[Post-Gazette Op-Ed / reprinted for clarity]

	It's not about cyber-sex. It's about cyber-censorship. That's
the thing to remember when you read about the Carnegie Mellon
University debate over the contents of the information superhighway.
	CMU's Andrew computer system is plugged into the Internet,
which is an international electronic network linking tens of millions
of people who communicate via electronic mail and Usenet conference
areas called newsgroups. A newsgroup is a discussion or distribution
area devoted to a particular topic, and about 100 of roughly 9,000
newsgroups are used for sexual discussions.
	This is what troubles CMU. They're embarrassed that sexual
material is available on their Andrew system.
	On November 9, the school decided to pull the plug on this
sexual material by removing 14 newsgroups that contain pictures, some
with sex-related content. CMU also had planned to remove 63 additional
groups that carried discussions about sex, but has decided to keep
them temporarily.
	CMU's decision to censor newsgroups is wrong. The decision was
pushed through a high-level administration committee in one meeting
without consulting legal experts or members of the campus community.
	This cyber-censorship has outraged students not because they
want to look at dirty pictures -- after all, they can buy Playboy and
Penthouse in the University Shoppe -- but because CMU has decided to
start censoring what they can see and talk about in cyberspace.
	In fact, official CMU computer statistics show that only about
three percent of people on campus look at dirty pictures.
	CMU's president, Robert Mehrabian, claims the school has to
censor the newsgroups because it may find itself in legal trouble if
it continues to let students look at dirty electronic photos.
	However, legal experts who specialize in cyberspace law at the
American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation
disagree. "The ACLU's review of the law leads us to conclude that the
university's fears are unfounded," says Vic Walczak, the executive
director of the Pittsburgh ACLU chapter. Mike Godwin, EFF staff
council, says that CMU administrators and its lawyers don't understand
the relevant legal and constitutional principles.
	Charles Lowry, the head of the CMU library system, agrees that
the school generally should be permissive, not restrictive. "The
university has a responsibility to make judgements that are carefully
drawn and not needlessly restrictive. Academic freedom is a high
value. If you don't have a clear legal decision, that's where you want
to stand."
	Besides, to be consistent, the administration should also yank
those Playboy and Penthouse magazines off the shelf of the Baker Hall
University Shoppe.
	Mehrabian also claims that the binary pictures are a waste of
computer resources. That may be true, but it's not a significant waste
-- the pictures use less than one-twentieth of one percent of the
available space on CMU's Andrew computer system.
	His claims that the images are degrading to women are
similarly misleading. "Some images may be degrading to women, but
censorship is not the answer. Women on the Internet are fighting back
against pornography with debate, not censorship," says Donna Riley, a
graduate student in Engineering and Public Policy and a member of the
campus women's organization. "Mehrabian's decision to censor is
patronizing. Women don't need to be protected."
	The administration's views show a misunderstanding of how an
institution of higher education should approach controversial
expression. A university shouldn't censor controversy. Instead, it
should encourage debate.
	The administration's decision to censor Internet newsgroups is
ironic, for a quarter century ago, CMU and nine other schools across
the country created the first electronic dirt roads on the information
superhighway. Now that the information superhighway has grown beyond
CMU's ability to control, the school -- like Dr. Frankenstein in the
recent box-office horror film -- is trying to disown its creation.
	Dr. Frankenstein created something beyond his ability to
control. When his creature ran away into the wilderness, it showed its
originally good nature. But when its creator disowned it, it rebelled.
	This month, CMU showed itself to be a 20th-century Dr.
Frankenstein with it tried to disown its connection with the Internet,
which it helped found in 1969.
	The Internet started as a way for people to share research,
says Howard Wactlar, vice-provost for research computing at CMU's
School of Computer Science. "We were chosen to start the Internet
because we were a leading research center. But what emerged was that
the Internet's primary use was for communication, not research. Most
of the traffic was people talking with one another."
	This communication has allowed uniquely free and uninhibited
electronic conversations for the last 25 years. Instead of engaging in
cyber-censorship and disowning its creation, CMU must bring the
censored newsgroups back and promote academic freedom. It must be a
leader in cyberspace and set an example for other schools to follow.

Declan McCullagh
President of the Student Body
Carnegie Mellon University