The following story that started as a harmless prank and led to a worldwide cyber scandal deserves special attention because what happened in summer 1997 has been discussed and analyzed from several different aspects ever since.

The original email message which contained a commencement speech allegedly delivered by Kurt Vonnegut at MIT spread all over the net like wildfire, went everywhere by computer from email-box to email-box, like a giant pyramid game.  It got posted to several mailing lists, even to a popular Hungarian one (HIX Tipp) where I first read it.

The sensation caused by the events was biggest in the US, since the protagonists of the story are both American: one of them is a popular and noted writer, Kurt Vonnegut, the other is a much less known journalist. The story was soon discussed so widely that an online magazine started its article with these words: "In case you’ve been living in a bomb shelter during the past few days, here’s what happened."

Let me tell you the story in short. An American journalist named Mary Schmich wrote a clever and funny article, in which she fantasized about giving a commencement address to graduating students. The article originally appeared in her regular column in the Chicago Tribune. Mary received favorable reaction, including congratulations from friends and some nice phone calls, but that was all. The story would have ended here if someone had not invented the hoax of the year.

What the unknown prankster did was he took Mary’s column a month after it was published in the Chicago Tribune and forwarded it on the net under the label „Kurt Vonnegut’s Commencement Address at MIT." This email message began to make rounds all over the net and arrived in millions of mailboxes within a few hours. The message was forwarded from friends to friends, stamped with such comments as „worth a read," and „check this out - it’s great". The message was even submitted to several newsgroups and mail forums, giving the „speech" enormous notoriety. The article quickly came to be reviewed by literary critics, archived by collectors and praised by Vonnegut fans who were enthusiastic to read the recent immortal words of their favourite writer. Recipients of the message thought they’d recognized Vonnegut’s unique wit, the kind of cynical humor for which he is famous. Even Vonnegut’s wife fell victim to the hoax and forwarded the message to family and friends. There was only one skeptic, a leading Vonnegut cyber-fanatic, who got suspicious and posted a reply to the alt.books.kurt-vonnegut newsgroup saying: "This voice is not quite his." The majority of people, however, did not have any doubt whether the message was true - they believed it without question.

It wasn’t long before both the real and the alleged writer learned what was going on in cyberspace. Mary was desperately trying to get in touch with Vonnegut until finally, she managed to track him down by phone. By then, Vonnegut had heard of the incident from friends, his lawyer, even from a women’s magazine that wanted to reprint the speech, until he denied he was the author.

"It was quite witty, but not my wittiness," he generously said to Mary.

As the incident became widely known Mary received more and more angry emails from people who accused her of plagiarism.  And, so, pen in hand, she wrote the true story of the commencement speech.

In this thoughtful article she clears herself and analyzes the deeper content of the events in an interesting way. Her response was published in her column and was put on several web pages on the Internet . The illuminating article begins with the following words:

"Oh, Kurt Vonnegut may appear to be a brilliant, revered male novelist. I may appear to be a mediocre and virtually unknown female newspaper columnist. We may appear to have nothing in common but unruly hair. But out in the lawless swamp of cyberspace, Mr. Kurt Vonnegut and I are one. Out there, where any snake can masquerade as king, both of us are the author of a graduation speech that began with the immortal words: "Wear sunscreen".

The whole letter is worth a read, first because it is another good piece, second, because it helps every netizen to understand more of the risks of  online communication.  Mary analyzes the events from her own perspective, but of course everyone is free to find the moral of the story for himself.  Moreover, the signals contained therein may help us to think in many different directions.

The most obvious questions that arise are: How reliable is information we get through the Internet? Can you trust your email and online news received from cyberspace? It is interesting to know that even the highly respected Wired News was taken in, and the editor confessed shamefacedly thereafter that a sentence of Vonnegut’s speech ran as its Quote of the Day :-)

The identity of the prankster remains a mystery, just like his or her intent.  However, it reminds us to be less gullible; we all should manage electronic information with sensible control and not fall prey to the same trap with the Internet that most do with TV: what they see on the screen, they believe. Untrue information may appear even in traditional media channels, despite the fact that, in traditional media, stories must travel through a filter before reaching the audience. In the case of the Internet, this filter does not exist.  On the World Wide Web anyone is free to publish anything under anybody’s name. Legal responsibility is merely academic.

Here’s the point where we should refer to the great importance of individual responsibility in the computer age. If we use the net as an effective means of communication, as an immediate and powerful media, the information superhighway will be a useful tool for the entire net community. It is frightening to consider that, like Vonnegut’s story, serious rumors and lies (read: libels against innocent people, organizations) can quickly spread to all corners of the world, and cause trouble and loss by delivering misinformation to masses, generating panic and chaos.

Consider this recent example:  an email is circulating widely that contains the alleged announcement of the Child Cancer Research Institute of the University of Düsseldorf about dangerous and carcinogenic food additives. The document, which seems to contain honest and trustworthy information and leads so many people to believe and forward the message to others, is only a fake. The email legend - according to the results of the investigation lead by some skeptics - is in fact a campaign intended against certain products of the food industry.

Other fans of Mary’s story point to the issue of name recognition. How much is a trademark or well recognized name worth? Mary Schmich refers to this issue in her response letter she penned when the scandal began.

"I should put Kurt Vonnegut’s name on my column. It would be like sticking a Calvin Klein label on a pair of Kmart jeans"

Asserting this, the journalist discounts all those enthusiastic reviewers who described the speech as brilliant, clever and funny. She says the praise was directed, not to the content, but to the well-recognized brand name.

Mary Schmich claims that she wrote the piece one Friday afternoon while high on coffee and M&M’s. "It was not art," she insisted.

The world (wide web) has nevertheless made literature out of it overnight.

Kurt Vonnegut commented the events briefly in this way:
"Cyberspace is spooky."

(However, after all this, who can be sure that it was his comment indeed? :-)
 

written and translated by Andrea Wesselenyi

Published as a leading article of the Hungarian monthly Internet Kalauz in April 1998

Feedback from readers of the story:

comments in Hungarian are added to the Hungarian version