• generated by sloganizer.net
  • Wednesday, June 14, 2006


    CIA Claims the Right to Decide What is News

    CIA Claims the Right to Decide What is News

    From George Washington University’s National Security Archive:

    Washington, DC, 14 June 2006 -

    The National Security Archive today filed suit in the United States
    District Court for the District of Columbia against the Central Intelligence
    Agency (CIA), challenging the Agency's recent practice of charging Freedom of
    Information Act (FOIA) fees to journalists pursuing news.

    The FOIA says that "representatives of the news media" can be charged only
    copying fees since they help to carry out the mission of the law by
    disseminating government information; but the CIA last year began claiming
    authority to assess additional fees if the Agency decides any journalist's
    request is not newsworthy enough. In adopting this new practice, the CIA
    reversed its prior 15-year practice of presumptively waiving additional fees for
    news media representatives, including the National Security Archive.

    "The CIA takes the position that it should decide what is 'news' instead of
    the reporters and editors who research and publish the stories," explained
    attorney Patrick J. Carome of the law firm Wilmer Hale, who is representing the
    Archive. "If the CIA succeeds in exercising broad discretion to charge
    additional fees to journalists, despite the plain language of the law, then too
    often we will find out only what the government wants us to know."

    "Today is the day that federal agencies are turning in their FOIA
    improvement plans under President Bush's Executive Order for a more
    'citizen-centered' and 'results-oriented' FOIA system. But the CIA has taken the
    opposite approach, and is instead trying to close off use of the FOIA by
    journalists," commented Archive General Counsel Meredith Fuchs.

    In 1989 the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
    Circuit recognized the Archive as a representative of the news media that cannot
    be charged for searches for records requested under the FOIA. The next year, the
    United States District Court for the District of Columbia held the CIA "must
    treat plaintiff as a 'representative of the news media' within the meaning of"
    the FOIA. For over 15 years, the CIA, like other federal agencies receiving FOIA
    requests from the Archive, abided by these decisions. Since these decisions, the
    Archive's news media activity has expanded dramatically, and its journalistic
    work has received numerous awards, including most recently the 2005 Emmy Award for Outstanding Achievement in News and Documentary Research.

    Suddenly, in October 2005, the CIA changed its practice and began to
    require the Archive to meet a new test for what information qualifies as "news."
    The CIA demanded that the Archive show that its requests for records meet
    several criteria that are not found in the FOIA itself, specifically, that the
    requests "concern current events," "interest the general public," and "enhance
    the public understanding of the operations and activities of the U.S.

    Among the requests that the CIA determined did not concern "current events"
    were two requests for biographical documents relating to members of the Taliban
    in Afghanistan and documents regarding the development of U.S. policy in
    Afghanistan in the five months before President Carter authorized U.S. aid to
    the Mujahadeen opposition to the Soviet-backed Afghan regime. The CIA rejected
    the notion that information about U.S. knowledge regarding the Taliban and the
    rise of Muslim fundamentalism in Afghanistan could result in "news." And
    although the CIA determined that FOIA requests about NAFTA and illegal Mexican
    immigration could result in "news," it rejected the idea that President
    Clinton's 1993 meetings with President Salinas on the subject could result in

    "This policy is a clear attempt to prevent journalists from getting
    information out to the public," said Archive Director Thomas Blanton. "Given the
    timing - when the intelligence community is under serious scrutiny about its
    activities - this appears to be an effort to shut down the growth of a vibrant
    public debate in the print, broadcast and online communities."

    Today's court filing, along with the decisions in the previous cases cited,
    were made available today on the Archive's Web site: http://www.nsarchive.org/

    Comments: Post a Comment

    << Home

    This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

    Listed on BlogShares


    Stumble It!