The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is calling all free information advocates to stand against major publishers they say are working to limit access to taxpayer-funded research through a program called CHORUS.

The Association of American Publishers proposed CHORUS (Clearinghouse for the Open Research of the United States) on June 5 as a way to help readers freely access full-text versions of all peer-review articles that report federally funded research.

But the EFF calls the proposal a “deceptive” way for publishers to control access to content and avoid losing profits from their traditional business model, which involves selling research-based articles back to scientists and institutions for a “massive profit.”

The publishers coalition hopes to have an initial proof of concept for CHORUS completed by August 30. In the meantime, the EFF is encouraging open access advocates to tell their representatives in Congress to support a different solution called the Fair Access to Science & Technology Research (FASTR) Act. Under FASTR, federally funded researchers must submit copies of the resulting journal articles to funding agencies that make the research freely available within six months, according to EFF.

California Public Records Act at stake

The fate of public records in California is in the hands of Gov. Jerry Brown this week, who is expected to sign Senate Bill 71, allowing local government agencies to sidestep key provisions in California’s Public Records Act, according to Southern California Public Radio KPCC.

According to an 11th hour “trailer bill” to the new state budget, agencies no longer have to explain why they are unable to meet records requests, and if they do meet the requests, they can provide data in the format of their choosing.

The California Department of Finance calls the decision a budget move that could save the state “tens of millions of dollars a year,” according to KPCC.

But in a letter calling for the governor to veto the “relevant portions” of the bill, Peter Scheer, executive director of the First Amendment Coalition, said the legislation will allow local authorities to cut off public access without reason and “ gut key transparency safeguards in California’s most important open-government law.”

Kara Hackett is SPJ’s Pulliam/Kilgore Freedom of Information intern, a freelance writer and a free press enthusiast. Contact her at khackett@spj.org or on Twitter: @KaraHackett.

There’s a little more sunshine in the Sunshine State after the 2013 legislative session passed an unusually high number of bills supported by Florida’s First Amendment Foundation (FAF). The FAF announced June 14 that the legislature passed 10 bills they supported, including a bill three years in the making that guarantees citizens the right to speak at government meetings and a transparency bill that requires Florida’s chief financial officer to post agency contacts online.

But the battle for more open government rages on as the legislature also passed 14 bills the FAF opposed and a dozen new exemptions limiting access to public records and open meetings. The running total of exemptions is now “well over 1,000,” according to the FAF.

New York shield law saves reporter from the stand

Thanks to the strong New York shield law, a New York Times freelancer will not be forced to testify about his personal observations involving the arrest of two Occupy Wall Street protesters.

Times freelancer Colin Moynihan wrote a blog post about the Jan. 10 arrest of two protesters who refused to leave Zuccotti Park. When the protesters said they were arrested without warning, city officials subpoenaed Moynihan to determine if the arrest was wrongful, according to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (RCFP). They claimed Moynihan was an “unbiased” witness, unlike other bystanders who would had an allegiance with either the police or the protesters.

But U.S. District Court Judge Jed S. Rakoff of New York ruled in an 8-page opinion on June 11 that a reporter’s personal observations are protected, like his notes, and a journalist cannot be forced to testify unless there are no alternative sources, according to RCFP.

Rakoff wrote: “Exempting firsthand observations from the scope of the reporter’s privilege would severely chill journalists from engaging in valuable firsthand reporting, such as performed by Moynihan here.”

Kara Hackett is SPJ’s Pulliam/Kilgore Freedom of Information intern, a freelance writer and a free press enthusiast. Contact her at khackett@spj.org or on Twitter: @KaraHackett.

As president of the University of Nevada, Las Vegas Society of Professional Journalists, I find myself in charge of planning quite a few events. When the time came to hold our first member meeting of the spring semester, I desperately needed ideas. While clicking on every link on the SPJ website, I ran across a copy of the organization’s mission.

Hoping for ideas, I read through it.

We’d held a meeting on service a few weeks earlier, and a First Amendment discussion seemed a little intense for the first meeting. (“Here’s your pizza and soda. Now, quick, which freedoms are guaranteed by the First Amendment?) I kept scrolling down — “foster excellence … inspire successive generations … encourage diversity in journalism.”

Diversity — now that I could work with.

The topic stood out. UNLV has consistently been ranked as one of the most diverse college campuses in the country. We have students from every walk of life. We represent numerous countries, religions, ethnicities — different genders and sexual orientations. It made sense for our chapter to ask: Where’s the diversity in the local journalism field? What role does that play in the politics of the newsroom, and is our news as inclusive as it should be?

Our board members went to work. We began planning and advertising a discussion on the diversity of our community and our local news market. I invited Antonio Planas of the Las Vegas Review-Journal and Chris Saldaña, a local broadcast news personality, to be our speakers.

On the day of, I was nervous. Our meeting didn’t have a huge turnout; I blamed myself for picking a Friday morning meeting date and expecting college kids to be awake. The members who were there, however, wanted to get the meeting going, and our speakers said the students deserved their attention.

We didn’t draw in a classroom full of students, but our speakers made such a tremendous impact upon the students who did attend.

Planas and Saldaña played off of each other so well. They discussed their own experiences as Hispanic journalists covering the news. They talked about missteps by reporters in covering our city’s diverse population, and they told us to embrace our own diversity and bring it to our reporting.

UNLV’s SPJ Chapter had broadcast news journalist Chris Saldaña and reporter Antonio Planas visit to discuss diversity in the news.

They described efforts to make colleagues aware of potentially offensive characterizations of minorities, but they also described how important it is for all groups to participate in the discussion on diversity.

They asked each student: Who are you, and what kind of diversity do you bring to the table?

I’ll admit it: I sometimes have a hard time speaking up in a newsroom full of much more experienced writers. Saldaña and Planas assured me that my opinion could help shed light on an overlooked group. It’s better to speak up, they said, than to be embarrassed by an inaccurate story or have your news organization appear out of touch.

They emphasized that we as journalists must examine the diversity of our environment, especially in a state with such an increasingly diverse population.

As student SPJ leaders, we try to bring the lessons SPJ emphasizes to the attention of our campus. We want members to get a taste of the professional world, but we also hope they’ll discover a bit of the kind of journalist they’d like to be. Our speakers that day helped us accomplish our goal.

Our attendees stayed afterward to discuss how they felt about the panel. Our small group of students could now raise questions, share its views with others.

Most importantly, the discussion could keep going, and that meant more to us than anything.

(Pashtana Usufzy/UNLV SPJ President organized this event earlier this Spring)

First of all, the EIJ family is growing. This year the gathering is three times the conference: a partnership between the Society of Professional Journalists, the Radio Television Digital News Association, and the National Association of Hispanic Journalists.

• Excellence in Journalism 2013 homepage

That means more opportunities than ever to network, learn, connect, and grow in our profession.

If you are on the fence about going, consider the following highlights:

• Additions and improvements to the Expo
• New U Loft, a two-day boot camp experience that uniquely increases the number of diverse idea-makers in media
• Breakout sessions to up your game: Including, broadcast freelancing; newsroom leadership; digging deeper with social media
• Documentary screening and Q&A with Ray Suarez, senior correspondent, PBS NewsHour
• Career profile critiques
• …and so much more!

In case you didn’t know, Excellence in Journalism is one of the biggest bargains in conference-land. You can choose between two kinds of registration. 

Al a carte

• Professional members of SPJ, RTDNA and NAHJ who register by July 15 pay $205 
• Student members who pay by July 15 pay $155

Packages

• Professional members of SPJ, RTDNA and NAHJ who register by July 15 pay $310
• Student members who pay by July 15 pay $260

Read about what’s included for each option!

AND, there’s more:

• EIJ 2012 recap
• Why join SPJ?
• Getting to Anaheim 
• Connect with other conference-goers via Twitter with #EIJ13
• Check out the Facebook page

In the past, that would have meant bringing in your own portable photocopier or one of those 110 spy cameras like they show in old movies on late-night TV. But today, with high-resolution digital cameras, cellphone cameras and tablet computers, it’s really easy.

So easy that Durango, Colo., wants to outlaw it.

The Durango Herald reports the city is going to vote on an ordinance Tuesday to bar records requesters from taking pictures of the documents they are seeking. City Clerk Amy Philips said the practice is costing the city money, in that the staff takes time to assemble “the records and let people come in and observe the records and tag which ones they want copies of, but we’re finding out now that people are able to come in with a phone and just (photograph) the copies.

“Then we don’t retrieve the money we spent.”

Along with banning photography, the city is planning to charge people $30 an hour for records requests to cover staff time spent filling the request on top of the 25-cent fee for copies.

The Durango City Council will vote on the proposal at the June 17 meeting.

We saw a similar argument in Utah, when that state’s legislature pushed through a bill gutting the state’s Government Records Access and Management Act. One of the changes it proposed was to add overhead costs — employee benefits, building utilities, rent, etc. — to the fees charged for records.

There are a couple problems with calls to “recoup” fees for public documents.

The fees charged for copying usually go well above and beyond the actual costs. When adding the costs of paper, toner and depreciation on the photocopier, the actual cost is about 1.5 cents per copy, which explains how copy centers can charge 7 cents a copy and stay in business.

I’ve personally seen a 911 dispatch center in Utah charge $20 for a recording of an emergency call on a compact disc. Depending on where you shop, a CD can cost about 25 cents a copy, and if Apple can get away with selling songs for 99 cents, a $1.25 would be a reasonable cost.

As far as the employees’ time, filling a records request, especially if it is a request that benefits the public, is just part of their job, which the public is already paying for through their taxes. Essentially, a records requester is being asked to pay twice for the same employee.

High fees can be used as a tool to deny access, especially for people of modest means.

A real-life example of this happened when the Utah Democratic Party sought records and correspondence releated to the Republican-dominated Legislature’s redistricting efforts. The Legislature charged them almost $15,000 for three boxes.

Officials only backed down when media outlets asked for the records.

A records fee could be justified in cases where a business is making the request solely for self-interest. But bureaucrats shouldn’t use public records as a revenue stream.

Many Chinese have taken to China’s version of Twitter, called Weibo, posting the leaker’s old modeling photos (turns out Snowden had a brief modeling stint). On a Weibo survey, 78 percent of respondents see Snowden as “freedom fighter who is protecting civil liberties,” ABC reports.

Snowden first told the Guardian he chose Hong Kong for his hideout because “they have a spirited commitment to free speech and the right of political dissent.”

And the results of the Weibo survey make it look like he’s safe, considering only three percent of respondents support turning him over to the U.S. government, ABC News said.

But even though it looks like China has taken a liking to Snowden, the nation has little patience with the U.S. as a whole since U.S. efforts to hack Chinese correspondence creates a “double standard” after the U.S. complained about Chinese hacking in May.

According to the Guardian, China said U.S. surveillance is testing Sino-U.S. ties and straining an already “soured relationship” on cybersecurity.

Kara Hackett is SPJ’s Pulliam/Kilgore Freedom of Information intern, a freelance writer and a free press enthusiast. Contact her at khackett@spj.org or on Twitter: @KaraHackett.

A Fox News reporter is seeking protection from being forced to reveal her sources in Colorado court under New York’s shield law, according to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.

Fox News reporter Jana Winter was subpoenaed in January for a July 25 story she wrote about the Colorado movie theater massacre last summer involving two anonymous law enforcement sources.

A five-judge panel heard the case on June 12 when Winter’s attorney argued that she should not be forced to reveal her sources because even though she was reporting in Colorado, she lives and works in New York, and is therefore protected under New York’s shield law, which provides “absolute privilege for journalists’ confidential sources and reporting materials,” RCFP said.

The attorneys for the accused shooter James Holmes subpoenaed Winter, saying the law enforcement sources violated Holmes’ right to a fair trial by telling Winter about his notebook allegedly filled with drawings of the planned shooting.

With the help of a Colorado judge in January, the attorneys got Justice Larry Stephan of Manhattan to sign-off on a subpoena, and Winter’s attorney, Dori-Ann Hanswirth, filed papers to appeal Stephan’s decision to sign, according to Fox News.

Since Stephan signed, Winter had to attend a Colorado hearing in April to determine whether Holmes’s notebook qualifies as evidence in the case. Winter is scheduled to reappear before the court in August, and if the notebook is ruled a “substantial issue,” she will be ordered to reveal her sources lest she face time in jail for contempt of court, according to RCFP.

But the New York court’s decision from Wednesday’s hearing may save her if they rule that Stephan should not have signed-off on the subpoena in the first place. Hanswirth told RCFP she is hopeful the New York court will decide before August.

Snowden under fire from both sides of party lines, NSA director speaks out

Two senior Republican lawmakers raised vague, yet alarming concerns that terrorists are already changing their tactics now that the NSA surveillance programs are unveiled.

Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich) said there are “changes we can already see being made by the folks who wish to do us harm, and our allies harm,” and Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Georgia) of the Senate Intelligence Committee said those “changes” might even cost American lives, according to Yahoo.

“His disclosures are ultimately going to lead to us being less safe in America because bad guys will be able to figure out a way around some of the methods we use, and it’s likely to cost lives down the road,” Chambliss said.

Alexander defended NSA’s intelligence programs as legal and necessary. But he did admit concern that junior employees like Snowden can access so many national security secrets and said that issue needs to be addressed.

“This individual was a system administrator with access to key parts of the network,” he said. “This is something we have to fix.”

Kara Hackett is SPJ’s Pulliam/Kilgore Freedom of Information intern, a freelance writer and a free press enthusiast. Contact her at khackett@spj.org or on Twitter: @KaraHackett.

Seattle Times reporter Mike Carter (courtesy of Mike Carter)

Mike Carter is proud to call himself a watchdog at The Seattle Times.

After all, they’re an endangered breed in U.S. newsrooms, where tight budgets mean tighter leashes on reporters likely to rack up hefty legal fees in their investigations and exposures.

But in his latest bout to obtain public information from the Seattle Police Department, Carter earned $20,000 for the Times without ever setting foot in court.

After a quest for a police memorandum lingered on for 11 months, Carter learned the department purposefully withheld it from the Times, violating Washington’s Public Records Act, so the police paid the Times a settlement to avoid a lawsuit.

Even so, Carter says when it comes to purging public information from government agencies and law enforcement, it’s never about the money.

“It’s a principle sort of thing,” Carter said.

On May Day 2012, a day of violent workers’ rights demonstrations, Carter and fellow reporter Steve Miletich were on the story, and by 11 a.m. Carter could tell the police weren’t prepared.

Earlier that morning, Assistant Chief Mike Sanford intercepted control of police operations and confused officers when he limited how much pepper spray they could use. He also told them not to make any arrests in the uproarious crowd.

As a noontime march grew increasingly violent, protesters tore through traffic, smashing storefronts and car windows with sticks.

When the police arrived, Sanford further complicated matters by charging the crowd in his business attire— white button up, black pants and dress shoes—without any protective gear.

Seattle Police carry off a participant in a May Day rally near Pike Place Market on May 1, 2012. (photo by John Lok)

He was assaulted, and other officers had to use force to rescue him, upsetting the community that the police’s own officer diverted their attention from protesters pillaging the streets.

Having reported on the police department since 2000, Carter knew Seattle Police Precinct Capt. Joe Kessler would be furious. At the time of the protests, Seattle police were already under the watchful eye of the Justice Department for their “unnecessary and excessive” use of force in a series of 2009-2010 incidents. Mishandling May Day only made matters worse.

Sources told Carter that Kessler sent a scathing internal memorandum to two police officers criticizing the department’s rash actions.

As more sources mentioned the “Kessler memo,” Carter began to see it as the missing puzzle piece the public needed to understand how their law enforcement had failed them.

Since it was subject to public disclosure, he was determined to wrestle it free from the control of police who held it out of view.

After SPD Chief John Diaz mentioned the memo, Carter and Miletich published an article on July 23, 2012 telling the public everything he knew about it. Carter purposefully filed a public disclosure request the same day.

“We wanted to amp the pressure up and shake the memo loose,” Carter said.

Sources told him the memo was only addressed to deputy chiefs Nick Metz and Clark Kimerer, so when Carter filed for disclosure, he cast a net “clearly intended to capture the Kessler memo,” asking for all emails, attachments, documents and memoranda involving May Day planning and response from all SPD captains and lieutenants involved.

He thought it would be easy to get because there’s no exemption in the Public Records Act for embarrassment.

“That’s what the Kessler memo was—embarrassment,” Carter said. “They had a captain being specifically critical of his superior over what could be called a debacle in their department.”

According to protocol, the department sent him a letter July 30 acknowledging they’d received his request, but they twice delayed their deadline to disclose the information until Sept. 17.

That’s when the documents started pouring in.

For the next eight months, Carter and Miletich combed through pages upon pages of tangled email strings and repetitive police reports. But the Kessler memo was still missing.

Carter suspected the police were waiting to reveal the memo until they filed their own (long overdue) after action report to counterbalance bad press the memo might arouse.

But when the SPD finally released their report on April 3, 2013, the Kessler memo never came.

Instead, Carter got an email from the department, saying they had fulfilled his request, and they were closing it.

At first he thought it was a mistake.

“I thought they forgot because I could not believe they were not going to actually give it to me,” Carter said.

He filed an email appeal with Diaz that morning, and when he confronted Diaz at a city council meeting that afternoon, the officer admitted the department intentionally withheld the memo. He sent Carter a copy later that day.

“But at that point, the damage had been done,” Carter said. “They were in clear violation of the law.”

That’s when decisions about the newspaper’s next steps fell to Seattle Times Executive Editor David Boardman, who met with  First Amendment attorney Eric Stahl and Times investigations editor James Neff.

“We came to the very quick conclusion that we couldn’t let the SPD get away with it,” Boardman said. “It was so blatant that we really had to call them on it.”

The Times sent a letter of intent to the police department on May 9 telling them they had a choice: either they could pay a $20,000 settlement or the Times would take them to court.

Boardman said the SPD was “quickly responsive and surprisingly open.” They worked with the Times’ attorney to pay the fee.

“We were not interested in asking for that amount of money to enrich us in any way or make tax payers angry with us,” Boardman said. “But we did want a big enough number to pay (potential) legal bills and send a clear message to the department that said, ‘You can’t get away with this. Don’t do it again.’”

Boardman gives credit to the Times’ owners for never shying away from costly legal disputes.

He said stories like Carter’s and Miletich’s are every news organization’s best defense against government agencies and public employees unions who are always looking to limit public access to records and free information.

“We’re able to pull out important investigative stories and successfully fight off those changes,” Boardman said. “We tell them, ‘You can’t do that because then we can’t tell these stories.’”

Kara Hackett is SPJ’s Pulliam/Kilgore Freedom of Information intern, a freelance writer and a free press enthusiast. Contact her at khackett@spj.org or on Twitter: @KaraHackett.

The Judicial Watch, a public-interest watchdog group, reported June 12 that it recently acquired documents through a FOIA request that revealed the federal government isn’t complying with current immigration enforcement laws and regulations.

An anonymous whistle-blower within a federal law enforcement agency alerted Judicial Watch that the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services has been undermining America’s national security by replacing required background checks on undocumented immigrants with costly “lean and lite” procedures since late 2012. The USCIS allegedly adopted these “haphazard” procedures to keep up with the influx of amnesty applications under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) that gives undocumented immigrants a two-year deferment from deportation. The Watch said their FOIA documents prove that background checks on immigrants seeking “deferred status” do not measure up to Immigration and National Security Act (INA) standards.

The Watch filed a FOIA request with the Homeland Security Department on Oct. 26, asking for “all communications, memoranda, emails, policy guidance, directives, initiatives and other correspondence respecting the scope and extent of background checks to be performed (or not) on aliens applying to the Obama administration’s DACA program.”

And the Watch isn’t the only group seeking more information related to  immigration. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and a team of San Diego news organizations asked a federal judge on June 12 to break the seal on information about an undocumented immigrant who died after he was beaten and Tasered by Border Patrol agents, according to the San Diego Union-Tribune.

In May, the agent’s attorneys asked the judge to seal the filings, and the government supported the request to prevent exposing the policies and procedures of Customs and Border Protection. But the ACLU said the cost of civil liberties in this case is too high, so they’re protesting the seal to “protect the public’s interest in open and transparent proceedings in cases involving serious questions of official misconduct,” the Union-Tribune said.

“The defendants’ extraordinary request to allow this case to proceed under full seal due to unspecified and unproven ‘security concerns’ violates both the First Amendment and the common law right of access to judicial records,” David Loy, legal director of the ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties, told the Union-Tribune. “Openness in judicial proceedings is essential to creating public trust in the legitimacy of the proceedings. In this case, defendants have not met the strict standard for cutting public access to the court record.”

Kara Hackett is SPJ’s Pulliam/Kilgore Freedom of Information intern, a freelance writer and a free press enthusiast. Contact her at khackett@spj.org or on Twitter: @KaraHackett. – See more at blogs.spjnetwork.org/foi

The department told congressional investigators on June 10 it hasn’t questioned an agency’s decision to withhold information under a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) exemption for four years, and when confronted about its own outdated FOIA regulations, it didn’t respond for four months, according to the Washington Free Beacon.

A National Security Archive government-wide audit in December revealed that 56 federal agencies failed to update their FOIA regulations after Attorney General Eric Holder issued a memorandum requesting an update in 2009.

Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) even noted the DOJ’s own regulations have not been updated since 2003.

But when Issa and Cummings called this to the DOJ’s attention in a February letter, the DOJ did not respond until June.

Principal deputy assistant attorney general Peter Kadzik wrote a letter to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on June 10, saying the DOJ has not determined any FOIA exemptions improper since the Obama administration’s first year in office.

But the Free Beacon notes that Kadzik’s letter did not acknowledge Issa and Cumming’s findings that in 2011 alone, the DOJ fully denied 30,000 FOIA requests and partially denied another 171,000 requests. It also used exemption 5 to deny more FOIA requests even though the Justice Department itself notes that this exemption is riddled with “somewhat opaque language.”

An August 2012 Washington Post analysis showed the number of FOIA requests fully denied due to exemptions rose more than 10 percent last year, from 22,834 to 25,636. But free information isn’t the only thing at stake when the government issues exemptions, tax payers dollars are often dished out to cover costly legal fees when news organizations and other information requesters file FOIA lawsuits against the federal government.

The Free Beacon reports that the number of FOIA lawsuits has “increased dramatically under the Obama administration,” even compared to his tight-lipped predecessor.

The Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) compared the last two years of President George W. Bush’s second term to the last two years of President Obama’s first term and found that FOIA lawsuits increased by 28 percent. The DOJ alone faced 50 percent more FOIA lawsuits, according to TRAC reports.

But in his letter to Issa and Cummings, Kadzik defended federal agencies, saying they have taken  “concrete steps to improve their FOIA administration.” The Free Beacon notes that the DOJ plans to publish its new FOIA guidelines later this year.

Kara Hackett is SPJ’s Pulliam/Kilgore Freedom of Information intern, a freelance writer and a free press enthusiast. Contact her at khackett@spj.org or on Twitter: @KaraHackett. – See more at blogs.spjnetwork.org/foi

Arizona open records laws may be under attack if the legislature passes a bill that threatens to limit the number of information requests a person can file, according to the Arizona Daily Sun. Currently, Arizona law says records must be “open to inspection by any person at all times during office hours.” But Yuma City Records Coordinator Susan Alden told the Daily Sun this law requires long hours for staffers to meet multiple, broad records requests. Even so, she said there is ”less need to limit the number of requests someone can submit in a period time,” and more need to allow agencies to charge for research time.

Wisconsin FOI Council calls out organization for labeling their own records private

The Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council is challenging a national federalism and conservative public policy organization for exchanging documents with government officials through private online drop boxes and labeling its own materials with disclaimers saying they are not subject to the Wisconsin open records law, according to the Beloit Daily News.

Michael Bowman, senior director of policy and strategic initiatives for the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), said the organization publicizes its final policy decisions. But until then it keeps documents secret so they aren’t mistaken for final policy, the Daily New reported.

The group also uses drop box to exchange documents instead of email because it thinks drop box files are not subject to public records.

But the Freedom of Information Council scoffs at these practices, coming alongside Madison-based Center for Media and Democracy that filed a lawsuit June 6 seeking ALEC’s materials related to a Republican state senator.

“A stamp by a private non-governmental group saying the records that it shares with lawmakers are not subject to open records laws should carry no weight,” Bill Lueders, president of the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council, told the Daily News.  “Absolutely none.”

Pennsylvania county conceals records for controller charged with felony

A Pennsylvania county denied the Citizens’ Voice news organization’s open records request for a county controller’s email records because he was arrested on felony electronic-surveillance charges, and he allegedly violated the state’s wiretap law, according to the Citizens’ Voice.

The Voice requested copies of the controller’s emails from January to May 2013 and from Jan. 1, 2012 to April 30, 2012, but said on June 11 that they were denied by Luzerne County because the controller “is under criminal and non-criminal investigations.”

The Citizens’ Voice said it plans to file appeals to the state Office of Open Records claiming that it is implausible that all of the controller’s emails are exempt from the Right To Know Law.

Kara Hackett is SPJ’s Pulliam/Kilgore Freedom of Information intern, a freelance writer and a free press enthusiast. Contact her at khackett@spj.org or on Twitter: @KaraHackett. – See more at blogs.spjnetwork.org/foi

On the morning of June 11, Snowden’s whereabouts were still unknown, but Hong Kong newspapers plastered with his image called him the “World’s Most Wanted Man.”

Fox News reports that if the Justice Department catches and charges Snowden, it’s likely to ask the International Criminal Police Organization (Interpol) for “a provisional request to arrest him pending extradition to the United States.”

Meanwhile a community of whistle-blowers spouted praise for Snowden in a series of letters published June 10 on the Guardian, commending his courage in revealing himself and standing up to one of the world’s most powerful security agencies.

In related news, The Center for Public Integrity collected disclosure records that revealed the judge who signed the court order requiring Verizon to give its customers’ telephone records to the NSA went to a seminar on strong executive branch powers in August 2008.

U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson attended lectures about the balance of civil liberties and national security, especially in times of terror, at the “Terrorism, Civil Liberty, & National Security” seminar sponsored by the Foundation for Research on Economics and the Environment (FREE).

Vinson began his term on the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in 2006, and it just expired in May.

Although Americans are largely divided about whether NSA’s surveillance is warranted to protect national security, The Atlantic published a provocative article June 7 urging Americans to consider the potential abuses of power that could ensue if a dictator seizes control of our current security infrastructure in the 2016 election.

Politics writer Conor Friedersdorf said Americans are too trusting of their own leaders and too fearful of potential terror threats that may or may not be real. But he said there is one very real threat to American security: Citizens giving up our Constitutional rights and liberties to presidents we trust, creating a dangerous precedent for when someone we may not even know now inherits those same presidential powers in the future.

“In less than four years, an unknown person will start presiding over the national-security state. He or she will be an ambitious power seeker who will guiltlessly misrepresent his or her character to appeal to different voters, lie countless times on the campaign trail, and break numerous promises while in office. That’s a best-case scenario that happens every time!”

Kara Hackett is SPJ’s Pulliam/Kilgore Freedom of Information intern, a freelance writer and a free press enthusiast. Contact her at khackett@spj.org or on Twitter: @KaraHackett.

1)      Writing in my pajamas:  I write in my pajamas…sometimes, maybe 10% of the time, but only because I get up in the middle of the night to write down an idea before I lose it. After working on a story all day, I sometimes get stuck on the lede, but once I go to sleep, my creativity percolates and the lede writes itself. I have to capture it before I lose it, and that often happens when I’m in my pajamas. The rest of the time I’m dressed for the day, just like everyone else.

2)      Daily naps:  Yes, I take a nap almost every day, and I won’t apologize for it. I need my naps to recharge after the early morning dashes to my computer, and sometimes just to give my brain a rest from writing, editing, researching and managing the day-to-day tasks that go along with owning a business. In addition, I have to adjust my schedule to other time zones, which sometimes means I have to be up as early as 4 a.m. PST for early morning calls with my East Coast friends and colleagues, but still be available to editors and clients on the West Coast after 5 p.m. PST.

3)      Four-day weeks: Ha! I wish. I usually work at least a five-day week, taking Fridays and Saturdays off, but any freelancer knows you work when you need to. Some days I’ll put in 12 to 14 hours, others maybe only six, but this usually spreads out over at least five days a week, and often more. And let’s not even talk about vacations. What?!!

4)      Netflix:  I’ll confess. I do watch Netflix sometimes, but only after 5 p.m. PST and only if my writing and editing work is done. I watch old episodes of Mad Men while I’m doing my bookkeeping, filing, planning for the next day or other tasks that don’t require 100% of my attention. It’s my reward after a long day. Sometimes this down time even includes a glass of wine.

5)      Facebook games:  If I am in the office all day, I typically have Facebook and Twitter open on a separate monitor on my desktop. This allows me to monitor activity on my iLoveKent and Virtually Yourz pages, but also to keep up with the day’s news and to connect with my freelance friends (see my previous post on fostering freelance relationships). I play the occasional game, but it doesn’t amount to more than 10 minutes every couple of weeks. And when I’m writing or editing, I shut everything down – Facebook, Twitter, email, cell phone, etc.

To my non-freelance, non-business owner friends, I agree with you – I *am* lucky. I wouldn’t trade my freelance life for any “day job,” but it isn’t as easy as it looks. It requires long hours, the occasional sleepless night and a heck of a lot of work. Now if you’ll excuse me, I have a date with my pillow…

____________________________________________________________

Based in the Seattle area, Dana Neuts of Virtually Yourz has been a freelance journalist for 10 years, specializing in business, feature and community writing. She is also the publisher of iLoveKent.net, which won a 2nd place award in the 2012 NW Excellence in Journalism contest for “Best Online Community Engagement.” She was named Regional Director of the Year in 2012, is currently serving as the national SPJ Secretary/Treasurer and will run for President-Elect in August 2013. Follow her on Twitter @VirtuallyYourz and @SPJDana.

Summer is right around the corner, and while we journalists may not have the luxury of a summer vacation, we still love to read voraciously.

Here’s a quick list of books every journalist will appreciate over the next few hot months.

• Public Editor #1 by Daniel Okrent: This collection of columns from the New York Times’ first public editor unmasks some of the inner workings of the Grey Lady. The book dives into universal newsroom issues every journalist can appreciate.
• The Elements of Style by William Strunk Jr. and E.B. White: You knew this one was coming. The book is standard among journalism curriculum and college English classes. As reporters and editors, we need to embrace the lessons in this little book. Worth reading annually!
• Fear and Loathing: On the Campaign Trail ’72 by Hunter Thompson: Thompson’s unique style may have inspired more than a few to pursue journalism. Tim McMahan, columnist at Omaha’s alternative weekly The Reader, wrote, “Every young journalist had a copy of Fear of Loathing in Las Vegas wedged in his/her milk-crate bookcase, or better yet, Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail ’72.” This was definitely true in my case. On the Campaign Trail is a collage of quality political writing and bizarre anecdotes that may or not be true. Truly gonzo journalism at its best, and worth visiting as often (if not more often) than Strunk and White’s classic – though that’s just one person’s opinion.

What other books should journalists read this summer? Let us know in the comments!

Rob McLean is a Digital Managing Editor with Hearst Television. He has been a member of the Society of Professional Journalists since 2010 and a member of the Online News Association since 2012. Interact on Twitter: @robertmclean.

What’s the easiest way to do this? Ever since Follow Friday Helper shut down, #FF has turned into Copy and Paste Friday. Here’s a few simple steps to make managing your #FF lists a bit easier.

1. Make a list: By making a list of handles that you wish to include in your #FF Tweet. Make sure to group handles by organizations, similar interests, specialties, etc. (ex: #GENJ).

2. Store a copy: Make sure the list is saved somewhere easily accessible to you (on a desktop, in notes on your phone, etc.)

3. Schedule, schedule, SCHEDULE!: Draft your tweet with the handles you intend to
include for that week’s #FF, and schedule using Hootsuite or another service. It’ll save you a lot of time and aggravation (Trust me on this).

Post written by: Claudia Amezcua is a Freelance Multimedia Journalist based in Los Angeles. She is a proud graduate of California State University, Fullerton with a degree in Communications. On her free time, Ms. Amezcua publishes “A Chicks Guide 2 Sports” that aims to help women better understand the world of sports and claudiaamezcua.com where she chronicles her life as a journalist. Connect with her @ClaudiaAmezcua_. 

Was interviewed by Michael Catalini of National Journal about the chilling effect of the Justice Department’s seizure of the AP’s phone records and the surveillance of FoxNews’ James Rosen. Also talked about the resurrection of the Shield Law bills.

Spoke with Christina Couch of bankrate.com about why, in some respects, journalist may be one of the “worst” occupations, but “still is the best damned job on the planet.”

Also, Global Journalist, a program on public radio station KBIA in Columbia, Mo., interviewed me about the Justice Department’s targeting of journalists’ phone records and other data in the administration’s zeal to prosecute leakers of classified information. Also talked a bit about the resurrection of the Shield Law bills.

Onward!

Jelly Bean Neuts

If I’m writing or editing, I’m likely alone in my home office which suits me just fine. Of course, I’m not truly alone then. Jelly Bean, my favorite eight-pound source of inspiration, is always there if I need a friendly face or just a break, and her siblings, Sammy and Ginger, are always handy with a meow or a purr to cheer me on.

When I need to feel a part of something bigger, or need human contact, I work at Starbucks or downtown at my favorite bakery. And when I really need to feel connected, I visit with friends online. I also connect with my freelance friends at local networking events. It might be at an event sponsored by SPJ or Media Bistro, or a meet-up that friends threw together to keep in touch. Regardless, I am only as lonely as I want to be.

For me, this ability to stay connected is crucial to my success, but also to my sanity. While I don’t miss cubicle life, I do miss seeing friends every day and being able to blow off steam when I need to. I make sure I maintain that camaraderie for myself but also to support my freelance friends. These relationships offer an intangible source of comfort and advice, as well as potential project leads. Even more importantly though, we are here to encourage each other.

Just last week, I talked to Anna Pratt, a fellow freelancer and member of SPJ’s freelance committee, to catch up. I asked her what her dream project is and how it was coming along. We both discovered that, while we have ideas, projects or stories we might want to work on “some day,” we need someone else to check in with us, to see how it’s going and to push us when we get stuck. We also like having someone to talk to about issues like collecting late payments, finding more work or firing clients.

• Stay connected offline through networking
• Stay connected online – Facebook, Twitter, Linked In, Tumblr, etc.
• Support and encourage each other

So even though we may work in a solitary environment at times, we are never truly alone. We have ways to connect with each other, virtually and face-to-face, and we should foster freelance relationships to support each other. It makes the freelance life so much more fun.

How do you support your freelance friends? I’d love to hear how you stay connected.

—————————————————————

Based in the Seattle area, Dana Neuts of Virtually Yourz has been a freelance journalist for 10 years, specializing in business, feature and community writing. She is also the publisher of iLoveKent.net, which won a 2nd place award in the 2012 NW Excellence in Journalism contest for “Best Online Community Engagement.” Dana is currently serving as the national SPJ Secretary/Treasurer and will run for President-Elect in August 2013. Follow her on Twitter @VirtuallyYourz and @SPJDana.

SPJ is gearing up again to fight for a federal shield law to protect journalists and their sources from unwarranted snooping by government prosecutors and other lawyers.

In case you missed it, the Obama administration suddenly decided last Wednesday that it’s a good time to get Congress to resurrect the Shield Law legislation that languished unloved in 2010 after getting Senate Judiciary Committee approval.

This came after the Justice Department revealed on May 13 that it had secretly obtained the outgoing and incoming phone-call records for 20 lines at the Associated Press offices in Washington, New York and Hartford, Conn. AP wasn’t the target of the probe; the feds were trying to determine who leaked some allegedly classified information.

A shield law probably wouldn’t have stopped the Justice Department’s fishing expedition, but it might have required the Attorney General to get a judge to approve — and maybe even narrow the scope — of the subpoena.

Regardless, late last week Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.) and Reps. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), Ted Poe (R-Texas) and Trey Radel (R-Fla.) introduced separate bills in the Senate and the House that would create the Free Flow of Information Act of 2013. The bills are based on similar legislation that won House approval twice in 2009 and 2010 and won committee approval in the Senate in 2009.

Now, here’s where members of SPJ come in.

In the coming days, we’ll be updating our shield law page with contact information for members of the U.S. Senate. We’ll be asking SPJ leaders and members to reach out to their senators and encourage them to vote for the FFIA. We’ll be sending out suggested talking points. And we’ll be keeping track of which lawmakers stand with us on this vital issue.

So stay tuned to spj.org and watch your inboxes for further details and rallying cries.

My mom is originally from Florida, so I tell myself this beach obsession is perfectly healthy, that it’s probably in my DNA. Isn’t there a story I can sell that would require some quality time at the beach? But before I pack my flip-flops and sunscreen, I’m starting to consider that maybe I need to dedicate some wall space in my home office, a small sunroom, to my now not-so-secret preoccupation. (‘I think, therefore I am,’ right?) After all, I’m looking for a little creative boost.

Often, books about freelancing will tell you to set up a specific space to do business — somewhere you can define the separation between church and state (or, in this case, home and work). Many experienced writers will tell you not to let your desk get cluttered, so you’re not expending too much mental energy on simple tasks, like looking for a certain scrap of paper or a working pen. Which is all good advice. But beyond those practicalities (and feng shui), what about some inspiration for the in-between times, when you’re collecting your thoughts, not necessarily racing to meet a deadline? Here are a few ideas to get you going:

Get organized, but don’t be afraid to show some personality. It helps to have a certain spot for everything you need, such as supplies, notebooks, mail and the like, plus a clear surface to write on. But that doesn’t mean it has to be boring or staid. Don’t be afraid to make your office your own. Maybe this means reusing some household items that are in storage instead of heading to the office supply store. For example, a plant stand can hold a printer, and a small, hard-case carry-on piece of luggage can hold notebooks. Or, maybe you want to create your own personal ocean/beach wall project.

‘Surround yourself with good things.’ This piece of advice from a painting professor in college has stuck with me. It could be as simple as having your favorite coffee cup close at hand or beautiful writing utensils or notebooks or planners. I’ve found that I like to hand-write my to-do list with my favorite Uniball pens. You might also spruce up the place with a hearty plant, colorful artwork, a funny comic or all of the above. It sounds like a no-brainer, but it’s easy to forget about the positive charge we can get from something we find aesthetically-pleasing or meaningful. Speaking of which, here’s a Pinterest board devoted to cool workspaces, big and small.

If you have room, add another seating area to change things up. Sometimes I just need to change my position to get a different take on a piece. At times when I’ve been staring at my computer screen for too long, it helps to print out the story and go read it elsewhere. I have an end table with a vintage lamp and a cozy chair in the opposite corner of my sunroom/office, which seems to work well for when I need to switch things up a bit.

It’s easy to dismiss these kinds of details, especially in the hubbub of the day-to-day, but paying attention to our work environment can help us get more done. I guess this means I’d better hurry up and figure out what I’m doing with my beach wall. Until I can afford the real thing, that will have to do.

Do you have other ideas or a beautiful office that helps you stay productive? Please feel free to share them with us! Also, check out SPJ’s “Desk Love” Tumblr here.

Anna Pratt (Twitter @annapratt) Email

As a staff reporter-turned-freelance journalist, Anna Pratt, who lives in Minneapolis, Minn., has ventured into garbage houses, spent the night in a homeless shelter and witnessed a fistfight in a church basement, all for various stories. Over the past nine years, her byline has appeared in the Star Tribune, The Line, the Southwest Journal, the Minnesota Independent and several suburban and community papers, web publications and broadcast media in the Twin Cities. She’s had many beats, including education, community news, business, development, arts, civil/human rights and immigration. Pratt chairs the programming committee for the award-winning Minnesota Pro Chapter of SPJ and she’s running for president-elect of the chapter. She also serves on the organization’s national programming committee. To read more, visitannaprattjournalist.com.

During a local SPJ discussion about legislation affecting Arkansas’ Freedom of Information Act in March, state Sen. Eddie Joe Williams (R-Cabot) told the gathered journalists that FOI is not a right but a privilege.

Members of the audience objected to Williams’ characterization of FOI laws as a privilege. One young journalist said it disturbed her to hear freedom of information described as a privilege, “when it’s a tool that protects a variety of rights.”

But it seems Williams may have just been presaging the retrograde thinking evident in Monday’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling in McBurney v. Young, a case that challenged a provision of Virginia’s open-records law that limits access to citizens of that state.

Justice Samuel Alito, writing for a unanimous court, declared Virginia’s citizens-only restriction constitutional. Much of the opinion unfortunately focused on the commercial uses of public data, but it’s the section on the history of public records that offends open-government sensibilities.

Justice Alito and the court show skilled reasoning in noting that, although Virginia’s public-records law denies access to nonresidents, it does allow nonresidents access to its courts and other data in a way that provided most of the documents that had been sought by the two non-Virginian petitioners, Mark McBurney and Roger Hurlbert.

But when Justice Alito’s opinion veers into a peevish recounting of the blighted history of public-records jurisprudence, he and the court show how out of touch with Americans they are.

Does it really matter that “[m]ost founding-era English cases provided that only those persons who had a personal interest in non-judicial records were permitted to access them,” as Justice Alito wrote? Or that 19^th century American cases tracked a similar philosophy?

He could just as easily have noted that American law once considered only white male property owners eligible to vote, and been just as relevant.

It’s alarming that Justice Alito asserts repeatedly that access to public records is not a “fundamental” right and that the country was just fine without FOI laws before the 1960s and will be fine without them in the future

Yes, Justice Alito and friends, the federal FOI law is only 47 years old and similar state laws about as recent. Open-government advocates fought hard-won battles to make local, state and federal governments more transparent to the citizens they serve.

Maybe “the Constitution itself is [not] a Freedom of Information Act,” as you wrote, but your opinion in McBurney gives regressive legislators safe cover to start closing access doors that are now open.

Only a half dozen states, including Arkansas, have public records laws that allow agencies to deny out-of-staters access to state and local documents. Let’s hope the number of states limiting access to residents remains at six after this ruling because the ability of Americans to figure out what is going on in their country – not just their state – will be severely diminished..

Without access to public records from many states, the Columbus Dispatch in 2009 could not have demonstrated that excessive secrecy exists at public universities nationwide because of abuse of the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act.

Without access to multiple jurisdictions, the Kansas City Star in 1997 might not have revealed lax safety measures nationwide that allowed college athletes to die.

Without access to a broad range of data, ProPublica’s Robin Fields in 2010 would have been hampered in showing wide disparities nationally in dialysis care.

That is scary, particularly at a time when the world is becoming more open. Americans don’t need more bunkering and secrecy. We are one nation, extremely mobile, and information is more portable and important than ever.

If we want to remain a beacon of freedom and justice, of progressive modernism, of advanced thinking, then we need to stand up against thinking that it’s OK to restrict or inhibit access to our governments, no matter where we live.