A series of divisive e-mails to an electronic mailing list for RPI faculty, which has resulted in the Institute’s refusal to reinstate Professor Don Steiner’s campus e-mail address, has renewed debate within the community regarding administration censorship.
Following Steiner’s retirement in June, his access to the campus e-mail systems was terminated, and his request that it be reinstated was denied due to allegations that he had violated the Rensselaer Policy on Electronic Citizenship by harassing Institute personnel.
In a formal letter to Steiner that was dated August 4, Vice President for Human Resources Curtis Powell explained that his communications over the general faculty distribution over the course of the preceding year were insulting and defamatory.
The original termination of Steiner’s network access occurred as a matter of course, and was not a disciplinary action. According to Powell, the Institute declined to re-extend the privilege of an RPI e-mail account to Steiner following his retirement, although he noted that excepting Steiner’s alleged infractions of the Policy on Electronic Citizenship, his request for reinstatement would likely have been granted.
Powell cited two specific messages as examples of Steiner’s e-mails being insolent. One was a response to President Shirley Ann Jackson’s February 19 letter to the faculty; Steiner characterized it as “more of the same subterfuge and insulting pabulum.” The other was a March 12 response to communication from Provost Robert E. Palazzo that called out some community members as “provocateurs;” Steiner’s reply criticized him for not acting in ways that a provost might be expected to.
Enclosed with Powell’s letter was a packet containing a selection of over 20 pages of Steiner’s communication over the faculty distribution list and quotes from a local newspaper referencing Steiner’s vocal objection to Jackson’s approach to faculty governance. These samples included the full texts of the e-mails Powell excerpted in the letters.
Among Powell’s assertions was that Steiner made defamatory comments, a claim that some dispute. The term “defamation” has a precise definition in the American legal system; according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary of Law, it involves “communication to third parties of false statements” that would damage an individual’s reputation.
The issue received national media attention when it was picked up in an August 11 article in Inside Higher Ed, an online news source that follows stories of interest to institutions and individuals involved in post-secondary education. The publication discusses faculty discomfort with the actions of the Rensselaer administration in this issue, quoting Professor Bruce Nauman, a familiar face in the recent governance crisis.
The situation has already been widely publicized on weblogs, frequently with claims that Jackson and her cabinet were censoring Steiner. Vice President for Strategic Communication and External Relations William Walker took a different stance, telling Inside Higher Ed that some of the e-mail messages in question “were offensive to other members of the university community,” and noted that RPI’s policies state that “all members of the campus have the right not to be harassed by others.” He added that it ensures, “university administrators, students, and faculty are protected from harassment for expressing their own ideas.”
Walker declined to respond to questions from The Poly regarding the situation and how the administration planned to address the perception of censorship, stating that the Institute does not comment on individual personnel issues. Jackson could not be reached for comment.
Regarding the allegations that he had violated the Rensselaer Policy on Electronic Citizenship, Steiner said that he was unaware that he had been accused of any such violations prior to Powell’s August 4 letter. He also asserted that his electronic communication had been professional in nature and was not harassment but critical discourse on the state of administration at RPI.
