Society of Professional Journalists ̶ D.C. Chapter
Calls for an End to Restrictions on Officers’ Freedom to Talk
to Reporters
The Washington, D.C.,
Pro Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists has called on Congress
to ensure that police reform measures include that police officers and others
in law enforcement have the freedom to communicate to the press.
The group calls for an
end to the prohibitions in some police departments against officers or other
staff speaking to reporters or speaking to reporters without reporting to
authorities, such as public information officers.
A 2016 survey sponsored
by SPJ, the chapter’s parent organization, found that over 23% of police
reporters have said that all or most of the time they have been prevented by a
PIO from interviewing officers or investigators at all.
“Such blatant monitoring
and repression of speech critically limits everyone’s understanding of
institutions and will enable abuse. We make this special appeal to Congress to
ensure such rules that silence police officers not be allowed to encumber
reform,” says the letter.
The letter is below. It
has been sent to the offices of:
Rep. Jerry Nadler,
Chair, House Judiciary Committee
Rep. Jim Jordan, Ranking
Member, House Judiciary Committee
Senator Lindsey Graham,
Chair, Senate Judiciary Committee
Senator Dianne
Feinstein, Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee
Senator Mitch McConnell,
Senate Majority Leader
Senator Chuck Schumer,
Senate Minority Leader
Rep. Nancy Pelosi,
Speaker of the House
Rep. Kevin McCarthy,
House Minority Leader
Chairman Jerry Nadler:
With Congress
considering police reform measures, we urge you to take action to ensure that
police reform includes the elimination of rules that silence police officers
from speaking to the press.
The Washington, D.C.,
Pro Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists wants to stress that any
police reform must eliminate the prohibitions, common in many jurisdictions, on
police officers ever speaking to reporters except under the oversight of
authorities, often public information officers.
Police reform will be
severely hampered or ineffective if it does not do away with the secrecy such
controls create.
Please note that an
extensive legal analysis by a prominent First Amendment attorney recently concluded
such policies in public agencies are unconstitutional and many courts have said
so.
Surveys sponsored by the Society of Professional Journalists, our parent
organization, found that over half of police reporters say they can rarely or
never interview a police officer without involving a department’s public
information officer.
Over 23% of police
reporters said that all or most of the time, they have been prevented by a PIO
from interviewing officers or investigators at all. A total of 57% said that
blockage happened at least some of the time.
Over the last two to
three decades, there has been a surge of policies in many types of
organizations prohibiting employees from speaking to reporters without the
controls, to the point it’s a cultural norm. It even occurs in congressional
offices.
Now this culture of
censorship appears to be paying some dark dividends. The current narrative is
that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s fumbles with COVID-19 may
have cost tens of thousands lives. It could have been predicted that an agency
shielding itself from public scrutiny would develop problems. CDC has an
authoritarian media policy posted
right on its website. It’s been many years since reporters could usually talk
to agency staff without the PIO/censors. Often reporters can’t talk to agency
staff at all.
In SPJ’s survey, some
police PIOs said they monitor interviews so that the conversations, “stay
within the parameters that we want” and, “To make sure that the reporter stays
on topic and so does the [police] officer.”
Such blatant monitoring
and repression of speech critically limits everyone’s understanding of
institutions and will enable abuse. We make this special appeal to Congress to
ensure such rules that silence police officers not be allowed to encumber
reform.
We would be pleased to
discuss this issue with you.
(Contact person)
Kathryn Foxhall
Board Member
Randy Showstack,
President, SPJ DC
RESOURCES ON
“CENSORSHIP BY PIO”
· SPJ’s
website on the issue gives background. It includes the
seven SPJ-sponsored surveys that showed the censorship is pervasive.
Coalitions of open government groups have written to the Obama and Trump
Administrations opposing the restraints. A coalition met with Obama White House
officials in 2015 to oppose the restraints.
· The Washington
Post’s Margaret Sullivan’s recent column looks at the muzzling of government scientists.
· Columbia
Journalism Review article connects the long history of these controls with current
circumstances, such as the CDC being terrifyingly absent.
· An editorial in MedPage Today asks “You Think China Has A COVID-19 Censorship
Problem? We Aren’t Much Better.”
· The
Clearing the Fog podcast includes an episode entitled “Another Method of
Censorship: Media Minders.” The relevant portion of the show begins
at about 32.54 and the site includes a transcript.
· On
Oct. 17, 2019, the House Science Space and Technology Committee voted to kill
proposed provisions that would have given federal scientists the right to speak
to reporters without prior permission from the authorities in their
agencies. Science Magazine reported on the mark-up.
· On
Nov. 6, 2019, SPJ and 28 other journalism and
open government groups sent a letter to every member of Congress calling for
support of unimpeded communication with journalists for all federal
employees.
· Katherine Eban’s 2019 book “Bottle of Lies,” a
jaw-dropping look at FDA failure, is on several “best books” lists. When the MedPage editorial (above) came out, Eban said this muzzling of government scientists was the reason it
took 10 years to write the book.
No comments:
Post a Comment