The Society of Professional Journalists went on the offensive Friday over “the possible weakening of existing Department of Justice guidelines governing investigations that involve the news media.”
SPJ President Sonny Albarado sent letter to Attorney General Eric Holder in response to the “off the record” meeting Holder offered journalists to discuss the JD’s investigation of security leaks to the press.
Read the letter, along with a release issued by the SPJ Friday, below:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contacts:
Sonny Albarado, SPJ National President, 501.551.8811, spjsonny@gmail.com
Ellen Kobe, SPJ Communications Coordinator, 317-927-8000 ext. 205, ekobe@spj.org
INDIANAPOLIS – Leaders of the Society of Professional Journalists expressed concern Friday about the possible weakening of existing Department of Justice guidelines governing investigations that involve the news media.
“While not perfect from a journalist’s perspective, the guidelines are quite good,” said SPJ President Sonny Albarado in a letter responding to Attorney General Eric Holder’s invitation to attend one of a series of off-the-record policy meetings at Justice. “We would object to any attempt to water them down, include new exceptions and caveats or otherwise make it easier for the government to disregard.”
The letter noted that SPJ believes the Justice Department violated the guidelines — established in 1972 — in its subpoena of phone records of The Associated Press and its reporters as part of a classified-information leak probe.
No one from SPJ’s executive committee attended Friday’s meeting with Holder because it was billed as an off-the-record policy discussion, but Albarado asked a representative from SPJ’s law firm, BakerHostetler, to attend and voice SPJ’s concerns.
“We disagree with your intention to hold off-the-record sessions and were glad to see that you agreed in previous meetings to the dissemination of summaries of the content of those meetings,” Albarado wrote. “We believe even more transparency is required for such important issues as press freedom and government intrusion into the news-gathering process.
“But a larger issue lies beyond whether your meetings are on or off the record,” Albarado said.
SPJ questions what the Justice Department hopes to gain from its meetings with journalism organizations, Albarado said.
“What we would like to see from you and the administration is a statement affirming your support of the existing guidelines (on subpoenas of journalists),” Albarado said.
SPJ would like to see “…a statement that assures the press and the public that the Justice Department will follow the guidelines — especially the provisions that mandate a narrowly drawn subpoena and notice to the affected news organization.”
Albarado’s letter continued: “We also would like to see you and the President affirm that most journalists are thoughtful, patriotic and judicious Americans and that these journalists diligently strive, with the help of government sources, to ensure that articles about our country’s efforts to fight terrorism and other national security matters do not compromise or otherwise harm lawful national security activities.
“We hope that you and your agency will work with the journalism community to sustain the aspirations of the existing guidelines and strengthen rather than weaken them,” Albarado said.
A copy of Albarado’s full letter to Holder can be found below this statement.
Founded in 1909 as Sigma Delta Chi, SPJ promotes the free flow of information vital to a well-informed citizenry; works to inspire and educate the next generation of journalists; and protects First Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech and press. For more information about SPJ, please visit www.spj.org.
Eugene S. Pulliam National Journalism Center
3909 N. Meridian St., Indianapolis, IN 46208
June 7, 2013
Attorney General Eric Holder
Office of the Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
Dear Mr. Holder:
The Society of Professional Journalists appreciates your interest in hearing from journalism groups and news organizations about Department of Justice policy on investigations that involve journalists.
We disagree with your intention to hold off-the-record sessions and were glad to see that you agreed in previous meetings to dissemination of summaries of the content of those meetings.
We believe even more transparency is required for such important issues as press freedom and government intrusion into the news-gathering process.
But a larger issue lies beyond whether your meetings are on or off the record.
What does the Justice Department hope to gain from these meetings – for itself, the Administration and the national security apparatus?
We understand that your office is reviewing the guidelines on subpoenas of journalists established in 1972, guidelines we believe the Justice Department violated in its subpoena of The Associated Press’ phone records last year.
While not perfect from a journalist’s perspective, the guidelines are quite good. We would object to any attempt to water them down, include new exceptions and caveats or otherwise make it easier for the government to disregard.
What we would like to see from you and the administration is a statement affirming your support of the existing guidelines, a statement that assures the press and the public that the Justice Department will follow the guidelines — especially the provisions that mandate a narrowly drawn subpoena and notice to the affected news organization.
We also would like to see you and the President affirm that most journalists are thoughtful, patriotic and judicious Americans and that these journalists diligently strive, with the help of government sources, to ensure that published information about our country’s efforts to fight terrorism and other national security matters do not compromise or otherwise harm lawful national security activities.
SPJ members believe strongly that the first duty of journalism is to seek truth and report it. Yet, we also strive to temper that high goal by recognizing that sources, subjects and colleagues are human and deserving of respect. Balancing these aims sometimes creates tension within ourselves, within our profession and within our relationships with government and the public.
We hope that you and your agency will work with the journalism community to sustain the aspirations of the existing Guidelines and strengthen rather than weaken them.
Sincerely,
Sonny Albarado
President
Society of Professional Journalists
3909 N. Meridian St.
Indianapolis, IN 46208
spjsonny@gmail.com
501-244-4321 (office)
501-551-8811 (cell)
Friends,
I have been invited to start blogging here, and so I will. My purpose is to prod the SPJ into taking stronger action to fix Illinois’ awful public-records statute. The recently concluded legislative session was, in my view, an utter failure for advocates of open government. The alleged FOIA reforms pushed through a few years ago have proven ineffective. In short, things are getting worse while thumbs twiddle.
I had a frank exchange with a couple of SPJ officers this morning via email. In their view, SPJ has taken action by setting up a website and getting grants and meeting with public officials. In my view, that is not enough, not nearly enough.
I have called on the SPJ to rescind the Sunshine Award given to Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan. The officers of the state SPJ chapter have rejected this idea. Instead, they tell me, we should be patient. They have also accused me of attacking Madigan for political reasons. That is not the case, but I suppose when you’re looking for reasons to keep thumbs twiddling, you’ll say darn near anything.
My hope here is to engage the membership in a frank and open discussion on how to address shortcomings in FOIA. It is my view that the only realistic means is to pressure elected officials and policy makers, starting with the attorney general, and it is my belief that the most effective way to get the message through is to rescind her award. Politicians understand that sort of thing. Anything less gets lost.
It is also my view that the best way to move SPJ in the right direction here is to withhold financial support. I first made this proposal to rescind the award in 2010, speaking with SPJ officers on both the state and national level. Since then, I believe that things have gotten worse, and I see no evidence that SPJ is willing to change the present timid course. And so I believe that we should boycott the SPJ. Don’t enter SPJ contests, don’t renew SPJ memberships, don’t give SPJ any money for anything whatsoever. Talk is cheap. Money matters. Anything less gets lost.
Anyone who supports rescinding Madigan’s award will be attacked by those who say they favor open government. I know, because it has happened to me. You will be accused of being a Republican lackey. You’ll be called a crackpot. And worse. But ask yourself: Do you think that Lisa Madigan deserves your seal of approval–because that’s what this award is–for ending secrecy in Illinois?
Anyone wanting more information about this issue should contact me via email — I’m easy to find, just Google a bit. And thanks for listening.
Bruce Rushton
Illinois Times
Springfield, IL