't not admit it for fear you'll be found out and people will misjudge you based on it.

how on earth would the federalist papers have been published in modern day?

-s