Bruce Keffer: The first question is one that you're probably sick of answering, which deals with the Unibomber.
Bob Guccione: No not at all.
Bruce Keffer: OK, great. Have you read the manuscript the was sent to Penthouse?
Bob Guccione: I've read some of it yes, I haven't plowed through.
Bruce Keffer: I know that you are a good judge of people or you wouldn't be so successful in the entertainment business. What is your opinion of this man?
Bob Guccione: Well I think in his strange and perverted way he is very serious, and he's certainly an intellect. He's not stupid by any stretch of the imagination. He makes a number of bizarre points, but they are rational within this odd context. It’s very rational, he's very eloquent, he's obviously well educated. In fact, I get the impression that he may be an academic. He might even have a background in teaching. And I certainly think he is acting alone. Although in his personal letter to me and in his manuscript he constantly refers to himself as, "we, his organization." Also those famous initials that appear on everything, FC mean Freedom Club. That's like his organization.
Bruce Keffer: So you think he's just saying, "we" to throw people off?
Bob Guccione: Right.
Bruce Keffer: With his interest in Penthouse magazine have the Federal agencies investigating the Unibomber requested your subscription records for the time periods and geographical areas associated with the bomber?
Bob Guccione: Actually they haven't, and in fact in a letter to me he said. "We" again I guess meaning his organization, "we don't regularly look at magazines like Penthouse however," I'm paraphrasing him now, "I'm very grateful to you for offering to publish the manifesto. I have given it to the New York Times, and the Washington Post first. And the reason why I'm saying to you and to them that if they fail to publish it and it falls to you to publish it, you being second in line, that I want to extract one more penalty. In other words I want to be able to target and kill one more person if you publish it as opposed to the New York Times.
Bruce Keffer: He's a real sick puppy dog isn't he?
Bob Guccione: Now he says “the reason I'm doing this is because I don't want the Times and the Post to turn to each other and say. ‘what are we getting upset about let Guccione do it, let Penthouse do it if they want, let them do it.’ “ He says, “I don't want that to happen.” He also says apart from finding the New York Times, and Washington Post to have a more, serious editorial environment for his manifesto, he says “I understand that Penthouse does run serious articles. However, Penthouse is an entertainment magazine and when you read my manifesto you will see that we are down on entertainment. We believe entertainment to be the opium of the masses.” So he's not only down on technology and science but he's also down on entertainment. He was very gracious in saying he's grateful to me. He says “you can publish it if the New York Times, and the Washington Post decide not to. I'm giving them 3 months to decide. If they don't do it you can do it.”
Bruce Keffer: What's that time frame look like now, how much time is left?
Bob Guccione: About a month has gone by. There are another two months left. I'm going to find a way to re-negotiate that position with him, by taking out a full page ad in the New York Times, or I'll do it on the Internet. I'll get a message to him that if he desists completely from all terrorist activities, as he has promised to do, if he's published by the Times, and we get to publish him, I will offer him (to get him to withdraw the idea that he has to kill one more person) a monthly column in the magazine where he can continue to proffer his philosophy, answer his critics and answer letters to editors that might maintain his interest. He also said to the Times and the Post, and this is why it may fall to us to publish him, he said to them that “if you do publish me, I also require that you publish a fresh statement which I will make each year annually for three successive years.” I think that the New York Times, and Washington Post can accept the deal as it originally appeared, that if they publish his manifesto he would cease all terrorist activities. He is now saying he needs these three annually published statements. I don't know how the New York Times, or Washington Post can agree to that, not knowing what that new statement will contain. It may be filled with anti-Semitic, racist statements. And there is no way they will have to judge that. So it may well be that publication will fall to us. But we will not in those circumstances publish him if that threat of having to kill one more person hangs overhead. He'll have to re negotiate with us, he'll have to promise not to do anything and we'll give him that column.
Bruce Keffer: Well you know Mr. Guccione, what has surprised me about this entire situation is the length of time he's been on the loose. It surprises me that during this time he hasn't injured himself, or he hasn't done something to slip up and get caught.
Bob Guccione: You know what he said to me, in his personal letter? He apologized for one attempted bombing. He said “I tried to bomb an airliner, and I rationalized, that by saying the plane would be full of businessmen, and businessmen would be engaged in the process of furthering our industrialized society. So, I believed it would be right to kill them.” He said “then it occurred to me that there probably were a lot of children and innocent children on the plane, and when my bomb didn't go off I was very grateful. I was grateful that it didn't go off. However I then took off three years to prefect my method, my technique for making bombs.” Once again this makes me feel that it’s one man acting alone. Secondly, to admit that he took off three years to learn the technique of bomb making is very interesting.
Bruce Keffer: Yes very interesting. Another thing is, what ever happened to that bomb that didn't go off? Does the FBI have it or what?
Bob Guccione: I don't know. He only mentioned in passing he made this one attempt. It is outside his M.O. [method of operations]. His M.O. is usually to target individuals operating in the high tech area, and not notify them in advance. Recently he apparently called up someone and told them that he was going to blow up a plane at LAX. This literally put everybody in a tizzy, and LAX virtually closed down. When I heard about that, I said that I didn't think it was him. I said he doesn't make threats like that. He doesn't usually tip you off in advance and he doesn't kill a lot of people. He goes for one person. He singles out individuals, targets them, and sends them a bomb. So I didn't believe it was him, It turned out it was him, but he said he did it as a threat. Almost like a hoax. He had no intention of blowing up a plane. He did it to get people’s attention again. He said they were tending to forget me. I think this is also an important part of his profile - That he has an ego, which one has to recognize.
Bruce Keffer: You brought up the Internet a minute ago. I think that was mentioned as one alternative. They wanted to publish his manuscript on the Net. What do you think taking that course of action would do? Do you think it would anger him and entice him to bomb again?
Bob Guccione: He's got to be published where he agrees to be published. For example I now have his manuscript. If I were to go to press with it, which I could easily do, I mean, I'm not going to have to fight him in court on a copyright battle. So I could really go ahead and publish it if I wanted to. If I did that I would be stepping outside the parameters of the agreement as it sits on the table, and I would have accomplished nothing, except of course selling a magazine. But I wouldn't accomplish what I'm attempting to accomplish and that is to stop the guy from killing people. I really believe that he wants to stop. You see, we made the mistake earlier, all of us, in thinking he was a serial killer. But he's not a serial killer. Because a serial killer is someone who finds killing an end in itself. Killing to him is not an end in itself. It’s a way of attracting attention. One of the things he pointed out in his letter was that if he had simply sent his manuscript to some publishing house they wouldn't even look at it. In the extreme outside chance that somebody published it , he said the public wouldn't read it. But by killing people, he says, “I am forcing the public to want to read what I've written.” To him his grand plan, his grand agenda, is not killing but in killing to attract attention so that he can publish this 37,000 word manifesto. That is what his real goal is. I think that if one could make a deal with him, and say “OK, I'll publish you intact, exactly as you presented it, and I'll publish your annual statement, or in a monthly column.” Which Penthouse can do, and the New York Times couldn't do. They are a family oriented publication, they can't step that far on the edge, but Penthouse could. If we can get him to agree to that, then I really think he will stick to his agreement. That's why if I were to publish him today it would ruin that effect completely. He would have no reason to stop killing.
Bruce Keffer: I hope you’re right about that. Now I'd like to get back to the Internet and discuss the Penthouse site on the Net. There are some phenomenal figures reported about the visitors to the Penthouse site. Is it true that there are over 2.5 million hits on your site a day?
Bob Guccione: No. 2.9 million.
Bruce Keffer: 2.9 million. That's amazing. How are you able to judge that figure?
Bob Guccione: Apparently those numbers are given to us, by a monitoring authority. They are very accurate and we have had to expand the site twice already and we are going to have to expand it again, because even with the expanded site you still have to wait to get on.
Bruce Keffer: What type of expansion will it be? Are you going to add chat rooms, video and audio capability?
Bob Guccione: We'll be adding a lot, we're doing it right now. We are developing a second tier system. So once you get to our site you will be able to buy a ticket to enter the World of Penthouse as you would enter Disneyland, or Disney World. You buy a ticket and you go in and all the rides are available to you. In our case there will be many rooms. There will be a reading room a screening room, you'll be able to call up Penthouse videos. You will actually be able to download them. You'll be able to go to the library and read anything that we've ever published in the past, and that's an enormous amount of material. It will be a huge library. You will be able to go to the bedrooms and watch different people enjoying themselves. There will be a chat room, you can make telephone calls and get on chat lines. It will be an adult Disney World. That's what were aiming for.
Bruce Keffer: Well what do you think about the Slade Gordon and John Exon Senate Bill 314? What effect will that have on the Penthouse site.
Bob Guccione: I think it's a terrible travesty, it's stupid, it's irrational, it's not going to work. It's never going to work. No one is ever going to successfully censor the media in this country. They've tried it again and again and it simply doesn't work.
Bruce Keffer: Were you surprised that Newt Gingrich had the same opinion that you do?
Bob Guccione: I was extremely surprised.
Bruce Keffer: Yeah, I think that floored everybody.
Bob Guccione: I take my hat off to him. Before that I had no time for him. I think he represents the wrong ideology as far as I'm concerned. With respect to individual freedom and the like. But that floored me, I'm really quite taken with it. I think it shows a side of Gingrich which he should make much more public. But this thing on censoring the Internet - look, we in the United States represent only part of the world wide collection of computer networks that make up the Internet. What are we going to do? Censor the rest of the world? Are we going to tell the Germans, "you can't say this on the Internet because our young American children are going to read it." It is just so stupid, I can't believe that they actually voted on it. It's inapplicable, its never going to be applied successfully because it physically cannot be.
Bruce Keffer: The thing which worries me beyond the Senate 314 bill is the fact that some colleges have started to restrict the content that their students and faculty can access. Such schools as Boston University, Carnegie Mellon and Princeton have all placed some restrictions on access.
Bob Guccione: I find that outrageous.
Bruce Keffer: What effect do you think this will have on the Senate Bill 314? Do you think this support will have a whiplash effect on the acceptance of the Bill?
Bob Guccione: I think it will have a whiplash effect. I think it appears on the surface to be supportive but I can't imagine that there is any long-term support there. I think that it will fold up. Especially at Princeton. It just doesn't make any sense.
Bruce Keffer: Well there is a growing fear among people who have computers in their homes today, that they are not going to be able to police their children at all times. Now let me play government advocate for a minute and ask you, what's wrong with restricting access to some type of content that is found offensive, as long as that content is readily available in other forms?
Bob Guccione: I think to make people comfortable some lock-out device might ultimately work, as it has in the cable industry. Some formula will be devised that will help parents lock their children out. However, let's get to the fundamental issue, and that is whether or not there is any harm to children as a result of exposing them to very explicit language or very explicit images that might appear on the screen. I have always maintained that a pre-pubescent child is simply not interested, there is nothing you can do to interest that child in sex. They are hormonally not interested. You get his interest by telling him "don't do this, don't do that." Mommy says "you can't read this, don't look at daddy’s magazines, don't look at daddy's books." The minute you start saying that to a child his curiosity takes over, not his sexuality. It doesn't exist in real terms at that age. Once a child enters puberty, forget it. It doesn't make any difference whether he has access to his father's computer, magazines or videos. It makes no difference because the theater of that child's mind is far more stimulating that anything he can find in books. We all know that, we've all been through that stage. I've brought up five children, as the founder of Penthouse and the active ongoing hands-on editor of the magazine, my kids grew up with it. Not one of them has anything like a distorted view of human sexuality or her place in society. Once you stop telling children something is bad for them, A: they don't assume a position good or bad, and B: they don't pursue it, because you haven't told them to stay from it so they don't pursue it.
Bruce Keffer: Well what if the Senate Bill 314 takes effect? How will you secure the Penthouse sites?
Bob Guccione: Even if the Bill takes effect I will fight it, on the grounds of constitutionality. I think that ultimately we will prevail. Despite how many laws are passed on the state level, and local level, city levels, those laws may pass but they are not constitutionally correct, and if they are challenged they will fall. Certainly we would be among the first to challenge anything like that. I have no intention of pulling in my horns, either as far as the magazine is concerned, the production of movies and videos that we do and our position on the Internet. We're not going to make any changes. I don't care what Senator Exon thinks.
Bruce Keffer: Thanks for taking time out of your busy schedule to join us today, and good luck on the Internet.
Bob Guccione: It's always a pleasure to talk about things that are important.
Webmaster
