Harvard.edu: An Ivy League pornographic playground

By | May 17, 2011, 5:13am PDT

Summary: Porn on Harvard.edu? Yes, but that’s only the start. Try Yale, Stanford, MIT, and more! This is one post you don’t want to miss…

Warning: The contents of this post are strongly adult-oriented. While the post itself will maintain a professional-though-adult tone, some of the pages I link out to are quite risque. As such, approach all links with caution and I recommend not visiting any of the links from this article with young, impressionable eyes around. Any links that link directly to a page with images that load will be noted as (NSFW) (or, Not Safe For Work) so that you can have complete confidence in knowing what is in store for you when clicking-through. If any of the links to follow don’t work, then it’s due to them having been nixed (which is a good thing for them). And now, without further ado…

UPDATE 5/18/11: It appears many of the links contained within this post have been removed by their owners. As such, expect mixed results if this is your first time viewing this article.

Imagine, if you will, the seemingly crazy notion that the Web site of an Ivy League school as prestigious as Harvard could have pornographic images in plain sight on public domain. It’s bad enough to think that a server of Harvard’s may have been hacked by someone who replaced/injected a page leading out to XXX content or something of the likes, but what is one to make of the Harvard physics council Wiki site that contains pages with terms like “barely legal blow job“? For that matter, there are a whole slew of these rogue Wiki sites with all kinds of fun and educational pages; like this one about “panty job free video clips“! Look up in your address bar when clicking those links, folks. That’s Harvard.

Worse yet, how does one reconcile blog entries on a Harvard Law blog that contain pornographic images with no educational or law-relevant value to them whatsoever? Sounds ridiculous, right? I mean, how on earth could the Web site of a school as prestigious as Harvard contain this type of content — never mind a fair amount of it at that! Just look at this screen shot of the home page of Harvard.edu (click it to see a larger version of the image):

Harvard.edu Home Page

Harvard.edu Home Page

So prestigious! So fresh! So clean! So… corruptible!

Remember those blog entries on a Harvard Law blog that contain pornographic images that I mentioned just a second ago? Well, below are screen shots from two out of a number of posts on it that I found containing such images (click them to see larger versions):

Should you want to see each post for yourself, here are the links to each them, respectively:

M & M’s Mom Carjacked in Detroit (NSFW Image)
Ingenious New Use for Our iPod (NSFW Image)

But wait, there’s more! For your consideration, here is an entire sub-domain totaling ~100 pages on Harvard.edu which seems to be dedicated to nothing but pornographic spam entries! We can easily mine these pages out via the following Google query: site:dev.flex.med.harvard.edu

And while we’re on the topic of pornographic spam pages littering Harvard.edu, take at look at this one enormous collection of links on one particular page. And there are many more like this I have been able to dig up, all thanks to a little bit of Google Fu.

Perhaps the icing on the cake is the fact that Harvard’s site utilizes a Google Custom Search box for their site-related searches. That means that if you visit Harvard.edu and utilize the search page that’s linked to in the upper right-hand corner of the home page, you’re going to see results from Google — albeit within Harvard’s Web site. Give the following a shot and see for yourself how hilariously fun this is:

  • 1 - Visit the Harvard.edu search page by clicking here.
  • 2 - In the search box, type the acronym “MILF” and hit the search button.
  • 3 - Giggle/cringe in disbelief and/or pee your pants just a little because of what you see.

For those of you who aren’t the interactive type, you can see what these results look like in the picture below (click it for a full-screen view):

Got MILF? Harvard does!

Got MILF? Harvard does!

Now, don’t get me wrong here; as far as I’m concerned, what someone wants to do with their own Web site is fine with me. Personally, I’m not the slightest bit offended by pornography; nor do I care who’s into what. We’re all human and people are into whatever they’re into. With that said, I can’t imagine that the image Harvard wants to portray is one of pornographic endeavors.

From an image/branding standpoint, posts like these make Harvard look trashy. From an editorial and administrative standpoint, the comments below the posts make Harvard look lazy and apathetic. Perhaps the latter is the worst of all, considering it is from that standpoint where it seems a particular ignorance and apathy have been fostered, thus allowing for anomalies like rogue Wiki sites that are publicly editable.

With such a wide array of pornographic entry points to the site, Harvard should consider undergoing a thorough investigation of both internal and external pages to help shore up their brand image and maintain the prestige. From an SEO (Search Engine Optimization) standpoint, those links are undoubtedly of some value to the spam sites they link out to. Harvard may also benefit overall via such a purge by reducing the total number of links that link out to garbage sites.

Also, I’d like to point out the fact that pornography is just one of many facets I decided to focus on where this type of investigation is concerned. Perhaps even more detrimental to a school’s image than pornography would be racism. When thinking on that path, it doesn’t take long to dig up pages dedicated to things like “Ku Klux Klan Chat” — never mind much more offensive and derogatory words I prefer not to write here. Now, do I think Harvard is a racist institution? Of course not. But the fact remains, that page is there. Spam or not, it just plain looks bad.

With that said, head on over to page two where I expose more schools with similar types of content and I list some particulars to look out for should you want to avoid or alleviate these types of issues on your very own Web site.

Warning: The contents on the following page are far more risque than those found above, so if this page was overload for you, then you may not want to continue…

Not just Harvard, but many others as well… »

Topics

Stephen is a freelance writer based in Charlotte, NC.

Disclosure

Stephen Chapman

Stephen Chapman is a freelance writer and content strategist. All work that Stephen does for ZDNet is on a contractual basis.

It is left to Stephen's discretion whether or not to accept assignments from prospective clients who discover him through ZDNet. Such endeavors have no association with ZDNet and, unless otherwise agreed upon, are kept separate and private in the interest of all parties involved. You may freely contact him for consulting, training, and/or public speaking inquiries.

While Stephen may accept complimentary passes, waived fees, payment, and/or covered travel costs to industry-related events (conferences, expos, etc.) as an attendee or a speaker, acceptance of such offers is not considered payment for, or exclusive guarantee of, any particular blog coverage of the event attended.

Biography

Stephen Chapman

Stephen is a freelance writer based in Charlotte, NC.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
126
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

zslzgds 94 wrv
bdsfwrryd67-24378983467785085099828823328587 27th Nov
fvavwj,gotthjul35, eoyzr.
0 Votes
+ -
Neither shocking nor interesting
Economister 17th May 2011
So hormone crazed young people at Ivy League institutions are no different from hormone crazed young people everywhere else?

What a surprise. And I did not even bother reading the blog and am perfectly happy to miss it. If I need to look at or read porn, I know where to find it thank you.

This is one blog I could do without.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Let me guess...
StephenChapman 17th May 2011
@Economister You're one of those people who writes "reviews" on Amazon without ever having read the book or owned the product, right?

Much more than just pornography, this post is call-out to Universities that they need to monitor their Web sites and understand what is being made available through them -- be it through students, faculty, or spammers. I took one of the most prestigious schools in the world and showed various pornographic entry points into their site.

Sorry to disappoint your expectations, but there is much more to take into consideration here than what meets the eye. Maybe if you had actually read the post, you would have understood that. I guess that's simply too much to ask of some people, huh? =)

-Stephen
0 Votes
+ -
Wrong again
Economister Updated - 17th May 2011
@StephenChapman

As soon as I read "...pornographic playground.." and "This is one post you don't want to miss..." I just rolled my eyes and tuned out.

Sorry, but that is just NOT serious blogging. That is sensationalism. Yes, you did disappoint.

Edit: Maybe you were catering to all the adolescent fan boys around here? I am sure many of them would find it very titillating.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Wrong again?
StephenChapman 17th May 2011
@Economister Where was I wrong to start with? lol.

Anyway, I can take your criticism of the one-sided nature that you personally think blogging should consist of, but you're starting to appear more like a Harvard system administrator at this point than an intelligible commenter. So vehement! Sheesh; learn to lighten up a little bit...

-Stephen
0 Votes
+ -
Let me count the ways for you
Economister 17th May 2011
@StephenChapman

1. Sensationalist headline/lead-in.

2. Wrong subject matter for a tech site

3. Your initial "guess" about me.

Maybe if you had actually attempted a serious blog on the matter and dropped the sensational beginning, we could at least have had an intelligent discussion about it. At this point your ego is bruised and you cannot think straight.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Sorry to disappoint you again, but...
StephenChapman Updated - 17th May 2011
@Economister If you think YOU have single-handedly bruised my "ego," you are delusional. happy In reality, I'm actually sitting over here giggling at the length you're willing to go to, to defend your point without even having read the article. By all means, please continue on your tirade! Your accusations of this article not being technical just shows how blissful one's ignorance must run to blindly make such a statement! Sure, the headline is playful, but you're the only one who has a problem with it so far. Sorry the world of blogging can't cater to your standards, Economister!

You've got a looooooong way to go before you even begin to scratch the surface of my "ego." Which movie did you pick that line up from, anyway? "Your EGO is so bruised by my superior intellect and world view that you cannot POSSIBLY consider continuing on with me! HA HA!" lol. Give me a break... grin


-Stephen
0 Votes
+ -
Thank you for confirming my assessment
Economister 17th May 2011
@StephenChapman

Did you say "tirade"?

In any event, I am done with this ridiculous exchange.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
You're welcome!
StephenChapman Updated - 17th May 2011
@Economister Like everything else appears to be in your world view, I am exactly what you think I am! Yes, I said "tirade" -- and I also said "vehement" and "pornography" and all sorts of other "wirty dords" you seem to take issue with.

PEACE OUT! lol.

-Stephen
@StephenChapman Beware, I fear you may crack your shoulder patting yourself on the back. There isn't anything to take into consideration here. More appropriate headline: "OMG the Internet is full of useless crap! OMG! OMG!" Or perhaps "LOL I found titties on Harvard.edu!!!" The examples you show are not shocking, barely inciteful (sic), and only seem to be odd in the amount of time the frivolous and dated posts have been online without anyone being perverse enough to notice them (until you). You do have to notice something in order to dispose of it, and when nobody does notice, it's probably not a big deal. I was hoping perhaps you might supply us with an algorithm to detach the frivolous blog posts from the porn and allow users to opt out of one and into the other. But then this page could disappear.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@sleepyfool Uniquely perceived! I'm sure the conclusions you've drawn from this post are not at all telling of your chosen perception differing not one iota from that which you have accused me of. Wonderful.

-Stephen
0 Votes
+ -
@StephenChapman

Maybe pornography is a personal issue for Economister. Did you catch your wife or husband watching some videos late at night? Lighten up pal the web is full of bad things.
@Economister but i'm pretty sure if the scores of wealthy alumni from any of these schools knew this content existed they wouldn't be too happy/willing to donate.
everyone knows horny kids are all the same; the issue is not with them but with the administrative professionals whose jobs it is to uphold the image of their university.
0 Votes
+ -
Sure...
Economister Updated - 17th May 2011
@oasis1489

because they NEVER did anything stupid when they were young.

Edit: I am not condoning or defending the behavior. My issue is the sensationalist blogging. And maybe ZDNet is the wrong place for sex type scandals.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Wrong.
StephenChapman 17th May 2011
@Economister Once again, it's not about that. You're missing the point and completely blowing steam based on ignorance/stubbornness.
0 Votes
+ -
@oasis1489 - I agree, I think if this article does get back to the University administrators for the above schools, - heck all schools - there will be some major reviews of the storage in the university cloud. This would be very interesting to watch.
0 Votes
+ -
oasis1489 touches on an important point.
Mister Spock 17th May 2011
@oasis1489
whether anyone one here believe this is inappropriate is not the issue, instead the image and reputation the school has spent countless years crafting and molding, the money raised and spent on "top notch" instructors and programs could be at risk, as donors and alumni may decide they no longer wish to be associated with a school that "caters to" porn or rascism.
plain
0 Votes
+ -
@Economister Wow - right over your head.
0 Votes
+ -
@Economister Yet once again you have proven most of the comments towards you are accurate.
0 Votes
+ -
And you have proven .....
Economister 17th May 2011
@ItsTheBottomLine

you don't even have the intellect to participate in the discussion. Enough said.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
And you have proven...
StephenChapman Updated - 17th May 2011
@Economister ...that with comments like that, you have come to realize the cost of such blatant ignorance. Resorting to insults like that is the best way to show how defeated you actually are -- or how much credibility or passion your point actually lacks. Good job.

-Stephen
@Economister reading comprehension fail. 'nuff said.
@Economister It sure was shocking to me. I gave too much credit to smart IT admins with maybe some common sense and etiquette. It is proof that these all these institutions need a review of their policy guidelines in what is proper or not.
0 Votes
+ -
SEO Fun and Games
ancientprogrammer 17th May 2011
This happens because so many people have been sold on the idea that links from .edu domains are the holy grail of SEO (even though Google has said this isn't correct).

Any .edu domain that leave even a tiny crack open will, at some point, receive a tremendous amount of spam content/links ranging from porn to antique knitting needles. Google certainly knows this and compensates for it but still the myth lives on.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
The past vs. what Google says now.
StephenChapman 17th May 2011
@ancientprogrammer Yes, I remember Matt Cutts stating in one of his videos that .edu links are no more valuable than other domains, but there was plenty of data prior to that point suggesting that they *did* provide more value.

So, though the perceived value of a .edu link being greater than others may be outdated at this point, there was a fair amount of data- and anecdotal-based evidence to suggest they did at one point -- thus making it more than just a myth.

Regardless, a dofollow link is a dofollow link and even nofollows have some amount of value to them -- even if only for the value of someone seeing them and curiously clicking on them.

Either way, universities should be aware of just how much of this is going on -- be it SEO spam or otherwise! Hopefully, this post will have the reach I intend for it to. happy

-Stephen
0 Votes
+ -
Authority Links
ancientprogrammer 17th May 2011
@StephenChapman - I've found that what really matters is the authority of the domain doing the linking, not the domain extension. For example, a link in an article posted on CNN or ZDnet is just as good, maybe better, than a link in a comment from a student blog at Harvard or Yale. There could have been a time, maybe 2002-2003, when .edu meant something but, for a while now, it hasn't meant anything more than a link from any other authority domain.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@ancientprogrammer I totally agree with you; however, I've personally seen the value .edu links have in years much more recent than 2003. That being said, I quit focusing on them well over a year ago now and would advise others to do the same, ultimately. Authoritative and topically-relevant pages == win/win -- not domain extensions, as you have noted.
0 Votes
+ -
What might be the point?
dsm@... 17th May 2011
Aside from the objective reality that university education, per se, is designed for further indoctrination, as "education" these years is more of that than learning about concepts with which the reputed authorities may disagree, one has to assume that the administration of these schools approve, support, and encourage pornographic activities. After all, it is there, open to discovery, and "freely" available. It is still there only because the university administrations approve of this diversion from (perhaps) previously more morally upstanding pursuits.

Then one might ask the question of why do they approve and support such diversions from polite society? The only answer I can readily find is, like television, it keeps the boobs from asking real questions and discovering things that the administration doesn't want them to question. However, that is the PC (paranoid conspiracy) answer, perhaps. On the other hand, given the magician's act that is almost all apparent public policy these days, one is driven to wonder why the diversion is significantly apparent so that they would risk public opprobrium so that it remains available, as surely "Pornographic Studies" is not a serious course stream in what should be an institution of higher learning. I thought "Women's Studies" fulfilled that role.
0 Votes
+ -
Welcome to the human race
Dr_Zinj 17th May 2011
It's always been about sex; even when they say it isn't.

Why is it that nobody seems to realize that if we weren't as preoccupied by sex as we are, we'd have gone extinct ages ago?
0 Votes
+ -
Thank you
Economister Updated - 17th May 2011
@Dr_Zinj

for putting this in proper perspective. When well over half a country thinks certain sex is "bad" and inconsistent with "family values", but then act according to their instincts anyway, get caught, "repent" and carry on, we do have a problem somewhere, but I am not sure the problem is our fundamental urge to procreate. And continuing to scandalize it is part of the problem, not the solution, but that point is apparently lost on the blogger.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Oh goodness; not you again.
StephenChapman 17th May 2011
@Economister No; the point of this blog post is lost on the person who doesn't read it such that they may understand that the very point you just wasted your time making *was already made* within the post by the blogger.

Just couldn't stay away, could you? lol.

-Stephen
0 Votes
+ -
I somehow don't believe my post ....
Economister 17th May 2011
@StephenChapman

was directed to you, but your pursuit of me just lends further credence to my initial assessment above. I am sitting here smiling at how worked up about this you have gotten.

As a blogger, you have yet to learn when to fold eh? It's been fun to rattle your cage a bit.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Ooo! Witty, now, are we?
StephenChapman 17th May 2011
@Economister Delusions of grandeur, have you! I needn't formulate into words what you have already made readily apparent to others reading all of your words throughout this post. Yes, that means exactly whatever YOU want it to mean -- regardless of if it *actually* does or not.

Again, please continue! wink

-Stephen
@Dr_Zinj

I'll keep that in mind next time one the lovely students in my district thinks they are being clever by hosting Adult Pictures or content on the web server as part of their web design class. I am sure the parents and members of the community will just accept that as a reason for it being there.

We make the teachers responsible for their own sections of the web server they have rights too but we frequently verify content and links because of stuff like this.

That being said there is nothing wrong with porn or adult material if you are into that sort of thing but there is an appropriate place for it and it is usually not on the school's web page. From the examples given it does not look like this material is intended for educational purposes and I highly doubt that the schools even know it is there in the first place.
0 Votes
+ -
Fine, so why
Economister 17th May 2011
@bobiroc

is the blogger presenting us with a scandalous headline?

"Harvard.edu: An Ivy League pornographic playground"

is the kind of stuff I expect from the tabloids, and not ZDNet, but that point completely escapes the blogger, apparently. It comes across as blatant click bait, nothing more, nothing less.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
You're right.
StephenChapman 17th May 2011
@Economister Your superior brain and infinite scope of ZDNet has once again conjured up some TRUTH in that head of yours! I mean, ZDNet's very own have NEVER written sensationalistic/scandalous headlines before, have they!? As a matter of fact, my writing is so completely devoid of ANY substance whatsoever that my editor-in-chief keeps me around solely out of pity! After all, the actual contents of my post have nothing at all to do with the headline, right? Oh, wait... you wouldn't know that because you're being a complete and utter child about this whole thing.

Listen, you can keep throwing your hands in the air and screaming that it's such a BIG DEAL to you that someone would create a non-boring headline for a post that completely supports/merits it, but at the end of the day, no one cares about what you're saying! Yes, just like the mom who learns to ignore her child when it cries because it can't have a piece of candy, so shall be your fate -- whether you want to believe it or not (which you obviously don't, because reality is not your stepping stone).

But by all means... keep on keepin' on! I wholeheartedly encourage you to continue painting your own picture. You're doing a wonderful job of letting completely sane and rational people know what it's like to read delusions of grandeur. wink

-Stephen
0 Votes
+ -
Re: Fine So Why
bobiroc 17th May 2011
@Economister

Actually it is one of the few blogs I have read on here in the past year or so that seems to be written objectively and with facts. Stephen is not attacking these schools and telling people they should switch schools based on his personal feelings about them but is showing people how information that some might find questionable can be found on sites that you would not expect to find that information on. I believe this was done to illustrate how some organizations may not even know what is out there on their websites. Especially those that may have a lot of hands controlling the content.

The thing I find funny is you seem to be so determined to discredit this author based on his headline which I am sure was designed to entice a potential reader to come read the blog. It is no different than what other bloggers do on here but the difference I see is that the information appears to be backed up by facts and not some half-witted speculation or assumption based on personal bias or dislike for a product, service, or organization. You seem to have no problem defending other bloggers that use click-baiting methods to get readers in despite some of them not having any factual information and rely only on there personal hatred of something.

I found that I could relate to the article a little bit as I work for a decent size school district with about 10,000 students and we have websites that students and staff create and maintain content in and we have come across similar things on our sites that we have to clean up and find out how the heck they got there in the first place.
0 Votes
+ -
Almost makes me think the Chinese have it right in blocking some web sites. A GOF (grumpy old fart).
0 Votes
+ -
I should have been on private browsing for this one. I didn't click on anything, but immediately i will erase my history and empty cache. Who needs this. Especially from a .edu. Is this what kids, their parents, and government scholarships are spending $50K to graduate our future "leaders"?
The child porn argument is a bunch of ****. It looks like material for a class. I think a moment to grow up needs to happen. Let's all take a moment and grow up.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@prof.ebral I understand your perception, but you only help qualify my point. Even with it being material for a class, I highly doubt UNC would approve of all of its contents being made openly-available to all of the Internet. I hope to create awareness more than just focus on one particular facet.

-Stephen
0 Votes
+ -
Wow, shocking...
Naryan 17th May 2011
Yeah we should be ashamed of these people, but not surprised, we knew loads of them were like this anyway. Yet we act shocked when we find out. Come on, so what?
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Did you read the whole post?
StephenChapman 17th May 2011
@Naryan This is about far more than just porn residing on .edu Web sites! No, it's not at all shocking to know that humans are interested in sex/pornography, but that's not the point of this post.
0 Votes
+ -
This is unsettling, but not alarming. It would be one thing if students or administrators were putting this up, but this content is coming from outside spammers.

Just as we have seen with the vandalism with Sony Playstation's network or the spam comments on Yahoo forums (or ZDNet), this stuff is difficult to monitor and prevent.

Unless you hire people to monitor posts, like on Wikipedia or HuffingtonPost, any wiki or message board is going to get littered with trash.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
You only read part of the post.
StephenChapman 17th May 2011
@Mwendo There's plenty more than just the spam I posted about!
0 Votes
+ -
your like one of those kids in elementary school that told on the other kids.. are you a cop or something?
0 Votes
+ -
Stephen,
Of course I read your blog after it captured my interest with it's title. You did a most respectable practice first, you warned me of the contents. Thank you. While news or information in any format might be of interest to anyone in particular (or no one at all) you offer an option, we can then make our own decision. Certain forms of press cannot be easily avoided, however on the net I can just click past.

Reading some of the comments here makes me wonder, if they didn't find an argument here, how far would they go to look for one?

Thanks again, Bernie
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@triktags@... Thank you for your comment, Bernie. I totally agree. I understand the subject matter is offensive to a lot of people (thus my desire to warn people), but I felt I did the piece justice and made the points I wanted to make -- even if they're misconstrued by people looking to pick a fight. =)

-Stephen
0 Votes
+ -
Can't resist. This is just too much.
Economister Updated - 17th May 2011
@StephenChapman

Are you for real? First you write "This is one post you don't want to miss" and then you write "thus my desire to warn people"?

My initial assessment of you has turned out to be about as accurate as it can get. How dumb do you think we are?
0 Votes
+ -
zslzgds 94 wrv
bdsfwrryd67-24378983467785085099828823328587 27th Nov
fvavwj,gotthjul35, eoyzr.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix