03/12/06

Associated Press CEO Tom Curley discusses Sunshine Week 2006


Tom Curley, The Associated Press' president and chief executive officer, has been an outspoken advocate in the campaign against government secrecy. In question-and-answer form, he discussed this year's Sunshine Week initiative spearheaded by media organizations.
___
Q: Sunshine Week 2005 was declared a success in initiating a national dialogue in the United States and shedding light on the public's right to open government. How does 2006 compare with 2005, and how do you view last year in terms of freedom of information?

A: Last year's effort was impressive. Participation was far higher than expected. Editors' efforts to show how freedom-of-information laws benefit the public were thoughtful and specific. Many focused on everyday issues that impacted local lives. Most important, the dial moved. Polls showed support for freedom of information rose.
___
Q: The first national Sunshine Week helped to energize congressional efforts to introduce strengthened Freedom of Information Act laws. Do you think President Bush's executive order for federal agencies to improve their compliance will play any role in that legislative process?

A: We must understand we are engaged in a long-term battle. Freedoms must be won anew by each generation. Crosscurrents in public and government thinking linger from the attacks on the United States in 2001. Signs of progress include the executive order to improve compliance, media industry engagement in open-records issues and at least some increased support. Unfortunately, an absurdly high amount of government information is being classified.
___
Q: As a result of an Associated Press lawsuit, the Pentagon this month released documents containing the names of detainees at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay. Why did the AP pursue this case?

A: Legal support for public trials dates back at least to 1188. The public has a right to know about the people being held, whether or not they are a threat, the nature of their alleged crime, whether their government is providing appropriate justice. Military and civilian codes provide rights to fair trials, including notice of charges and humane treatment of incarcerated. The nature of the charge doesn't diminish the rights of the accused or provide additional powers to the state.
___
Q: Should journalists have access privileges for government records that do not extend to the public? For instance, in Ohio, ordinary citizens do not have access to lists of people who receive permits to carry concealed weapons, but according to the law, the media does.

A: That law in Ohio, and laws in other states, resulted from odd compromises late in the legislative process. We're much better off when our rights match the public's rights.
___
Q: Is there enough of a direct dialogue between the public's intermediary -- the media -- and the government's gatekeepers of information?

A: We've done a much better job recently shining the spotlight on access. The high-profile cases where journalists have been thrown in jail or threatened with jail put the issue on the front page. The courts' attitudes are unmistakably chilly. We've got a lot of work to get the public behind us.
___
Q: Do the media have clear guidelines, that the public should be aware of, for when it should bring to light a government access problem or when to work behind the scenes with federal, state or local authorities to resolve a complex issue?

A: We routinely hold information until we can be sure of its accuracy, value or context. I don't think we've explained to the public how hard we work to be sure. Of course, each mistake undermines our credibility. The guidelines on when to publish or when to wait should be clear within each organization and communicated when appropriate to the public. We must fight the accuracy battle each day with every word we write.
___
Q: How does new technology affect the media's relationship with the U.S. military in the resolution of freedom of information disputes?

A: News circles the globe in an instant, and the military and media are tested as never before to get the facts right from the beginning. We have the capacity to put a story on the air before we know what the story is. Restraint should be exercised for the sake of accuracy and context. Nonetheless, most problems arise for all the old and wrong reasons: An official wants to put the best spin on a situation or someone puts being first with a story ahead of first being right. Our complaints with the military tend to be more specific _ a particular official ignoring long-established procedures or overreaching.
___
Q: Prosecutors and defense lawyers have used the power of subpoena to demand reporters' notes in a couple of recent high-profile legal cases, including the jailing of New York Times reporter Judith Miller and the Wen Ho Lee case -- which involves an AP reporter -- in which the defense has asked journalists to reveal their sources. Are these aberrations that are confined to an unusual set of legal circumstances, or do those cases represent a judicial trend to limit the use of government sources?

A: The trend is unmistakable and chilling. We must do our part by limiting when we go off the record, and we must fight to get access to information the public needs. Government by secrecy doesn't make for enduring democracy. Judges will be more sensitive to the public's access when they see the potential for public harm from secrecy.
___
Q: Has the role of the press as a watchdog of government for the public taken a beating in the current political climate in America?

A: History shows that there are pullbacks in times of war, and that's understandable. We should stick to our principles and make the case to the public.
___
Q: Are efforts by the media to become more transparent so the public better understands the journalistic process actually working?

A: Research by the Pew Charitable Trust and the Freedom Forum show impressive upticks. That should inspire all of us to seize the moment.
___
Q: The right of a citizen to privacy is increasingly being pitted against the public's right to know. How does that affect the media's relationship with the public?

A: A citizen's privacy rights should be understood and respected. The rules are nearly always clear about when information crosses the line from private to public. When it's not clear, editors are very careful to debate when and what to publish. Our battle is keeping the public's business from being conducted behind closed doors.
___
Q: The Associated Press daily faces government hostility to its newsgathering efforts globally. How are its FOI efforts in the U.S. helping to cope with that?

A: We work in a lot of places where media are feared more than guns. Interestingly, our efforts in the U.S. are seen as a sign of strength. We've heard from journalists in many countries that they have been encouraged to ask the tough questions or to report when information is being concealed. We face a difficult era. The Rose, Orange and Tulip Revolutions in former Soviet republics appear to have spooked unelected regimes to intensify efforts at repression. The courage of journalists -- AP and others -- working in these places should inspire all of us.