Last month, Interim Public Access Counselor for the State of Indiana, Sandra Bowman, issued an opinion stating that e-mails sent by IU employees via university accounts can be disclosed to the public through the 1984 Indiana Access to Public Records Act (IDS, Nov. 20).\nAs this means that e-mails to and from my account could be matters of public record, I felt it necessary to explain and clarify some items of correspondence that, upon release to the public, could be, well, misinterpreted. Given space constraints, I cannot reprint the text of the messages here. But I have provided the dates and subject lines, in order that this column might serve as a key to their original intent.
Jan. 27\nSubject: Re: What's up?\nIndividuals unfamiliar with political science's special jargon could easily misunderstand this e-mail. First of all, it's important to know that political scientists often have a strong sense of political party affiliation. Second, while not all political scientists are Democrats, they do represent a large majority within the group and therefore shape the terms of the community's discourse. As a result, a certain reverence for the symbols of the Democratic Party have become commonplace among political scientists of all ideological stripes.\nThus, I am actually expressing my great esteem when I refer to a senior university administrator as an "absolute and unmitigated jackass," "the biggest jackass in the world" or "Grand High King of the jackasses, ruling in all his majestic jackassiness over his jackass subjects." After all, the jackass -- or donkey -- symbolizes the Democratic Party and its traditions of humane government and equality for all Americans. You will observe that in other e-mails, I apply this same praise to faculty members, colleagues and students. Perhaps I am overly generous in the term's use, but I tend to see the best in people.
March 6\nSubject: Wait 'til ya hear this one!\nI want to apologize for the poor taste of the joke featured in this e-mail and make clear that I do not hold to the opinions implicit in it. The joke was racist, sexist, homophobic, insensitive toward the disabled, insulting to people taller than six-foot-eight; bigoted against individuals of Chinese, German, Argentinean, Irish, Haitian, Polish, Thai, Swedish, Latvian, Greek, Melanesian or Togolese extraction; offensive to the traditions of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, Shintoism, all faiths descending from the teachings of Zoroaster and any form of worship involving a corn goddess; denigrating toward the fine work done by the good men and women of the United States Postal Service, the USDA and the Dallas Cowboys cheerleaders; harmful to the preservation of the emperor penguin; misrepresentative of artificial insemination's potential for ensuring the future survival of the emperor penguin; and generally sophomoric, crude, fixated on the baser bodily functions and not funny at all. Again, my sincerest apologies.
July 21\nSubject: Clara, photo attached.\nI swear that I have never seen this goat before in my life. Clearly someone at www.XXXNaughtyBarnyard.com made a mistake.
Oct. 15\nSubject: Master plan.\nHere, I was merely providing a hypothetical response to a student's question. I would, for instance, never fluoridate the ketchup in the dining halls as a means of weakening the willpower of Bloomington's student population. Furthermore, how could I possibly take control of the local media to plant subliminal messages (you believe Brian)? The idea is patently ridiculous (you agree). The hallmark of American higher education is the value attached to independent thought (do my bidding). Why would I want to jeopardize that (make me a cheese sandwich)?
