The following letter was sent to CDC Dec. 10, 2014.
The only response, which is below, was from the CDC public affairs office.
Dr. Thomas Frieden
Director
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Dr. Frieden:
Many journalists are extremely concerned
about the controls at CDC and other federal agencies that prohibit journalists
and staff members from communicating with each other unless they are under the
agency’s surveillance. In most cases these policies force reporters to go
through the public information officers before speaking to anyone.
No matter what the intent is, the
constraints have a powerful censoring impact, regularly stopping staff from
saying anything that might displease people above them or others in the
political structure.
In your recent Congressional testimony
you said in that your 30 years in public heath the only thing like the Ebola
threat was AIDS.
I was editor of The Nation’s
Health, the newspaper of the American Public Health Association, when AIDS
emerged.
You doubtlessly remember the political
atmosphere that threatened to suppress or mangle communication.
But that time was before the current
“censorship by PIO” constraints. Prohibitions against people communicating
without notifying the authorities would have astounded us.
CDC experts spoke to reporters fluidly,
often outside of official channels, in confidence if necessary. And that was
absolutely critical. Frankly, those educational sessions kept reporters from
being naive and dangerous.
The outtake below from my “Editor and
Publisher” op-ed refers to one moment when a highly placed CDC official went “on
background” and saved The Nation’s Health from obliviously printing
pernicious propaganda.
The Rise of Censorship by
PIO
Since the early1990s these constraints
have become a fact of life in our culture as businesses, all levels of
government, and others have adopted the staff-silencing rules. They are very
effective and inevitably have a huge deleterious impact on public health.
Employees are silenced in hospitals, schools, police departments and other
workplaces, some of which undoubtedly have occupational health
issues.
As indicated in the resources I will
send you in another email, the Society of Professional Journalists has recently
documented that these practices are now pervasive and most journalists see them
as serious constraints.
In July SPJ and the Society of
Environmental Journalists led 38 journalism and open government groups in
writing to President Obama about these and other constraints, saying the groups
consider them censorship. I was gratified in September to receive one of SPJ’s
“Sunshine Awards” for my work on this issue.
CDC’s Controls
Last July when you answered written
questions after you spoke at the National Press Club I asked why CDC now has
these prohibitions—given that for most of its history it did not—and why it
blocks reporters altogether at times.
You basically said CDC does not do this.
I do not doubt your sincerity. But
reporting reality is massively different.
CDC’s constraints, like those in a
number of agencies, became apparent in the early 1990s. They are not a secret.
PIOs and other staff often re-state the prohibitions.
The policies’ very existence chill or
eliminate many exchanges. People are barred from ever speaking to each other
confidentially. Fluid communication is killed as reporters must go through an
application process for each conversation. Delays are unmanageable because a few
PIOs are a bottleneck between thousands of people who should be talking to each
other. The mandated regimen hobbles journalists’ work just as it would
yours.
But beyond that, over time the process
has become deliberately suppressive. PIOs listen in on phone conversations. They
stop staff members from answering questions someone objects to. They sometimes
block communications with staff members altogether.
For example, in recent
years:
---PIOs blocked me, while I was
researching a story for pediatricians, from speaking to CDC experts about
newborn circumcision over my 20 requests during five weeks. I put out a press
release about the blockage, but never got to speak to any experts.
---A Florida reporter had done her
homework and knew who at CDC had worked in that state on one of the largest TB
outbreaks in recent times. CDC would not allow her to speak to those people,
saying the agency wanted the state to take the lead. The reporter did talk to
state people. But it’s essential to quality journalism that reporters talk to as
many people as feasible.
Note here: The Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention stopped communication about an infectious disease
outbreak because it had an idea on how information should be
controlled.
Criticality of Unauthorized
Information
As far back as we know, unauthorized
communication with reporters has been key in changing malicious circumstances,
including Watergate and the Tuskegee experiment. But on a more daily basis the
story is almost routinely different when reporters can talk to staff members
away from the controls--in addition to getting official information through
official channels.
To hinder that process keeps vital
information from even the people who institute the controls.
As someone whose graduate school was the
APHA and whose respect for CDC has never abated, I would appreciate talking to
you at any point. Journalists may be more at fault for letting this develop than
people in government. But if government and journalists keep it a secret between
us, it will debilitate all of us.
Kathryn Foxhall
301 779 8239
301 779 8239
Cc: Dr. Georges Benjamin,
Executive Director, the American Public
Health Association
Mr. John Donnelly
Freedom of Information Chair, Press
Freedom Committee
Dr. David Cuillier
Freedom of Information Chair, Society of
Professional Journalists
Dr. Shiriki Kumanyika
President-Elect, American Public
Health Association
Outake From Editor and Publisher Op-Ed
about an 1980s Incident
“The CDC expert recited the official
story for 30 minutes, saying everything was fine. But this was before CDC
clamped down with PR office censorship. Typical of that time, no one knew the
reporter and source person were speaking. So the reporter asked, “Doctor, is
there something you could tell me if your name weren’t attached to
it?”
“The expert exploded and it was like a
light switched on in a dark cave. He explained why people were going to die and
how it related to AIDS. He explained how the lab test network worked nationally,
which was public information, but the reporter had no time to ferret it out.
Congress did not understand it, either.
“Had that expert been tracked by the
PR office, like today, he would have stuck to the politically safe story–which
would have been completely accurate and completely misleading and muddling for
the reporter’s public health professional audience. That article would have been
the moral equivalent of throwing barriers in front of first responders. And the
reporter would have never known it.”
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2014 12:23
PM
Subject: RE: The Impact of Censorship at
CDC
Dear Ms.
Foxhall:
I’m responding to your Dec. 10 email to
the director and others regarding our public affairs policies and practices.
Thank you for contacting us again related to this important topic. CDC has a
written policy for media relations. A portion of that policy is contained
here.
Response to Media
Inquiries
In compliance with the Code of Conduct for CDC Media
Relations Employees policy for Release of
Information to News Media, CDC media relations employees are to be honest
and
accurate, respond promptly, and promote the free flow of
scientific and technical information. In its communication with the public and
the news media, CDC is committed to openness,
free
exchange of information and data, accuracy, timeliness,
and responsiveness. Further, CDC offers the widest practical and appropriate
dissemination of information about public
health
research, science, programs, and recommendations. In
keeping with the desire for a culture of openness, CDC employees may, consistent
with this policy, speak to members of the
press
about their work.
Speak on Official Work without
Interference from Media Communication or Policy
Office
CDC is committed to ensuring that all information
products authored by its staff members or published by CDC are released for
public use in a timely manner, are of the highest quality
and
are scientifically sound, technically accurate, and
useful to the intended audience (Clearance of
Information Products Disseminated Outside CDC for Public
Use). Consistent with policy
for
Release of
Information to News Media,
presenters at public events, such as conferences or meetings, may conduct
interviews with media regarding their presentation while on site
without
interference from CDC media employees.
CDC media relations employees will adhere to the
following code of conduct:
• Be honest and accurate in all
communications
• Honor publication
embargoes
• Respond promptly to media requests and respect media
deadlines
• Act promptly to correct the record or erroneous
information, when appropriate
• Promote the free flow of scientific and technical
information
• Protect non-public
information
CDC’s media relations guidance has received a grade of “A” from
the Union of Concerned Scientists, and CDC is one of very few government
organizations to be graded A. In addition, CDC’s Division of Public Affairs
(DPA) enjoys a robust exchange of ideas with members of various media
associations and regularly invites media to CDC’s headquarters for in-depth
briefings from its scientists about CDC’s work. We maintain a 24/7 process for
media queries.
What the CDC’s Division of Public Affairs does not do is require
CDC employees, including scientists, be interviewed by media. In instances were
subject matter experts are not available, DPA works to answer questions for
media or directs them to released and available information. A conservative
estimate is that more than 70,000 people meet the definition of “reporter or
media representative” and DPA is committed to a respectful exchange with any one
of them who may contact us in the course of their reporting. I’ve included CDC’s
communication principles which guides my division’s work. Staff are reminded of
these principles regularly. I hope this serves as a reminder of the role of the
public affairs specialist. We look forward to working with you on topics of
public health interest in the future.
Sincerely,
Barbara Reynolds
Director
Division of Public Affairs
CDC
