At least four organizations have written to the Biden Administration calling for significant actions to support a free press, including changes to eliminate restrictions that force reporters to notify or be overseen by public information officers or other authorities.
--The Society of Professional Journalists calls for ending the restraints on reporters speaking to employees. (Coverage in The Hill newspaper.)
--The Society of Environmental Journalists calls for the administration to appoint people in the press offices who adhere to truth-telling, responsiveness and openness; restore daily briefings; ensure agency employees are free, “encouraged even” to talk directly with reporters without press office permission; reverse Trump Administration restrictions on FOIA; support the Journalists Protection Act or similar measure; direct federal law enforcement to avoid physical harm to journalists; and support the shield law legislation to ensure reporters can keep sources confidential.
---The News Media for Open Government calls for daily briefings at the White House and regular briefings at agencies; ending restrictions that prohibit employees from speaking to the press without notifying public information officers; interpreting FOIA in a way that provides more disclosure; supporting the Office of Government Information Services Advisory Opinions; providing for protection of confidential sources; and reversing a Trump administration rule that would limit the time foreign journalists may stay in the U.S.
---The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University calls for narrowing or withdrawing policies that restrict public servants from participating in policy debates; publishing White House visitor logs; imposing new limits on the surveillance of journalists; rescinding the orders to explore options to narrow legal protections for social media platforms; and several other actions. (This may be the most comprehensive statement on free press issues.)
Thursday, January 28, 2021
Wednesday, January 20, 2021
Society of Professional Journalists Calls on Biden to Stop the Gag Rules on Federal Workers
The Society of Professional Journalists has called on President Joe Biden to end restrictions on federal employees from “speaking to the press without notification or oversight by authorities, often by using public information officers as gatekeepers.”
“These rules, exacerbated under the Trump administration, amount to extreme censorship and damage everyone’s understanding of government,” said SPJ president Matt Hall. “They literally threaten people’s lives.”
“SPJ believes the nation is suffering the consequences of these controls during the COVID-19 pandemic,” the letter states. “Agencies that the public count on, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration, have stymied reporting for years. Often, the press is not allowed in their facilities and reporters are prohibited from contacting staff without the authorities’ oversight; in reality, reporters are often not allowed to speak to anyone.”
The Hill newspaper covered the statement on inauguration day.
“These rules, exacerbated under the Trump administration, amount to extreme censorship and damage everyone’s understanding of government,” said SPJ president Matt Hall. “They literally threaten people’s lives.”
“SPJ believes the nation is suffering the consequences of these controls during the COVID-19 pandemic,” the letter states. “Agencies that the public count on, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration, have stymied reporting for years. Often, the press is not allowed in their facilities and reporters are prohibited from contacting staff without the authorities’ oversight; in reality, reporters are often not allowed to speak to anyone.”
The Hill newspaper covered the statement on inauguration day.
Sunday, January 17, 2021
Groups Call on Biden to Lift the Censorship on Federal Staff
At least two groups have called on President-elect Joe Biden to eliminate the censorship on federal workers that bans them from speaking to the press without reporting to authorities.
The restrictions in effect often block staff from speaking to journalists at all.
Both groups make lifting the constraints a part of their agenda for early work in the new administration.
The News Media for Open Government says the administration should, among other things, eliminate, “current restrictions that prohibit government employees in Executive Branch agencies from communicating with the press unless a public information officer provides clearance and is involved.”
The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University says the administration should: “Narrow or withdraw policies that unconstitutionally restrict public servants from participating in policy debates.”
It stresses, “These policies violate the free speech rights of the employees and deprive the public of access to critical information and insights.”
Over six years coalitions of up to 60 organizations have repeatedly written to the Obama and Trump administrations and to Congress warning of the dangers of the constraints.
The restrictions in effect often block staff from speaking to journalists at all.
Both groups make lifting the constraints a part of their agenda for early work in the new administration.
The News Media for Open Government says the administration should, among other things, eliminate, “current restrictions that prohibit government employees in Executive Branch agencies from communicating with the press unless a public information officer provides clearance and is involved.”
The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University says the administration should: “Narrow or withdraw policies that unconstitutionally restrict public servants from participating in policy debates.”
It stresses, “These policies violate the free speech rights of the employees and deprive the public of access to critical information and insights.”
Over six years coalitions of up to 60 organizations have repeatedly written to the Obama and Trump administrations and to Congress warning of the dangers of the constraints.
Thursday, November 5, 2020
SPJ DC Chapter Says Press Restrictions Exacerbated Current Problems
The restrictions on talking to the press have been instrumental in getting the nation into its current straits with the COVID-19 pandemic, a Washington journalists group told three senators today.
The D.C. ProChapter of the Society of Professional Journalists asked that examination of controls on the press through media relations be part that the requested inquiry on political interference in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration.
Sens. Elizabeth Warren, Senator Patty Murray and Senator Gary Peters have asked the Government Accountability Office to examine the possible undue political influence by the Trump Administration on communication and integrity at those agencies.
The D.C. Pro Chapter is part of the Society of Professional Journalists, the largest broad-based organization of journalists in the United States.
SPJ has called these restrictions censorship and authoritarian. The organization recently said these blockages have led to government dysfunction and a significantly higher COVID-19 death toll.
The chapter particularly emphasized that an extensive analysis by First Amendment attorney Frank LoMonte says that the controls are unconstitutional. It also says many courts have said that they are.
It also pointed to documents the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University obtained which show, among other things, CDC indicated to staff it was not particularly important to allow reporters to talk to anyone.
The complete letter with resources on the issue is here:
The D.C. ProChapter of the Society of Professional Journalists asked that examination of controls on the press through media relations be part that the requested inquiry on political interference in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration.
Sens. Elizabeth Warren, Senator Patty Murray and Senator Gary Peters have asked the Government Accountability Office to examine the possible undue political influence by the Trump Administration on communication and integrity at those agencies.
The D.C. Pro Chapter is part of the Society of Professional Journalists, the largest broad-based organization of journalists in the United States.
SPJ has called these restrictions censorship and authoritarian. The organization recently said these blockages have led to government dysfunction and a significantly higher COVID-19 death toll.
The chapter particularly emphasized that an extensive analysis by First Amendment attorney Frank LoMonte says that the controls are unconstitutional. It also says many courts have said that they are.
It also pointed to documents the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University obtained which show, among other things, CDC indicated to staff it was not particularly important to allow reporters to talk to anyone.
The complete letter with resources on the issue is here:
Friday, October 23, 2020
NYT Reporter on the Current Controls at CDC: Sad and Scary
At a session at the September Society of Professional Journalists’ meeting, long-time New York Times science reporter Donald G. McNeil, Jr. said:
“I have never seen the CDC so paralyzed in 20 years of covering them. And it is sad and scary.
“Even under the Obama Administration they had to clear anything important through HHS. But now, I mean, I have never seen it like this, where they don’t hold a press conference in order to announce a major change they are making in guidelines. They sort of slip it onto the website without telling anybody. And it comes to our attention on the quiet.
“And then when we ask for an explanation of: ‘Why are you using .60 infection fatality rate or why did you change the guideline about who should be tested, they don’t want to answer the questions. So if you don’t talk to people off the record, you don’t talk to anyone because nobody is being allowed to say anything on the record unless it has be cleared through [Health and Human Services Secretary] Alex Azar’s office, if you are talking basically about HHS or CDC. Or through the White House. So, it is a horrible experience for a journalist trying to get life -saving information out of your own government.”
“I have never seen the CDC so paralyzed in 20 years of covering them. And it is sad and scary.
“Even under the Obama Administration they had to clear anything important through HHS. But now, I mean, I have never seen it like this, where they don’t hold a press conference in order to announce a major change they are making in guidelines. They sort of slip it onto the website without telling anybody. And it comes to our attention on the quiet.
“And then when we ask for an explanation of: ‘Why are you using .60 infection fatality rate or why did you change the guideline about who should be tested, they don’t want to answer the questions. So if you don’t talk to people off the record, you don’t talk to anyone because nobody is being allowed to say anything on the record unless it has be cleared through [Health and Human Services Secretary] Alex Azar’s office, if you are talking basically about HHS or CDC. Or through the White House. So, it is a horrible experience for a journalist trying to get life -saving information out of your own government.”
From KF: The question I have is why we, journalists, allowed ourselves to be put in the situation where we got only controlled conversations--in the Obama administration and before? Why did we not oppose the restraints or warn the public?
Indeed, why wouldn't an institution that controlled public scrutiny of itself become a danger to the public? Why wouldn't what we don't know because the omnipresent PIOs be hazardous?
Tuesday, October 20, 2020
Journalists and All the Stories Not Told
Many reporters work hard and are highly skilled. Statements from a number of them leave a picture of journalists working until they can open some doors and shine light on important stuff. However, they often don't talk about the doors that remain closed. These are doors are locked by people in power using controls such as bans on staff speaking to reporters without the oversight by authorities, often PIOs.
Why aren't we talking about the doors that are still locked?
Why aren't we talking about the doors that are still locked?
Below are some locked doors stories.
The hidden alternative database had been in place nearly 20 years.
It took Jewett six months to do the story. During that time she worked with an agency PIO and she was never allowed to speak to a subject matter expert.
She got the story through Freedom of Information requests for documents and talking to outside experts, including a former FDA employee.
She said if she had been allowed to talk to insider experts the reporting would have been a much simpler or quicker process. But the agency makes experts available, she said, if it’s going to get flattering coverage.
Employees, Jewett said, are reminded not to speak to reporters without telling the journalists to go through the press office. And reporters sort of know, she said, that it’s frowned upon if a reporter tries to get in touch with an employee first.
At a 2017 meeting at the National Press Club, she said, “In the past 10 years I have had almost zero access to career staff at EPA. Usually the way I find things out or get leaks is people who have recently left. People outside of EPA with close connections. They’ll talk to folks inside EPA.
“People in EPA have typically been absolutely petrified of speaking to the press. They will speak to someone one degree out or recently left.”
Scoop on a Hidden Database, But Never Permission To Talk to Staff People
Christina Jewett is winning awards for her extraordinary 2019 Kaiser Health News series that found the Food and Drug Administration had “let medical device companies file reports of injuries and malfunctions outside a widely scrutinized public database, which leave doctors and medical sleuths in the dark.”The hidden alternative database had been in place nearly 20 years.
It took Jewett six months to do the story. During that time she worked with an agency PIO and she was never allowed to speak to a subject matter expert.
She got the story through Freedom of Information requests for documents and talking to outside experts, including a former FDA employee.
She said if she had been allowed to talk to insider experts the reporting would have been a much simpler or quicker process. But the agency makes experts available, she said, if it’s going to get flattering coverage.
Employees, Jewett said, are reminded not to speak to reporters without telling the journalists to go through the press office. And reporters sort of know, she said, that it’s frowned upon if a reporter tries to get in touch with an employee first.
NYT Reporter Said She Had Rarely Talked To EPA Career Employees for 10 years
Coral Davenport is a key reporter for the New York Times on the Environmental Protection Agency.At a 2017 meeting at the National Press Club, she said, “In the past 10 years I have had almost zero access to career staff at EPA. Usually the way I find things out or get leaks is people who have recently left. People outside of EPA with close connections. They’ll talk to folks inside EPA.
“People in EPA have typically been absolutely petrified of speaking to the press. They will speak to someone one degree out or recently left.”
FDA and Off-Label Medications
For a 2018 story on off-label use of medications, a Washington Post reporter said FDA never allowed the journalists on the story to speak to anyone in the agency, despite repeated requests.Ten Years to Nail Down FDA Failure
Katherine Eban’s 2019 book “Bottle of Lies,” a jaw-dropping look at failure in the FDA on generic drugs, is on several best books lists. When my editorial came out in Medpage talking about the “PIO Censorship,” Eban tweeted that muzzling of government scientists was the reason it took 10 years to write the book.Unborn FDA Newsletters
Jim Dickinson has had a newsletter company, which includes FDA Webview, focusing on that agency for several decades. He says, “I couldn’t have started my company under the limits now in place -- I'd have had nothing to sell but what everyone else already had in a glutted marketplace: approved FDA info.”Wednesday, October 14, 2020
Brechner Center: It's Illegal, But State Universities Gag Athletes
It’s illegal for public universities to gag athletes from speaking to the media and yet that is frequently what they do, says a new report from Brechner Center for Freedom of Information.
In a summary on the Poynter website, the authors say, “Yet for athletes at many of the nation’s top athletic programs, talking to the news media is regarded as a punishable offense. Players caught giving interviews without their athletic department’s approval — about any topic, even one unrelated to sports — can be punished with sanctions including withdrawal of their scholarships, ending their college careers.”
The project found that 86 percent of rulebooks from 58 state universities that compete in the NCAA’s elite Division I forbade athletes from speaking to journalists without permission.
The article lays out the arguments as to why these restrictions are illegal.
It also says, “When athletes’ interactions with the press and public are filtered through university image-minders, wrongdoing will go undetected and multiply.”
Although it’s not discussed in the Poynter article, the same can be said of Congress, federal, state and local agencies, schools, police departments and the many other types of institutions that have instituted these controls.
In a summary on the Poynter website, the authors say, “Yet for athletes at many of the nation’s top athletic programs, talking to the news media is regarded as a punishable offense. Players caught giving interviews without their athletic department’s approval — about any topic, even one unrelated to sports — can be punished with sanctions including withdrawal of their scholarships, ending their college careers.”
The project found that 86 percent of rulebooks from 58 state universities that compete in the NCAA’s elite Division I forbade athletes from speaking to journalists without permission.
The article lays out the arguments as to why these restrictions are illegal.
It also says, “When athletes’ interactions with the press and public are filtered through university image-minders, wrongdoing will go undetected and multiply.”
Although it’s not discussed in the Poynter article, the same can be said of Congress, federal, state and local agencies, schools, police departments and the many other types of institutions that have instituted these controls.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)