Author Topic: Obama Admn becoming even less transparent and open. AP  (Read 2056 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39425
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Obama Admn becoming even less transparent and open. AP
« on: March 17, 2014, 05:31:56 AM »



Mar 17, 5:36 AM EDT


US cites security more to censor, deny records

By TED BRIDIS and JACK GILLUM
Associated Press
 

 
 
AP Photo
 AP Photo/k.vineys
   

 
Politics Video
 
 
 
   

 
 
 
     


 
   
   
 
         
   
   
 
Multimedia
 
 
 Multimedia: Explainer of the Freedom of Information Act with video. 
 
 
   

 
Buy AP Photo Reprints
 


 
 
 
   

 
Interactives
 
Federal FOIA Delays
State Laws on Information Access
 
 
 
Latest News
 
US cites security more to censor, deny records
 Tensions rise over access to local government


 
 
   

 
 
   
   
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Obama administration has a way to go to fulfill its promises from Day 1 to become the most transparent administration in history.

More often than ever, the administration censored government files or outright denied access to them last year under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act, cited more legal exceptions it said justified withholding materials and refused a record number of times to turn over files quickly that might be especially newsworthy, according to a new analysis of federal data by The Associated Press.

Most agencies also took longer to answer records requests.

The government's own figures from 99 federal agencies covering six years show that halfway through its second term, the administration has made few meaningful improvements in the way it releases records. In category after category - except for reducing numbers of old requests and a slight increase in how often it waived copying fees - the government's efforts to be more open about its activities last year were their worst since President Barack Obama took office.

In a year of intense public interest over the National Security Agency's surveillance programs, the government cited national security to withhold information a record 8,496 times - a 57 percent increase over a year earlier and more than double Obama's first year, when it cited that reason 3,658 times. The Defense Department, including the NSA, and the CIA accounted for nearly all those. The Agriculture Department's Farm Service Agency cited national security six times, the Environmental Protection Agency did twice and the National Park Service once.

And five years after Obama directed agencies to less frequently invoke a "deliberative process" exception to withhold materials describing decision-making behind the scenes, the government did it anyway, a record 81,752 times.

"I'm concerned the growing trend toward relying upon FOIA exemptions to withhold large swaths of government information is hindering the public's right to know," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. "It becomes too much of a temptation. If you screw up in government, just mark it `top secret.'"

Citizens, journalists, businesses and others last year made a record 704,394 requests for information, an 8 percent increase over the previous year. The government responded to 678,391 requests, an increase of 2 percent over the previous year. The AP analysis showed that the government more than ever censored materials it turned over or fully denied access to them, in 244,675 cases or 36 percent of all requests. On 196,034 other occasions, the government said it couldn't find records, a person refused to pay for copies or the government determined the request to be unreasonable or improper.

Sometimes, the government censored only a few words or an employee's phone number, but other times it completely marked out nearly every paragraph on pages.

The White House said the government's figures demonstrate "that agencies are responding to the president's call for greater transparency." White House spokesman Eric Schultz noted that the government responded to more requests than previously and said it released more information. "Over the past five years, federal agencies have worked aggressively to improve their responsiveness to FOIA requests, applying a presumption of openness and making it a priority to respond quickly," Schultz said.

Sunday was the start of Sunshine Week, when news organizations promote open government and freedom of information.

The chief of the Justice Department's Office of Information Policy, which oversees the open records law, told the Senate last week that some of the 99 agencies in the past five years have released documents in full or in part in more than 90 percent of cases. She noted the record number of requests for government records, which exceeded 700,000 for the first time last year, and said decisions are harder than ever.

"The requests are more complex than they were before," director Melanie Pustay told the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The government's responsiveness under the FOIA is widely viewed as a barometer of its transparency. Under the law, citizens and foreigners can compel the government to turn over copies of federal records for zero or little cost. Anyone who seeks information through the law is generally supposed to get it unless disclosure would hurt national security, violate personal privacy or expose business secrets or confidential decision-making in certain areas. It cited such exceptions a record 546,574 times last year.

"The public is frustrated and unhappy with the pace of responses and the amount of information provided," Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., said at the same congressional hearing. "There's a common reaction for anybody who has any experience with it that it doesn't function well."

John Cook, the incoming new editor at the Intercept, the online magazine founded by investor Pierre Omidyar, said his experience under the open records law was "abysmal" but not especially worse last year than previously. "It's a bureaucracy," Cook said. "As often as it's about trying to keep data from falling into the hands of reporters, it's the contractor looking for ways to reduce the caseload. It's just bureaucrats trying to get home earlier and have less to do."

The AP could not determine whether the administration was abusing the national security exception or whether the public asked for more documents about sensitive subjects. The NSA said its 138 percent surge in records requests were from people asking whether it had collected their phone or email records, which it generally refuses to confirm or deny. To do otherwise, the NSA said, would pose an "an unacceptable risk" because terrorists could check to see whether the U.S. had detected their activities. It censored records or fully denied access to them in 4,246 out of 4,328 requests, or 98 percent of the time.

Journalists and others who need information quickly to report breaking news fared worse than ever last year. Blocking news organizations from urgently obtaining records about a government scandal or crisis - such as the NSA's phone-records collection, Boston bombings, trouble with its health care website, the deadly shootings at the Washington Navy Yard or the attack on the diplomatic mission in Benghazi - can delay uncovering significant developments until after decisions are made and the public's interest has waned.

The government said the average time it took to answer a records request ranged from less than one day to nearly two years. AP's analysis showed that most agencies took longer to answer requests than the previous year, although the White House said the government responded more quickly and did not immediately explain how it determined that. The Pentagon reported at least two requests still pending after 10 years and the CIA was still working on at least four requests from more than eight years ago.

The AP's request to the Health and Human Services Department for contracts with public-relations companies to promote Obama's health care law has been pending for more than one year. Requests for files about the Affordable Care Act and the IRS's treatment of tax-exempt political groups have languished in government offices for months. Similarly, the AP has waited for more than 10 months for emails between the IRS and outside Democratic super PACs about tea party groups.

After Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., was selected as the Republican vice presidential candidate, the AP asked scores of federal agencies for copies of letters he wrote to them. At least seven turned over the records after the election in November 2012. Some didn't even acknowledge AP's request for Ryan's letters until months after Obama was sworn in for a second term.

Last year, the government denied 6,689 out of 7,818 requests for so-called expedited processing, which moves an urgent request for newsworthy records to the front of the line for a speedy answer, or about 86 percent. It denied only 53 percent of such requests in 2008.

The EPA denied 458 out of 468 expediting requests. The State Department, where expedited processing can save 100 days of waiting time for example, denied 332 of 344 such requests. The Homeland Security Department denied 1,384 or 94 percent of expediting requests. The Justice Department, which denied AP's request for video its investigators obtained days after the Navy Yard shooting, denied 900 out of 1,017 such requests.

The U.S. spent a record $420 million answering requests plus just over $27 million in legal disputes, and charged people $4.3 million to search and copy documents. The government waived fees about 58 percent of the time that people asked, a 1 percent improvement over the previous year.

Sometimes, the government said it searched and couldn't find what citizens wanted.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence, whose top official has testified to Congress repeatedly about NSA surveillance programs disclosed by contractor Edward Snowden, told the AP it couldn't find any records or emails in its offices asking other federal agencies to be on the lookout for journalists to whom Snowden provided classified materials. British intelligence authorities had detained one reporter's partner for nine hours at Heathrow airport and questioned him under terrorism laws. DNI James Clapper has at least twice publicly described the reporters as "accomplices" to Snowden, who is charged under the U.S. Espionage Act and faces up to 30 years in prison.

Likewise, Cook, departing as the editor at Gawker, was exasperated when the State Department told him it couldn't find any emails between journalists and Philippe Reines, Hillary Clinton's personal spokesman when Clinton was secretary of state. BuzzFeed published a lengthy and profane email exchange about the 2012 attack on the diplomatic mission in Benghazi between Reines and its correspondent, Michael Hastings.

"They said there were no records," Cook said of the State Department.

---

Online:

U.S. government FOIA performance data: http://www.foia.gov/data.html

Example of heavily censored Justice Department document: http://tinyurl.com/p44ub6c

© 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39425
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn becoming even less transparent and open. AP
« Reply #1 on: March 19, 2014, 11:03:14 AM »

we lose access, we'll never get it back'

 By Paul Bedard  | MARCH 19, 2014 AT 11:44 AM


White House Washington Secrets Barack Obama Media Newspapers Transparency
 


Photo - Charles Dharapak, right, Chief White House photographer for The Associated Press, listens to Julie Pace, AP's chief White House correspondent, as each took turns speaking to gathered editors and publishers at the Newspaper Association of America's mediaXchange 2014 convention, in Denver, Tuesday. Both journalists talked about their experience of ongoing coverage limitations placed on news organizations by the Obama White House. BRENNAN LINSLEY -- AP Photo
Charles Dharapak, right, Chief White House photographer for The Associated Press, listens to...

The Associated Press has stepped up its attack on White House efforts to block coverage of events involving President Obama, warning that once access is cut, “we'll never get it back.”

In the latest media charge that the White House has reneged on promises to be “transparent,” two of AP's White House staff told a convention in Denver this week that the president's team often bars coverage of Obama events because they are “hypersensitive” about his Image.

At the Newspaper Association of America's mediaXchange convention in Denver, AP White House photographer Charles Dharapak said that instead of letting reporters and photographers in at major news events, like the president's recent meeting with the Dalai Lama, it is issuing “virtual press releases” on social media.
   


Sign Up for the Paul Bedard newsletter!

















 
He suggested that in cutting reporters from events that have historically received coverage, the White House is limiting access to independent news organizations. "Once we lose access, we'll never get it back," he told convention participants.

"We don't fault them for using these methods of social outreach," Dharapak said of the White House in an AP interview after his presentation. "Just don't shut the independent press out,” he told his news service.

The White House press corps has been frustrated by the way the White House limits coverage and have begun to openly complain about being shut out. White House officials, however, said that putting news out through social media gives a wider audience access to the president.

His comments were the buzz in the crowd, eventually hitting Twitter.

“@Dharapak: We don't fault @WhiteHouse for managing President's Image but its no sub for independent journalism,” tweeted Maggie Murphy, editor of Parade magazine.

“@CharlesDharapak: It's important for the public to understand that official White House photos are public relations,” tweeted Amanda Knowles, web and social media manager for the Newspaper Association of America. “@CharlesDharapak: How White House manages their message: Handout photos from closed events become visual press releases,” she added.

Amber Paluch, community engagement editor for the Green Bay Press-Gazette in Wisconsin, tweeted, “Unscripted time with @BarackObama are rare & the chance for reporters to ask questions much rarer."
Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at pbedard@washingtonexaminer.com.   




Share this article on Facebook or Twitter
Print this article

JOHN MATRIX

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 13281
  • the Media is the Problem
Re: Obama Admn becoming even less transparent and open. AP
« Reply #2 on: March 19, 2014, 12:36:22 PM »
Incredible irony considering how he ran on TRANSPARENCY!!!! when every single thing with this administration has been deception and secrecy.

dario73

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6467
  • Getbig!
Re: Obama Admn becoming even less transparent and open. AP
« Reply #3 on: March 20, 2014, 05:22:14 AM »
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/reporters-held-4-minutes-president-countdown-clock-looming-aide-and-standing_785599.html

Reporters Held to 4 Minutes With President By Countdown Clock, Looming Aide, and Standing Up

According to a local CBS Arizona affiliate, President Obama and his team have 3 tactics to make sure reporters stick to the 4 minutes the White House has allotted them to interview the leader of the world: a countdown clock, a looming aide, and they have to conduct the interview with the president while standing up.

One CBS anchor called the measures "a little ridiculous."

We immediately launched into our interview because there was a person standing behind him actually counting down to the four minutes. And by the time he answered my last question, I realized that we had already gone over the four minutes, so that's why I took an opportunity to sort of ask a lighter question afterward because I figured at that point, you know, why not? I have nothing to lose," said the local reporter.

"But what was interesting--a side note--is the reason why we're standing, I was told by one of his staffers, is because he likes to get comfortable when he's sitting and he tends to get very chatty. And so this was another way to keep him--and us--at the four minutes that they were suggesting that we not go over."

Said the local anchor, "Yeah, and it sounds like the pressure is on when some guy is standing behind him with a countdown clock. That's a little ridiculous."

President Obama gave a round of interviews to local affiliates yesterday in the White House. Only the CBS Arizona affiliate revealed the process behind the scenes.

dario73

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6467
  • Getbig!
Re: Obama Admn becoming even less transparent and open. AP
« Reply #4 on: March 20, 2014, 05:27:24 AM »
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/03/the-most-transparent-administration-cont-185401.html

The most transparent administration, cont

On Tuesday night, The New York Times reported that no reporters would be traveling with First Lady Michelle Obama to China, and that she would be giving no interviews while there. Nicholas Kristof, the Times columnist, called the First Lady's decision "a mistake," and said it "signals weakness or fear of coverage." Several conservative outlets picked up the Times report, including the influential Drudge Report, which linked to a Weekly Standard article about it.

Shortly after noon on Wednesday, I reached out to the First Lady's office to inquire about the decision. A spokesperson for the First Lady responded to my inquiry but declared the response "off the record," meaning I wasn't allowed to use the information therein. When I told the spokesperson that I needed a response I could use, the spokesperson replied with another off-the-record statement regarding the First Lady's trip.

The spokesperson then wrote, "If you need something attributable, you can take this on background from a White House official..."

The statement that followed did not address my original inquiry. Instead, it offered a formulaic explanation about "the power and importance of education" and "reaching people," followed by an explanation that the First Lady would participate in open press events and take questions online and in forums.

By now it was 5 p.m. ET, nearly five hours after my initial inquiry. When I told the spokesperson that I did not see why the quote needed to be anonymous and attributed to "a White House official," the spokesperson said if I needed something on the record I could refer to the First Lady's travel guidance and a transcript of a press call regarding the trip. These documents did not contain an answer to my question regarding why no reporters would be traveling with the First Lady.

Now, I'll leave frustration over Michelle Obama's trip to The New York Times, Nick Krisfof, The Weekly Standard and Drudge Report (a motley crew right there). What I want to know -- and what I've wanted to know since last October -- is why the spokesperson in the First Lady's office didn't want to give me a name I could put on a harmless, formulaic quote?


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39425
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39425
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

dario73

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6467
  • Getbig!
Re: Obama Admn becoming even less transparent and open. AP
« Reply #7 on: March 21, 2014, 05:05:26 AM »
Have to be honest.

This reporter was mistaken. She retracted everything. Another reason why they should stay in the kitchen. ;D


'My mistake and I own up to it': Phoenix reporter reverses course, says White House Press Secretary Jay Carney DOESN'T get daily briefing questions in advance.

'As a local journalist I had no issue providing my proposed question in advance,' she told MailOnline, 'because I wanted to make sure it was an appropriate q[uestion] for a national briefing and I wanted to make sure it was appropriate for Mr. Carney.'

'ut in discussing it with a staff member the night before, we decided I would save it for the president. I was attempting to not waste national time on a local question, but in my attempt at explaining that I unintentionally made it sound like that experience applied to everyone.'
'That is my mistake,' Anaya added, 'and I own up to it.'


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2585306/White-House-Press-Secretary-Jay-Carney-denies-TV-reporters-claim-gets-daily-briefing-questions-IN-ADVANCE.html#ixzz2wb86Z1h5
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Skip8282

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7004
Re: Obama Admn becoming even less transparent and open. AP
« Reply #8 on: March 21, 2014, 03:05:20 PM »
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/03/the-most-transparent-administration-cont-185401.html

The most transparent administration, cont

On Tuesday night, The New York Times reported that no reporters would be traveling with First Lady Michelle Obama to China, and that she would be giving no interviews while there. Nicholas Kristof, the Times columnist, called the First Lady's decision "a mistake," and said it "signals weakness or fear of coverage." Several conservative outlets picked up the Times report, including the influential Drudge Report, which linked to a Weekly Standard article about it.

Shortly after noon on Wednesday, I reached out to the First Lady's office to inquire about the decision. A spokesperson for the First Lady responded to my inquiry but declared the response "off the record," meaning I wasn't allowed to use the information therein. When I told the spokesperson that I needed a response I could use, the spokesperson replied with another off-the-record statement regarding the First Lady's trip.

The spokesperson then wrote, "If you need something attributable, you can take this on background from a White House official..."

The statement that followed did not address my original inquiry. Instead, it offered a formulaic explanation about "the power and importance of education" and "reaching people," followed by an explanation that the First Lady would participate in open press events and take questions online and in forums.

By now it was 5 p.m. ET, nearly five hours after my initial inquiry. When I told the spokesperson that I did not see why the quote needed to be anonymous and attributed to "a White House official," the spokesperson said if I needed something on the record I could refer to the First Lady's travel guidance and a transcript of a press call regarding the trip. These documents did not contain an answer to my question regarding why no reporters would be traveling with the First Lady.

Now, I'll leave frustration over Michelle Obama's trip to The New York Times, Nick Krisfof, The Weekly Standard and Drudge Report (a motley crew right there). What I want to know -- and what I've wanted to know since last October -- is why the spokesperson in the First Lady's office didn't want to give me a name I could put on a harmless, formulaic quote?




And the AP still shills for him.  Go figure.


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39425
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn becoming even less transparent and open. AP
« Reply #9 on: April 04, 2014, 08:15:43 AM »
Bump

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39425
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39425
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.