Iowa State has prided itself in the studies of science and technology since its conception, a trend that Michael Bugeja, director of the Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication, strongly suggested continue.

On Thursday, a panel collaborated to discuss the benefits and harms of “Second Life,” a virtual world created by San Francisco-based Linden Labs that has been used at Iowa State and various other universities in an educational setting.

“I am not placing blame on Linden Labs advocates or ‘Second Life,'” Bugeja said. “I am placing responsibility on state employees who contract with nongovernment vendors to take these concerns into account before litigation and controversy compels us to.”

The points of view of a number of ISU professors including Steffen Schmidt, university professor of political science; Brian Mennecke, associate professor of logistics operations and management information systems; Barbara Mack, associate professor of journalism and communication; Carla Espinoza, associate vice president for human resource services; Paul Tanaka, university counsel; and Eliot Winer, assistant professor of mechanical engineering.

Debate was sparked Thursday after studies have produced evidence that “Second Life” has been used for reasons other than education. Mack said that according to a BBC study, nearly 30 percent of all business done on “Second Life” is sexually related. In addition, Bugeja said the top two issues seen on the police blotter on “Second Life” are harassment and assault.

While these problems are seen as serious by some, the argument was made by Espinoza as to whether the damage to “pixel people” really caused an effect in reality.

The answer from the majority of panel: “yes.”

Tanaka used more of a conventional example to exploit the liability concerns involved with “Second Life.” Tanaka said educators should think twice before contracting with “Second Life” because it is made clear in its terms of use that “Linden Labs has the right to remove any user for any reason or no reason at all.”

“In the real world, you wouldn’t go out and lease a classroom from a landlord that didn’t cover all liabilities,” Tanaka said.

Another issue brought up by Bugeja was in the difference that students and faculty members view the utilization of technology.

“The fact is that students see technology for networking and socializing,” Bugeja said. “We [educators] see it as information and communication. What we’re really doing here is confusing what an institution of technology and science ought to be doing.”

Tanaka punctuated the attack on “Second Life” by stating that the platform isn’t meant to be used for educational purposes, and that “Second Life” isn’t required to obey a critical educational act – the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, better known as FERPA.

“I’m a realist, I know that virtual worlds are coming,” Tanaka said. “They’re very powerful and they’re very powerful for teaching. We have two options, we can either refuse to use or manage the damage.”

Winer closed conversation Thursday with a statement regarding his opinion on the future of “Second Life” and other virtual-based environments.

“These things aren’t going to go away,” Winer said. “To think you can take it all away is the fantasy.”