Letters

Disturbed By Abelson Report

To The Faculty Newsletter:

We were much disturbed to read, on page 69 of the Abelson Report [Report to the President, MIT and the Prosecution of Aaron Swartz], about a meeting between Robert Swartz and the Chancellor and General Counsel:

“Second, Robert Swartz connected the matter of his son to that of Star Simpson, arguing that the Star Simpson matter was a precedent that would allow MIT to make a statement. The Chancellor and the General Counsel took a different view, explaining that after MIT had made those statements its administration had been (justly) reprimanded.”

We have to wonder how the Chancellor and General Counsel construed the Simpson case as a precedent arguing against coming to the aid of someone in need of help. Surely any thoughtful person who attended the debate preceding the vote on the Manning-Winston resolution understood that our proposed resolution – some still call it a vote of no confidence – was in opposition to characterizing an innocent student as “reckless.” Both the Chancellor and General Counsel were there, both know that the vote failed and that the faculty narrowly sustained a policy that permitted, indeed encouraged, the administration to act thoughtfully – either by public comment or by behind-the-scenes negotiation – on consequential matters involving MIT. The Simpson case raised concern that the administration did not act thoughtfully, while the Swartz case is about a failure to act.

Kenneth R. Manning
Thomas Meloy Professor of Rhetoric and History of Science

Patrick H. Winston
Ford Professor of Computer Science

	Back to top
	Send your comments