This material first appeared on the Project 2000 Website in the summer of 1995. Many of the original links have been lost, but we have attempted to archive much of the original content for historical purposes.

The Cyberporn Debate.

Time July 3, 1995 Cyberporn cover.

The July 3, 1995 Time magazine cover story on “Cyberporn” by Philip Elmer-Dewitt, is based on its exclusive access to Marty Rimm’s Georgetown Law Journal paper, “Marketing Pornography on the Information Superhighway.” Already, the Rimm study and the Time cover story are providing ammunition for conservative special interest groups, lobbyists, and elected officials. However, as documented in the series of critiques which follow, both the Rimm study and the Time cover story contain serious conceptual, logical, and methodological flaws and errors. These flaws and errors are sufficiently severe that neither the Rimm study nor the Time cover story should be taken seriously by policy makers considering issues involving the Internet and the so-called “Information Superhighway.” Our objective is to provide a forum for a constructive, honest, and open critique process. We do not debate the existence of pornography in “cyberspace,” though we do dispute the findings presented in the Rimm study and the Time article concerning its extent and consumption on the Internet. Pornography exists and is transmitted through many media, including cable television, books and magazines, video tapes, private “adult” bulletin boards, the postal mail, computer networks, interactive media like CDROM, fax, and telephone, to name a few. The critically important national debate over First Amendment rights and restrictions on the Internet and other emerging media requires facts and informed opinion, not hysteria.

The Danger
Misformation, when propagated, begets even worse misinformation. Consider the remarks of Senator Grassley in the June 26, 1995 Congressional Record :

Mr. President, Georgetown University Law School has released a remarkable study conducted by researchers at Carnegie Mellon University. This study raises important questions about the availability and the nature of cyberporn. …

The university surveyed 900,000 computer images. Of these 900,000 images, 83.5 percent of all computerized photographs available on the Internet are pornographic. Mr. President, I want to repeat that: 83.5 percent of the 900,000 images reviewed–these are all on the Internet– are pornographic, according to the Carnegie Mellon study.

We do know know whether Senator Grassley was misinformed or deliberately misled on the facts he presented. We do know that the numbers he presented were 100% incorrect. The most critical error in Grassley’s statement is that the 900,000 files (which were not all images, by the way), were from adult bulletin boards, not from the Internet.

The June 26 Congressional Record also contains remarks from Senator Exon regarding the Time cover story:

If it were not referenced, I would reference the graphic picture on the front of Time magazine today, which I think puts into focus very distinctly and directly what my friend from Iowa and this Senator has been talking about for a long, long, time.

As you read through the material on this page, keep Senators Grassley and Exon’s remarks in mind.


Key Articles

Rimm, Marty (1995), “Marketing Pornography on the Information Superhighway“, Georgetown Law Journal, 83 (June), 1849-1934.

Hoffman, Donna L. and Thomas P. Novak, “A Detailed Analysis of the Conceptual, Logical, and Methodological ...“, July 2, 1995 (version 1.01).

Elmer-Dewitt, Philip (1995), “On a Screen Near You: Cyberporn,” Time, July 3, 38-45.

Hoffman and Novak’s critique of the Time “Cyberporn” article.

Rimm’s response to Hoffman and Novak’s critique. Hoffman and Novak’s response to Rimm’s response.


Rimm

* Wikipedia entry for Marty Rimm


Critiques & Analysis

Declan McCullagh’s “Moral Mazes” series: Carnegie Mellon, Marty Rimm, Marvin Sirbu, and Time Magazine.

“The Rimmjob Method” [Mike Godwin, October 1, 1995]

“Cyberspace to Congress: The Net is Mainstream — and it Votes” [Donna L. Hoffman, January 1996]

“Jacking in from the ‘Point-Five Percent Solution’ Port: Washington,...” [Brock N. Meeks, CyberWire Dispatch, July 4, 1995].

“Jacking in from the ‘Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride’ Port: Porn-O-Plenty,” [Brock N. Meeks, CyberWire Dispatch, July 13, 1995]

“Critique of the Rimm Study“. [Brian Reid, Digital Equipment Corporation, July 6, 1995]

“Critique of ‘Wired for Sex’ on A&E Investigative Reports” [Edward D. Isenberg, January 7, 1996]

Letter submitted to the New York Times regarding Peter Lewis’ article (7/3/95) on the Rimm pornography study. [David S. Touretzky, Faculty Member, CMU Computer Science Department]

“A Preliminary Discussion of Methodological Peculiarities in the Rim...’ ” [David G. Post, Visiting Associate Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center, June 28, 1995]

Criticisms of the Time Article and the Rimm Study [Jim Thomas, Professor of Sociology and Criminal Justice Illinois University, June 25 through July 2, 1995

"CIS Censorship: The Whole Story" [Michael Kunze, Spiegel Online, January 6, 1996]

Comments by Samuel Greenfield, 1995 CMU Math/Computer Science graduate.

“The Ethics of Carnegie Mellon’s ‘Cyber-Porn’ Study“. [Jim Thomas, Professor of Sociology and Criminal Justice, Northern Illinois University, July 11, 1995]

“Critique of Rimm Article on Online Pornography” [Lisa Sigel, doctoral candidate in Social History, Carnegie Mellon University, and Geoffrey Sauer, doctoral candidate in Cultural Theory, Carnegie Mellon University, July 4, 1995]. Note: Lisa Sigel is acknowledged by Marty Rimm as a “Contributor” to his article.

“Would-be Censors Base Arguments on Bogus Research,” Tomorrow column [Howard Rheingold, July 2, 1995]

He Says/She Says: linked commentaries on the Rimm study and Time “Cyberporn” article. [Brad Rhodes, MIT]

“JournoPorn: Dissection of a Scandal” [Mike Godwin, HotWired, July 4, 1995]