Discussion Example - "Cyberporn" (Time Magazine)

A major Time Magazine article on Cyberspace pornography based on 'a University study' (Carnegie Mellon U.)[CMU] has been roundly condemed on the Internet as being unsubstantiated in fact: the (un-peer-reviewed) work of a senior student. Major criticisms appear to be that the work was not only poor research, but had failed to differentiate between Adult Bulletin Boards and the Internet.

DISCLAIMER: While this information is both selected and selective, it should not be construed to represent the opinions of the author, the group, nor of the University of NSW. The intention is to provide information for reasoned discussion and debate.

On 3rd July,1995, (Volume 146, No. 1) Time Magazine published its front cover article "On a Screen Near You: Cyberporn" alleging extensive pornography on the Internet. It was based on a report by an undergraduate Engineering student "Marketing Pornography on the Information Superhighway" (The Rimm Report).

The reaction by the Net was immediate.

Links to the Cyberporn Affair


Some Questions

Should a University Policy allow / prohibit electronic publication (or relay?) of material of a sexual nature? Of a "pornographic" nature? Who decides? Letter to CMU BBoard Committee by David Touretsky

Could Time Magazine's actions (in publishing the article without expert review) be considered as responsible?

Once the Time article was published, was the Net response appropriate? If appropriate, was it adequate to address the issue?

Did CMU (through Rimm) gain or lose credibility from this situation? (In what way?)

If CMU lost credibility, could that have been avoided through general policy guidelines (or was this a one off event for which they can be wise after the event)?

If CMU gained credibility, could that opportunity for front-page coverage in an international magazine be enhanced through general policy guidelines (or was this a one off event for which they can be wise after the event)?

Can the problem of pornography on the Net be ignored by University policy? (If we ignore the sex issue will it go away? :)

In spite of the damaging assessment of the Rimm Report are the conclusions still correct? ("The argument may be unsound but the conclusions true.")


This page established by Charles Willock on behalf of a group interested in airing issues of censorship / freedom of speech etc. Last updated 24th October 1995.

E-mail to: charlesw@cse.unsw.edu.au