SPJ cited the blockage and delays of reporters by the Department of Health and Human Services as particularly tragic, noting also the censorship in its daughter agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration and the National Institutes of Health.
For many years a number of agencies have banned employees from ever speaking to reporters without notifying authorities, often through the agency public information offices.
The forced oversight leads to intimidation of source people within agencies. Beyond that, excessive delays and total blockages often prevent reporters from speaking to people at all.
In another session at the SPJ meeting, Donald G. McNeil, Jr., prominent New York Times health reporter, decried the current situation in CDC and HHS, saying, “It’s a horrible experience for a journalist trying to get life-saving information out of your own government.”
SPJ has led several coalition efforts opposing these controls over six years.
The Society’s 83 delegates passed the resolution Saturday night at its two-day virtual annual meeting. The statement passed in a bundle of 12 resolutions, all so noncontroversial among the delegates that separate consideration was not necessary. One other resolution accepted a new policy on the kind of entities to allow as sponsors for its meetings.
The full resolution on speech controls is below.
Resolution
10: A Resolution Opposing Restrictions on Speech
that Could Worsen a Pandemic
Submitted
by:
Kathryn Foxhall, Member, Freedom of Information Committee
Cosponsors: SPJ Freedom of Information Committee; Randy Showstack,
president, Washington, D.C., SPJ Pro Chapter
Resolutions
Committee Recommendation: Positive
WHEREAS the Society of
Professional Journalists has long spoken out against controls on speech that
pressure people not to speak to journalists without notifying authorities,
often through public information officers;
WHEREAS SPJ has called the restrictions censorship
and authoritarian;
WHEREAS the COVID-19 pandemic
has now killed nearly 200,000 people in the United
States and no one knows when there be relief;
WHEREAS the Society believes
the secrecy caused by these controls on speech has led to agencies severely
limiting public scrutiny of themselves; to inevitable incidents of government
disfunction; and therefore, to a significantly higher death toll from COVID-19
than would otherwise happened;
WHEREAS the Society decries in
particular the tragedy that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
has employed this oversight, delay and blockage of reporters for many years,
including in its daughter agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, the Food and Drug
Administration, and the National Institutes
of Health;
WHEREAS the Society further
notes evidence that HHS and its agencies continue to entrench these controls,
for example with:
---instructions from the
current Assistant Secretary of Public Affairs that all press releases and press
inquiries for the 80,000-person
department go through the ASPA office;
--- a CDC memo telling staff who deal
with reporters asking to talk to someone: “Just because there are outstanding
requests or folks keep getting asked to do a particular interview does not mean
it has to be fulfilled.”
WHEREAS these controls in effect silence or
inhibit the great majority of people in HHS who have something important to say
about the pandemic;
WHEREAS there have been many
other incidents of blockage and controls on journalism before and during the
pandemic in many agencies and parts of the nation;
WHEREAS the continuation of
this censorship will also exacerbate future crises; and
WHEREAS the Society has
congratulated Brechner Center for Freedom of Information Director Frank LoMonte
on his extensive legal analysis that finds
such controls on speech are unconstitutional and many courts have said so;
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED that the Society of Professional Journalists, meeting in
convention virtually on September 12¸2020, calls on the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services to explain why controls on the speech of its
employees are safer for the public than is free speech and why that department
has the right to decide this under the U.S
Constitution.
No comments:
Post a Comment