MIT Takes Stand On Intellectual Freedom

[Marc Rotenberg <rotenberg@xxxxxxxx>]

I thought folks on this list might be interested in the
following news article which appeared in the Washington
Post today. It would be wonderful if the ACM were to take
a similar stand in defense of academic openness after
September 11.

Marc Rotenberg.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48389-2002Jun13.html

MIT Seeks to Preserve Openness Amid Security Measures
By Michael A. Fletcher
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, June 14, 2002; Page A06

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology has become the first major
academic research institution to outline a policy designed to
protect intellectual openness on campus amid growing pressure to
limit access to sensitive information and materials as part of the
war on terrorism.

Recommendations developed by a faculty committee include confining
classified research to separate, off-campus locations, refusing
contracts that require government prescreening of research results
and assembling a standing faculty committee to monitor and respond
to legal restrictions on the disclosure of scientific information.

For decades, MIT has conducted classified research on radar,
satellites and electronic air defense systems at its off-campus,
federally funded Lincoln Laboratory. Other research universities
also typically restrict classified research to separate, off-campus
facilities accessible only to staff with security clearances.

But because of legal restrictions imposed after last year's
terrorist attacks, universities now find themselves reviewing their
policies to balance the need for academic openness on campus with
new national security concerns.

Congress has passed two measures since October that, among other
things, restrict the handling of biological agents commonly used by
university researchers. Also, the Department of Defense recently
proposed to make it illegal for scientists to publish certain basic
research without prior government approval. The measure was pulled
back in the face of vehement opposition from scientific
organizations.

"Since the Cold War, we've struggled with the issue of academic
freedom and what is sensitive research versus classified research,"
said Joanne Carney, director of the Center for Science, Technology
and Congress at the American Association for the Advancement of
Science. In the wake of the Sept. 11 terror attacks, she said, that
dilemma has intensified.

Bruce Alberts, president of the National Academy of Sciences, called
the MIT report "an important first step. Other universities will
need to take a close look at it to see what new policies they need
to protect faculty and students in the new, security-conscious
environment."

The proposed guidelines, contained in a report to be considered by
MIT administrators, reflect the school's dual role as a cutting-edge
research institution and a world-renowned place of higher education.

The report said MIT should not accept or hold documents on campus
that are deemed "sensitive" or that are to be restricted from
foreign students.

Also, classified work should be restricted to classified facilities
separate from the campus, the report said.

The MIT committee also said the school should not enter into
contracts that require its research findings to be prescreened by
the federal government or other sponsors.

The MIT report also said the school should consider moving some of
its biological research off campus to a separate facility.

© 2002 The Washington Post Company