In response to two related articles in the Sept. 12 edition of the Old Gold and Black ("E-mail: for your eyes only?" and "A force to be reckoned with"), the e-mail expressed administrative concern that the articles "give the false impression that University Police have access to e-mail accounts in the University network."

The Old Gold and Black takes its role in the university community and its responsibility of fair and accurate reporting very seriously.

Thus, we were deeply concerned when an official university communication suggested inaccuracies in the articles.

It is also our responsibility as a newspaper to determine whether a printed correction or clarification is needed to set the record straight. When asked, no staff member or administrator involved with e-mail policy pointed out factual errors or misquotations in the articles, but instead expressed concerns about the article's tone.

The OGB accurately reported that in some cases, University Police can gain access to a university e-mail account. Section four of the Policy on Responsible and Ethical Use of Computing Resources states that, "In especially serious cases, Information Systems staff may read users' e-mail, but only after obtaining permission from the Provost." Under this policy, the OGB reported that University Police can obtain permission to read a user's e-mail with "consensus between the offices of Information Systems, Student Life and University Police," with the Division of Student Life serving as the current appointed representative of the Provost. The article explains that "this situation though a rare one, represents a difference between the role of police on and off campus."

In its statement, the university recommends that the joint faculty, student and staff Committee on Information Technology amend a policy that "does not generally address such access" by the university to personal e-mail, a policy that has been invoked in the past in "rare" instances. "In the absence of current policy guidance regarding a request by University Police," the e-mail stated, "Information Systems would require that an appropriate senior administrator make a determination that the interest to be served by allowing access to an account outweighs the interest in preserving the privacy of communications."

We admit the journalistic process is an imperfect one, but we stand by the accuracy of our articles. While some may find the article misleading, there are no factual inaccuracies and we trust our readers to evaluate the issue themselves.

The OGB encourages submissions of letters to the editor as the primary venue for expressing disagreement with articles we publish. We open up our paper each week to concerned parties, allowing them to respond to articles in the same forum in which they appeared.

We believe this serves the university community by creating a two-way dialogue on the pages of the paper, ideally allowing for a greater understanding of an issue and the encouraging change.

The topic of students' rights is sensitive and complex, and for this reason we've devoted the "We the Students" series to these crucial issues. Over the next few weeks, we will continue our research into the university's policy regarding e-mail privacy.

We will continue to inform our readers about these and other policies, as we believe they are important for the university community to understand.