In a report released in July, Boston attorney Michael B. Keating corroborated the administration’s claim that those involved had been unaware that they were breaching privacy protocol at the time the searches took place.
The 29-page Keating report helped to clear up uncertainty from which the the faculty’s initial frustration arose, Hall said. Such uncertainty lent itself to the vision of a “worst-case scenario,” he added. “[That] dissipated quickly once people realized what had actually transpired.”
In addition to commissioning Keating at the April faculty meeting, University President Drew G. Faust announced the creation of a committee tasked with reviewing the patchwork of email privacy policies in place across the University at the time of the searches with the end goal of recommending a universal policy.
The committee handed down their proposal for a single, University-wide privacy policy late last month, after almost a year of consideration. If approved, it would establish a faculty oversight committee, regular record-keeping, and a clear chain of command for authorizing access to electronic communications.
Harry R. Lewis ’68, a computer science professor and the former dean of the College, wrote in an email that the “recommendations seem to get all the major points right—and if these policies are adopted, that will be a big and reassuring change in the standards.”
This March’s Faculty meeting, which would have been the first chance for faculty members to discuss the proposed policy in a formal setting with administrators, was cancelled last week due to “insufficient business ready for action.” The cancellation leaves unanswered the question as to where the faculty’s collective voice lies a year after the email searches were announced.
“Biding time is the general attitude,” History professor Charles S. Maier ’60, a former Crimson Editorial chair said, adding that faculty are not as “excited” about the issue at the present.
“We’ll see when this [email privacy] report gets debated,” he said.
Hall said that faculty members’ quiet reaction to the cancellation of last week’s meeting offers a sharp contrast with the climate last spring, when such a cancellation “would have been a bad move.”
—Staff writer Dev A. Patel can be reached at dev.patel@thecrimson.com. Follow him on Twitter @dev_a_patel.
—Staff writer Steven R. Watros can be reached at steven.watros@thecrimson.com. Follow him on Twitter @SteveWatros
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
CORRECTION: March 11, 2014
An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated the number of resident deans whose email accounts were searched by administrators in connection with the Government 1310 cheating case. In fact, the accounts of 17 resident deans were subject to the secret queries.