The Time Study

[David Farber <farber () central cis upenn edu>]

Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 16:52:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: "L. Jean Camp" <lc2m+ () andrew cmu edu>


There was some interest on the Time magazine story about CMU's research
at the meeting. When I returned my mailbox had  a few local pointers and
much debate. Here is a summary of the information I have.


Jean




(Please send this to Dave Farber if he is not on this list. I know there
has been discussion there as well.)


Martin Rimmm asked questions of many people here at CMU. He did not give
any of these people final edits. This is the opposite of the truth: That
while the study was funded by CMU it does not represent the official
opinions or position of CMU.
Two of the twenty list, Adam Epstein and Lisa Sigel, have disclaimed the
study. In one disclaimer it is illustrated that he did not even do his
own shell scripts!  Please see this web page for their disclaimers.
http://www2000.ogsm.vanderbilt.edu/cyberporn.debate.cgi
This includes links to various detailed discussions of Rimm's work.


Check http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/kcf/www/censor/index.html
For a discussion of the various responses of CMU since the study can
come out, and ther entire local battle ove access to offensive
information began.


Finally, I would point out in terms of credibility that he has claimed
to have a book which is being published by a publisher with no other
address than  his own, and no other books to its credit.  The artist who
is mentioned as having done the work in the book has stated that the
work has not been done, and may not be completed.


Please do read Lisa Seigel's analysis. She is a researcher in the
Department of History and does academic work in the study of pornography.


It is truly shameful that Time fell for such bad research, and even more
so for Georgetown. Please do not associate this undergraduate publicity
stunt with academics at CMU.


Jean