Below are resources on the constraints on reporting, gag rules, censorship by PIO, etc.
-- Last year 25 journalism and other groups wrote to the Biden Administration’s Office of Science and Technology Policy asking for elimination of such restrictions in the federal government and for restoring journalists' access to agencies.
--The extensive legal analysis from The Brechner Center for Freedom of Information finds that these constraints, although very common, are unconstitutional and that many courts have agreed with that. The longer version is a legal brief.
--As the Covid death toll mounted in 2020, for instance, CDC told their media relations staff to remember that just because reporters persist in asking to talk to someone in the agency that doesn’t mean they have to be allowed to.
--The Society of Professional Journalists has said the controls are censorship and authoritarian.
--“Editor and Publisher” featured the issue in October, 2021.
-- The Yale Law School Access and Accountability Conference last October had a “Fighting Censorship by PIO” session. (The agenda is here and the PIO papers [Foxhall and LoMonte] are here. The video is here, session number 5.)
--In 2019 there was legislation in Congress with a provision to allow federal scientists to talk to reporters without prior approval. The provision was killed in committee.
--A recent webinar, “The Gagging of America,” from the Society for Advancing Business Editing and Writing, has a discussion with First Amendment Attorney Frank LoMonte on blockages in both the public and private sector.
--Last year the Biden administration’s Environmental Protection Agency affirmed that it would continue these controls.
--Kathryn Foxhall’s blog as other information.
Sunday, July 24, 2022
Thursday, July 7, 2022
Doing It Again: Talking about White House Access, Being Silent about the Other Censorship
Washington Post media critic Erik Wemple writes today on the lack of access for some reporters in some areas of the White House.
He quotes one reporter as saying, “It should be a big thing for us in this country: How to hold officeholders accountable if we’re not able to question them?”
As with previous controversies about White House credentials and access, I am flabbergasted at our determination not to talk about the massive other controls on press access, for physical entry and for contacts with people, in Washington and across the country.
Below is part of my letter to Wemple and about 280 White House correspondents.
"Regarding the article, 'Some White House Reporters Object to Exclusion from Biden Events:'
"A number of agencies including HHS have no credentialling system for reporters’ access and they ban all staff from talking to the press without oversight by authorities/PIOs. The system on its face prohibits confidential communications and it means many reporters’ supplications for contact are blocked, deliberately or otherwise.
"Should we not talk about this? Is it just too big a part of our culture now, after 30-40 years of this tightening? Should journalists just assume whatever sources we get are enough?
"As just one example, over two years into the pandemic with catastrophic missteps and at least six million dead, nearly all the 11,000 or so employees at CDC are essentially silenced…..
"We told the New York Times recently, “The press should not be taking the risk of assuming that what we get is all there is when so many people are silenced. We should be openly fighting these controls.”
"The next catastrophe is coming. We need for journalists to stand up on this.
"I’d be happy to talk to anyone."
He quotes one reporter as saying, “It should be a big thing for us in this country: How to hold officeholders accountable if we’re not able to question them?”
As with previous controversies about White House credentials and access, I am flabbergasted at our determination not to talk about the massive other controls on press access, for physical entry and for contacts with people, in Washington and across the country.
Below is part of my letter to Wemple and about 280 White House correspondents.
"Regarding the article, 'Some White House Reporters Object to Exclusion from Biden Events:'
"A number of agencies including HHS have no credentialling system for reporters’ access and they ban all staff from talking to the press without oversight by authorities/PIOs. The system on its face prohibits confidential communications and it means many reporters’ supplications for contact are blocked, deliberately or otherwise.
"Should we not talk about this? Is it just too big a part of our culture now, after 30-40 years of this tightening? Should journalists just assume whatever sources we get are enough?
"As just one example, over two years into the pandemic with catastrophic missteps and at least six million dead, nearly all the 11,000 or so employees at CDC are essentially silenced…..
"We told the New York Times recently, “The press should not be taking the risk of assuming that what we get is all there is when so many people are silenced. We should be openly fighting these controls.”
"The next catastrophe is coming. We need for journalists to stand up on this.
"I’d be happy to talk to anyone."
Monday, June 20, 2022
Letter to NYT: Gag Rules Are a Big Danger to Free Speech
“One of the most dangerous threats to free speech is the tremendous growth over three to four decades of government agencies, businesses and others barring employees from speaking to journalists,” freedom of information officers of journalism organizations told the New York Times last week.
The letter is in response to the paper’s editorial board’s pledge to look at censorship in the United States.
Opinion | Should Biden Run for Re-election in 2024? - The New York Times (nytimes.com)
Tuesday, May 31, 2022
To Wash Post: Baby Formula: The Press Was Not There; Press Contacts Were Controlled
Open Letter to the Washington Post:
I’m questioning the propriety of the press covering what was known about baby formula issues prior to the shortage without talking about the censorship on newsgathering in Food and Drug Administration and elsewhere.
FDA employees, like people in many agencies, are prohibited from talking to reporters without guards from the public information office. Probably most contacts with reporters never happen because of delays or blockages through that permission-to-speak process.
About 27 years ago at least five specialized newsletter reporters walked the agency’s halls getting many stories that were not officially ordained. That kind of networking with employees might very well have brought out the formula issues well before they became a crisis.
Staff who may have seen this problem coming are in effect blocked from getting to know reporters, talking to them informally or, often, talking to them at all.
We in the press like to think that with all our talent, along with contacts with a few insiders who defy the no-talk rules, we get the whole story anyway. We don’t tell the public about this censorship culture which is now pervasive in many U.S. public and private entities. Our silence is shameful and our assumption about how much we know is repeatedly shown to be wrong.
We turn a blind eye to official information control and thereby turn a blind eye to many hazards to children and others.
The extensive legal analysis from The Brechner Center for Freedom of Information finds that these constraints, although very common, are unconstitutional and that many courts have agreed with that. The longer version is a legal brief.
May we talk about this?
Thanks,
Kathryn Foxhall
FDA employees, like people in many agencies, are prohibited from talking to reporters without guards from the public information office. Probably most contacts with reporters never happen because of delays or blockages through that permission-to-speak process.
About 27 years ago at least five specialized newsletter reporters walked the agency’s halls getting many stories that were not officially ordained. That kind of networking with employees might very well have brought out the formula issues well before they became a crisis.
Staff who may have seen this problem coming are in effect blocked from getting to know reporters, talking to them informally or, often, talking to them at all.
We in the press like to think that with all our talent, along with contacts with a few insiders who defy the no-talk rules, we get the whole story anyway. We don’t tell the public about this censorship culture which is now pervasive in many U.S. public and private entities. Our silence is shameful and our assumption about how much we know is repeatedly shown to be wrong.
We turn a blind eye to official information control and thereby turn a blind eye to many hazards to children and others.
The extensive legal analysis from The Brechner Center for Freedom of Information finds that these constraints, although very common, are unconstitutional and that many courts have agreed with that. The longer version is a legal brief.
May we talk about this?
Thanks,
Kathryn Foxhall
Resources
--The Society of Professional Journalists has said the controls are censorship and authoritarian.
-- “Editor and Publisher” featured the issue in October 2021.
-- The Yale Law School Access and Accountability Conference last October had a “Fighting Censorship by PIO” session. (The agenda is here and the PIO papers [Foxhall and LoMonte] are here. The video is here, session number 5.)
BCC:
Laura Reiley
Kimberly Kindy
Washington Post Editorial Staff
Senate HELP Committee
House Energy and Commerce Committee
Media Reporters
Health Reporters
--The Society of Professional Journalists has said the controls are censorship and authoritarian.
-- “Editor and Publisher” featured the issue in October 2021.
-- The Yale Law School Access and Accountability Conference last October had a “Fighting Censorship by PIO” session. (The agenda is here and the PIO papers [Foxhall and LoMonte] are here. The video is here, session number 5.)
BCC:
Laura Reiley
Kimberly Kindy
Washington Post Editorial Staff
Senate HELP Committee
House Energy and Commerce Committee
Media Reporters
Health Reporters
American Society of Journalists and Authors
American Society of Media Photographers
News Leaders Association
Associated College Press
Center for Scholastic Journalism
Colorado Press Women
Colorado State University
Colorado Press Women
Colorado State University
International Society of Weekly Newspaper Editors
iSolon.org
Media Freedom Foundation and Project Censored
National Association of Black Journalists
National Association of Hispanic Journalists
National Federation of Press Women
National Newspaper Association
National Press Photographers Association
iSolon.org
Media Freedom Foundation and Project Censored
National Association of Black Journalists
National Association of Hispanic Journalists
National Federation of Press Women
National Newspaper Association
National Press Photographers Association
National Writers Union
Native American Journalists Association
North American Agricultural Journalists
OpenTheGovernment.org
Radio Television Digital News Association
Society of American Business Editors and Writers
Society of Environmental Journalists
Society of Professional Journalists
Tully Center for Free Speech at Syracuse University
Native American Journalists Association
North American Agricultural Journalists
OpenTheGovernment.org
Radio Television Digital News Association
Society of American Business Editors and Writers
Society of Environmental Journalists
Society of Professional Journalists
Tully Center for Free Speech at Syracuse University
Saturday, May 21, 2022
To Energy + Commerce Re: Baby Formula Shortage: FDA Kicked the Press Out about Years Ago
The following letter went to the House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee:
Chairman Pallone:
Regarding the baby formula shortage and what was known about circumstances at FDA: the controls on news reporting at the agency have become extreme over a long time. It is not realistic to expect that problematic situations will not develop and fester when governmental agencies heavily restrict public scrutiny of themselves.
Over the last two to three decades, many agencies, businesses and other institutions have instituted policies banning employees (and sometimes others) from speaking to reporters without oversight by authorities, often through public information officers. These restrictions prohibit all contacts not overseen by authorities, even though confidential conversations are so often critical to the public’s understanding.
Also, in reality, the system works so that a huge portion of contacts between reporters and staff is blocked altogether.
A number of journalism organizations have worked opposing these controls for a long time. I work with the Society of Professional Journalists and others on the issue.
I would like to talk to your staff about this.....
Please note also:
--Last July, 25 journalism and other groups wrote to the Office of Science and Technology Policy asking that the blockages be ended and that reporters be given credentials to enter facilities. It was one of numerous efforts over the years. We have not received any substantial response despite several follow-up contacts with OSTP.
--Importantly, an extensive legal analysis from The Brechner Center for Freedom of Information finds that these mandates for reporters to go through PIOs, although very common, are unconstitutional and that many courts have agreed. (The longer version is this law journal article.)
---SPJ sponsored seven surveys (2012 to 2016) that showed the censorship is pervasive in federal, state, and local government, education, government science agencies and police departments (see some summaries below).
---Journalism groups recently published a letter in Science magazine on this issue: Scientists’ right to speak to the press (science.org).
We don’t know about FDA but apparently contacts with the press for all or most of HHS must go through one small office, the Assistant Secretary of Public Affairs. Thus, a very few people under heavy conflict of interest and political pressure decide what all of us can hear about agencies’ workings.
As Covid deaths began to mount in 2020, an official told CDC media relations staff that just because individual reporters persist in asking to speak to someone, doesn’t mean they are allowed to.
Probably the top reason for media organizations’ silence about the controls is their long-time work ethic and strong financial incentive to assume--and to convince their audience--that good reporters get the story anyway. It’s more likely the press gets some stories and assumes what we get is all there is.
In addition, journalists fear, with good reason, that PIOs and other powers will block whatever access reporters have if they complain.
There are other resources below. I’d be happy to talk to anyone about this.
Regarding the baby formula shortage and what was known about circumstances at FDA: the controls on news reporting at the agency have become extreme over a long time. It is not realistic to expect that problematic situations will not develop and fester when governmental agencies heavily restrict public scrutiny of themselves.
Over the last two to three decades, many agencies, businesses and other institutions have instituted policies banning employees (and sometimes others) from speaking to reporters without oversight by authorities, often through public information officers. These restrictions prohibit all contacts not overseen by authorities, even though confidential conversations are so often critical to the public’s understanding.
Also, in reality, the system works so that a huge portion of contacts between reporters and staff is blocked altogether.
A number of journalism organizations have worked opposing these controls for a long time. I work with the Society of Professional Journalists and others on the issue.
I would like to talk to your staff about this.....
Please note also:
--Last July, 25 journalism and other groups wrote to the Office of Science and Technology Policy asking that the blockages be ended and that reporters be given credentials to enter facilities. It was one of numerous efforts over the years. We have not received any substantial response despite several follow-up contacts with OSTP.
--Importantly, an extensive legal analysis from The Brechner Center for Freedom of Information finds that these mandates for reporters to go through PIOs, although very common, are unconstitutional and that many courts have agreed. (The longer version is this law journal article.)
---SPJ sponsored seven surveys (2012 to 2016) that showed the censorship is pervasive in federal, state, and local government, education, government science agencies and police departments (see some summaries below).
---Journalism groups recently published a letter in Science magazine on this issue: Scientists’ right to speak to the press (science.org).
We don’t know about FDA but apparently contacts with the press for all or most of HHS must go through one small office, the Assistant Secretary of Public Affairs. Thus, a very few people under heavy conflict of interest and political pressure decide what all of us can hear about agencies’ workings.
As Covid deaths began to mount in 2020, an official told CDC media relations staff that just because individual reporters persist in asking to speak to someone, doesn’t mean they are allowed to.
Probably the top reason for media organizations’ silence about the controls is their long-time work ethic and strong financial incentive to assume--and to convince their audience--that good reporters get the story anyway. It’s more likely the press gets some stories and assumes what we get is all there is.
In addition, journalists fear, with good reason, that PIOs and other powers will block whatever access reporters have if they complain.
There are other resources below. I’d be happy to talk to anyone about this.
Kathryn Foxhall
Tuesday, May 17, 2022
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Staff Contact Information Disappears
The Department of Health and Human Services employee directory, which has been online for many years, has suddenly lost email and telephone listings. Names and professional positions are there, but there is no way to make connections.
I emailed five public affairs officers asking whether it is fair to say that the lack of an HHS directory with contact information is unprecedented, since even before the internet anyone could buy an HHS directory at the Government Printing Office.
I also asked if it is fair to say that no contact information is listed on the HHS website for public affairs contacts, other than the media@hhs.gov.
I wrote to HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra saying this elimination of contacts would appear to be another step in the direction of information control that has included banning employees from speaking to reporters without notifying agency authorities and indicating to staff that they have no responsibility to speak the press.
One report said told the employee directory change was done in the name of security.
I told Becerra, “Security is not best served with one of the largest government agencies in the world broadly impacting public health from behind nearly impenetrable walls of restrictions with unreachable, unknowable people.
“I’m asking that all these barriers be removed. Note that many journalism groups have asked the same about the previously instituted restrictions.”
I emailed five public affairs officers asking whether it is fair to say that the lack of an HHS directory with contact information is unprecedented, since even before the internet anyone could buy an HHS directory at the Government Printing Office.
I also asked if it is fair to say that no contact information is listed on the HHS website for public affairs contacts, other than the media@hhs.gov.
I wrote to HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra saying this elimination of contacts would appear to be another step in the direction of information control that has included banning employees from speaking to reporters without notifying agency authorities and indicating to staff that they have no responsibility to speak the press.
One report said told the employee directory change was done in the name of security.
I told Becerra, “Security is not best served with one of the largest government agencies in the world broadly impacting public health from behind nearly impenetrable walls of restrictions with unreachable, unknowable people.
“I’m asking that all these barriers be removed. Note that many journalism groups have asked the same about the previously instituted restrictions.”
I have not had an answer yet.
Friday, April 22, 2022
Teachers’ Union President: Barriers to Talking Are Maybe Not Putin, But They are Very Dangerous
FYI to readers:
This is a story picked up from last month, but the points are still good.
You would not compare the bans on employees speaking to the press to Russia’s Vladimir Putin, because Putin is a murderer, said Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO, of the largest teachers’ unions.
“But the roots of it are very dangerous. The roots are basically saying, ‘We’re going to stop people from giving real, accurate, truthful information about conditions about public good….’”
Weingarten, who spoke at a Sunshine Week online session sponsored by the Society of Professional Journalists and the National Press Club, was pointing specifically to the order the Philadelphia School Board has considered that would prohibit employees from speaking to the press without express permission from the district.
She said, “Public education is a public good. The public is entitled to know what’s going on. Teachers should be able to say what’s going on. There should not be this censorship about this.”
Weingarten also told the audience that if a school or district refuses to allow a reporter to speak to an employee, it’s indeed possible that the union can help getting the two together.
On the legal side of that question, First Amendment Attorney Frank LoMonte said, journalists should know from the start that a public school or university is a government agency and, “The Supreme Court has said over and over again public employees do not check their First Amendment rights at the door when they sign on to a government job and that applies to teachers or principals or coaches or anybody in public school.”
“And so, these pervasive policies, which we see at all levels of government, including education, that restrict employees from being able to talk without permission, they’re all against the law,” LoMonte said. He is former director of the Brechner Center for Freedom of Expression and has recently become counsel for CNN.
Delece Smith-Barrow, education reporter at Politico, said, “One thing that journalists face so often is not being able to get the information that they want, or get access to someone who has the information that they need, and it’s not that we need it personally, it’s that news consumers need it.”
Some of the blockage, she said, “Can look like slow or no response to a FOIA request….Maybe they’re a principal, an administrator that is central to your story who you need to reach and you’re being told by the school district that person can’t speak with you.”
Eva-Marie Ayala, the Education Lab editor for The Dallas Morning News, described reaching out to an employee in a local agency and having a public relations person get back, really upset, and saying the reporter was being nefarious to go around the PR office.
“And you know, that is our job,” Ayala said. If a reporter is going to name someone in the paper, perhaps when there is an allegation against them, the journalist has a duty to go above and beyond to reach out to the person and get their side of the story, she stated.
Ayala also said some school boards have policies that only one person on the board, typically the school board president, should speak to the press. She said, “These school board members are elected by the public. They don’t elect one person or the whole board. They individually elect the school board trustees to speak. We reach out to them as needed. If they decline to comment, we put that in there. Again, it is all about transparency.”
Ayala said one of her pet peeves, which she gets all the time, is the request to send her questions in advance when she asks for an interview. She says she replies that she usually doesn’t share questions in advance, but she might outline some of the topics she is interested in. That’s because, the interviewee typically will say something that causes the reporter to ask a different question, and that will trigger another response from the source person.
“And, so it’s a conversation. It’s not just a one-way street.”
Further reporting on the panel is on the NPC website.
This is a story picked up from last month, but the points are still good.
You would not compare the bans on employees speaking to the press to Russia’s Vladimir Putin, because Putin is a murderer, said Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO, of the largest teachers’ unions.
“But the roots of it are very dangerous. The roots are basically saying, ‘We’re going to stop people from giving real, accurate, truthful information about conditions about public good….’”
Weingarten, who spoke at a Sunshine Week online session sponsored by the Society of Professional Journalists and the National Press Club, was pointing specifically to the order the Philadelphia School Board has considered that would prohibit employees from speaking to the press without express permission from the district.
She said, “Public education is a public good. The public is entitled to know what’s going on. Teachers should be able to say what’s going on. There should not be this censorship about this.”
Weingarten also told the audience that if a school or district refuses to allow a reporter to speak to an employee, it’s indeed possible that the union can help getting the two together.
On the legal side of that question, First Amendment Attorney Frank LoMonte said, journalists should know from the start that a public school or university is a government agency and, “The Supreme Court has said over and over again public employees do not check their First Amendment rights at the door when they sign on to a government job and that applies to teachers or principals or coaches or anybody in public school.”
“And so, these pervasive policies, which we see at all levels of government, including education, that restrict employees from being able to talk without permission, they’re all against the law,” LoMonte said. He is former director of the Brechner Center for Freedom of Expression and has recently become counsel for CNN.
Delece Smith-Barrow, education reporter at Politico, said, “One thing that journalists face so often is not being able to get the information that they want, or get access to someone who has the information that they need, and it’s not that we need it personally, it’s that news consumers need it.”
Some of the blockage, she said, “Can look like slow or no response to a FOIA request….Maybe they’re a principal, an administrator that is central to your story who you need to reach and you’re being told by the school district that person can’t speak with you.”
Eva-Marie Ayala, the Education Lab editor for The Dallas Morning News, described reaching out to an employee in a local agency and having a public relations person get back, really upset, and saying the reporter was being nefarious to go around the PR office.
“And you know, that is our job,” Ayala said. If a reporter is going to name someone in the paper, perhaps when there is an allegation against them, the journalist has a duty to go above and beyond to reach out to the person and get their side of the story, she stated.
Ayala also said some school boards have policies that only one person on the board, typically the school board president, should speak to the press. She said, “These school board members are elected by the public. They don’t elect one person or the whole board. They individually elect the school board trustees to speak. We reach out to them as needed. If they decline to comment, we put that in there. Again, it is all about transparency.”
Ayala said one of her pet peeves, which she gets all the time, is the request to send her questions in advance when she asks for an interview. She says she replies that she usually doesn’t share questions in advance, but she might outline some of the topics she is interested in. That’s because, the interviewee typically will say something that causes the reporter to ask a different question, and that will trigger another response from the source person.
“And, so it’s a conversation. It’s not just a one-way street.”
Further reporting on the panel is on the NPC website.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)