Riability and Liability in Websites

The U.S. Court of Appeals just ruled that Craigslist, Inc. is not liable for any discriminatory listings that may appear in their online advertising website. With the ease at which people can create websites and postings, it is difficult to determine or monitor the authenticity or how appropriate the page or listing is. As more and more people turn to the internet to do their research, classified searches and social networking, the concern has grown as to what we are viewing and how real or true something is that we see online. Also, it is nearly impossible for some sights to monitor the contents as to whether they are offensive, discriminatory or accurate.
Some sights such as Facebook.com ask you to verify that you have the right to distribute anything you post as well as insure the company that it is not pornographic or inappropriate. Simply checking a box does not ensure any of those things. Other than being reported by other users, there are very few ways to monitor such a large filing of people's pages, pictures and posts. So how do we know the sights we are on are not only accurate, but they do not contain any content that may be offensive or inappropriate? We have been told to make sure we trust the sight publisher. This can be possible for news sources, but some searches may not be that easy.
It is a freedom that we are entitled to print whatever we would like on the internet at this point, within reason. So who can we trust? If there was a more effective system that could issue a stamp of authenticity to websites that wish to be recognized as such, we could establish information as authentic, correct and appropriate, just as we have with other media. It is however, nearly impossible and unnecessary to do so for all websites and postings, which may not be a bad thing.