The commission's assignment was to determine the nature, extent, and impact on society of pornography in the United States and to make recommendations to contain the spread of pornography. Profiles of the commission's members (including a priest, a high Baptist official, and other right-wing and conservative members) indicate that biased member selection made the commission's findings a foregone conclusion. In addition, the analysis highlights the commission's lack of intellectual rigor and the< unscientific bases for its conclusion that pornography is harmful -- a conclusion that contradicts the findings of previous Canadian, British, and American panels. In addition to examining conflicting attitudes toward sex and pornography, the report examines the pornography industry's response to the hearing and such issues as child pornography, organized crime involvement, and the difficulties inherent in defining pornography. First amendment issues also are examined, and critiques are provided of religious, ultrafeminist, and right-wing censors. Finally, the 11 dissenting opinions from the commission's conclusions are provided, as is correspondence to the commission from several writers.