Information Is Power

2021 ◽  
pp. 230-245
Author(s):  
Mary-Rose Papandrea
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Government Information ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Press ◽  
Security Information ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
Government Secrecy ◽  
Right Of Access

Balancing the equally important but sometimes conflicting priorities of government transparency for public accountability versus government secrecy for national security seems intractable. One possibility is to recognize a constitutional right of access to government information. This would support democratic self-governance, allow the public to engage in meaningful oversight, and provide access to necessary information without the game of leaks. It could radically refocus arguments regarding the rights of government employees to reveal national security information and of third parties to publish it. Recognizing this right faces an uphill battle against decades of First Amendment jurisprudence. It also faces innumerable logistical and practical obstacles. It would not eliminate the need to determine when the public, the press, and government insiders can disclose national security information. Nevertheless, the ongoing collapse of press access norms and government’s increasing desire to operate outside public view may warrant dramatically rethinking First Amendment scope and protections.

scholarly journals Copyright Policymaking as Procedural Democratic Process: A Discourse Theoretic Perspective on ACTA, SOPA, and PIPA

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annemarie Bridy
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Foreign Relations ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Freedom Of Information Act ◽  
The Public ◽  
Law Faculty ◽  
College Of Law ◽  
Security Information ◽  
University Of Idaho

In Bring in the Nerds: Secrecy, National Security, and the Creation of Intellectual Property Law, David Levine juxtaposes two starkly different copyright policymaking processes: the closed international process that produced the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) and the relatively open domestic process that led quite dramatically to the scuttling of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA). He reads the two processes against each other as a prelude to recommending Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) reform. The amendment to FOIA that Professor Levine proposes would open the international IP policymaking process to greater public scrutiny by creating a qualified public right to "foreign relations" national security information, which was systematically withheld from the public during the ACTA negotiations. This article, prepared for the Cardozo Arts and Entertainment Law Journal's 2012 Symposium, "Piracy and the Politics of Policing: Legislating and Enforcing Copyright Law," is a response to Professor Levine that draws on Jürgen Habermas' discourse theory of procedural democracy to examine the policymaking dynamics of ACTA and SOPA/PIPA and to assess the democracy-enhancing potential of the FOIA reform Professor Levine proposes.Annemarie BridyProfessor<http://www.uidaho.edu/law/faculty/annemariebridy>|University of Idaho College of Law|PO Box 83720-0051|Boise, ID 83720|Ph. 208.364.4583Affiliate Scholar<https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/about/people/annemarie-bridy>|Stanford Center for Internet and SocietyAffiliate Fellow<http://isp.yale.edu/people-directory?type=19>|Yale Information Society ProjectSSRN<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=630766>|HeinOnline<http://heinonline.org/HOL/AuthorProfile?collection=journals&search_name=Bridy,%20Annemarie&base=js>|LinkedIn<https://www.linkedin.com/in/annemariebridy>|Twitter<https://twitter.com/AnnemarieBridy>

Freedom of the Press

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sam Lebovic
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
Private Information ◽  
Press Freedom ◽  
Freedom Of The Press ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Public Officials ◽  
The Press ◽  
History Of ◽  
Constitutional Right

According to the First Amendment of the US Constitution, Congress is barred from abridging the freedom of the press (“Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press”). In practice, the history of press freedom is far more complicated than this simple constitutional right suggests. Over time, the meaning of the First Amendment has changed greatly. The Supreme Court largely ignored the First Amendment until the 20th century, leaving the scope of press freedom to state courts and legislatures. Since World War I, jurisprudence has greatly expanded the types of publication protected from government interference. The press now has broad rights to publish criticism of public officials, salacious material, private information, national security secrets, and much else. To understand the shifting history of press freedom, however, it is important to understand not only the expansion of formal constitutional rights but also how those rights have been shaped by such factors as economic transformations in the newspaper industry, the evolution of professional standards in the press, and the broader political and cultural relations between politicians and the press.

Getting at the Live Archive: On Access to Information Research in Canada

2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 623-633 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Walby ◽  
Mike Larsen
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Government Agencies ◽  
Access To Information ◽  
The Public ◽  
Official Discourse ◽  
Dirty Data ◽  
Information Research ◽  
Public Record ◽  
Constitutional Right

Most of the draft documents, memoranda, communications, and other textual materials amassed by government agencies do not become public record unless efforts are taken to obtain their release. One mechanism for doing so is “access to information” (ATI) or “freedom of information” (FOI) law. Individuals and organizations in Canada have a quasi-constitutional right to request information from federal, provincial, and municipal levels of government. A layer of bureaucracy has been created to handle these requests and manage the disclosure of information, with many organizations having special divisions, coordinators, and associated personnel for this purpose. The vast majority of public organizations are subject to the federal Access to Information Act (ATIA) or the provincial and municipal equivalents.We have been using ATI requests to get at spectrum of internal government texts. At one end of the spectrum, we are seeking what Gary Marx calls “dirty data” produced by policing, national security, and intelligence agencies. Dirty data represent “information which [are] kept secret and whose revelation would be discrediting or costly in terms of various types of sanctioning.” This material can take the form of the quintessential “smoking gun” document, or, more often, a seemingly innocuous trail of records that, upon analysis, can be illuminating. Dirty data are often kept from the public record. At the other end of the disclosure spectrum are those front-stage texts that represent “official discourse,” which are carefully crafted and released to the public according to government messaging campaigns.

scholarly journals The Legal Framework and Barriers to Access to Environmental Information in Ethiopia

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 139-172
Author(s):  
Abdulkader Mohammed Yusuf
Keyword(s):  
Legal Framework ◽  
Vital Role ◽  
Environmental Information ◽  
Access To Information ◽  
Multilateral Environmental Agreements ◽  
The Public ◽  
Barriers To Access ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access

Information plays a vital role, both in terms of its importance for a democratic order and as a prerequisite for public participation. Many countries have made provisions for access to information in their respective constitutions. The FDRE Constitution explicitly provides that everyone has the right to seek and receive information. The Freedom of Mass Media and Access to Information Proclamation –which entered into force in 2008– gives effect to this Constitutional guarantee. Moreover, the number of laws on different environmental issues is on the rise, and the same could be said of the multilateral environmental agreements that Ethiopia has ratified. Many of the laws incorporate the right of the public to access environmental information held by public bodies. Despite the existing legal framework, there are still notable barriers to access to environmental information. By analyzing the relevant laws, the aim of this article is to contribute to the dialogue on the constitutional right of access to information with particular emphasis on the legal framework on, and the barriers to, access to environmental information within the meaning of Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration.

Secrets and Leaks

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rahul Sagar
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Press ◽  
The Law ◽  
Complex Relationships ◽  
Unauthorized Disclosure ◽  
Fear Of Retaliation

This book examines the complex relationships among executive power, national security, and secrecy. State secrecy is vital for national security, but it can also be used to conceal wrongdoing. How then can we ensure that this power is used responsibly? Typically, the onus is put on lawmakers and judges, who are expected to oversee the executive. Yet because these actors lack access to the relevant information and the ability to determine the harm likely to be caused by its disclosure, they often defer to the executive's claims about the need for secrecy. As a result, potential abuses are more often exposed by unauthorized disclosures published in the press. But should such disclosures, which violate the law, be condoned? Drawing on several cases, this book argues that though whistleblowing can be morally justified, the fear of retaliation usually prompts officials to act anonymously—that is, to “leak” information. As a result, it becomes difficult for the public to discern when an unauthorized disclosure is intended to further partisan interests. Because such disclosures are the only credible means of checking the executive, the book claims, they must be tolerated, and, at times, even celebrated. However, the public should treat such disclosures skeptically and subject irresponsible journalism to concerted criticism.

The Long (Futile?) Fight for a Federal Shield Law

2021 ◽  
pp. 156-169
Author(s):  
Judith Miller
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Secret Information ◽  
Shield Law ◽  
Use Of Technology ◽  
The Press ◽  
Government Secrecy ◽  
Almost All

The Pentagon Papers case leaves open the question of whether journalists can be compelled to disclose the identities of those who reveal classified information to them. This essay considers some of the most enduring arguments for and against a federal shield law. Those who argue against such a law note definitional problems and contend that we must punish leaks given their impact on national security. They argue that institutionalizing the press actually harms the press and that the shield law is unnecessary given current use of technology to identify sources of leaks. Those in favor counter that definitional questions should not be a problem because almost all states have been able to resolve the questions in their laws. Moreover, most leaks do not compromise national security; government secrecy, deceit, and incompetence cause more damage to national security than the press’s reporting of secret information; and without a federal shield law, sources will not provide important information about government misconduct.

The Ideological Struggle

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Preminger
Keyword(s):  
Labor Law ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Organized Labor ◽  
The Political ◽  
The Public ◽  
Collective Rights ◽  
Ideological Struggle ◽  
The Press ◽  
Constitutional Revolution

Continuing the investigation into the labor-capital balance of power, Chapter 8 addresses the second of the three planes of struggle, that of ideological struggle. The chapter explores the delegitimation of organized labor in the press and how worker activists perceive this, as well as hostility towards organized labor from the political elites. This delegitimation is analyzed in the context of changing judicial narratives and the “constitutional revolution”, particularly the liberalization of labor law and the prominence of the “balance of rights” concept, including the increasing importance of third parties to labor disputes. These changes, reflected in the National Labor Court’s landmark Pelephone ruling, have undermined the salience of workers’ rights and collective rights, and strengthened employers’ rights. They have also realigned the front, pitting organized labor against “the public” as opposed to workers against their employer.

Citizen-Centric E-Government

2010 ◽  
pp. 45-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher G. Reddick
Keyword(s):  
Homeland Security ◽  
Organizational Transformation ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Electronic Government ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Government Information ◽  
It Use ◽  
Roles And Responsibilities ◽  
The Public ◽  
Security Information

Electronic government or e-government in this chapter can be defined as the delivery of government information and services to citizens through the Internet 24 hours a day, seven days per week. This definition has been used in other empirical studies of e-government adoption (Moon and Norris, 2005a). This chapter adds to this definition Grant and Chau’s (2005) interpretation of e-government as a broad-based transformative initiative, which is consistent with creating more citizen-centric government. Gronlund (2005) reviews the various definitions of e-government and has found they share a common theme of the need for organizational transformation through technological implementation. Citizen-centric e-government is the delivery of government services continuously to citizens, businesses, and other government agencies through the Internet (Seifert and Relyea, 2004). Citizen-centric government through e-government acts as a transformational tool that provides a new government model based on being citizen focused (Schelin, 2003). Some scholars have argued that for e-government to fully realize its capabilities, it must transform government from agency-centric to citizen-centric (Seifert and Relyea, 2004). The term e-government emerged in the late 1990s. It was born out of the Internet boom. The literature on information technology (IT) use within government is different from e-government because it more often focuses on external use, such as services to citizens’ and organizational change (Gronlund and Horan, 2004). Definitions of e-government that focus exclusively on service delivery components fail to capture the more complex aspects of government transformation because of IT (Grant and Chau, 2005). The purpose of this chapter is to provide an overview of the e-government literature with a focus on how it influences citizens. In order to understand some of the issues associated with Homeland Security Information Systems (HSIS), we need to provide information on e-government and its impact on government. There is a discussion in this chapter of the evolution of the roles and responsibilities of federal CIOs. There also is a description of how the public sector CIO’s environment is uniquely different from what can be found in private sector. In this chapter, we identify what it means to create a more citizen-centric government through e-government. A conceptual framework is outlined explaining what factors one would expect to be associated with creating a more citizen-centric government. This chapter articulates how these findings can be used to move e-government to higher stages of development. There also are examples of HSIS creating more citizen-centric government towards the end of the chapter.

Let’s Be Practical

2021 ◽  
pp. 123-139
Author(s):  
Stephen J. Adler ◽  
Bruce D. Brown
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
Current Situation ◽  
The Press ◽  
Espionage Act ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Government

The proliferation of leak cases over the last decade suggests that a case against the press for publishing government secrets may be on the horizon. Before 2009, an unwritten understanding between the government and the press of governmental forbearance and press responsibility provided more effective press protection than the First Amendment. While continued reliance on this understanding would be preferable to a changed law, the scales have tipped toward the suppression of speech in national security reporting, which has shaken that understanding. The current situation is so bad that it is now time to consider reforming the Espionage Act. Reformed legislation should provide a floor that permits First Amendment defenses, the law should act as a backstop if those arguments fail, and it should be as limited and precise as possible so that it does not inadvertently create a dangerous new power to prosecute the press.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document