SPJ EIJ17 Resolution entered into congressional record
Due to the efforts of DC Pro Chapter Recording Secretary Kathryn Foxhall, a noted Freedom of Information advocate who has followed her passion with efforts to stop government “Censorship by PIO,” a resolution passed by delegates to the annual SPJ national convention in 2017, now known as Excellence in Journalism, or EIJ17, was entered into the record of a July 17 joint House subcommittee hearing on scientific integrity.
Foxhall said Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., saw that the resolution was inserted. “I hope this opens up potential for further discussion with Congress,” she told the DC Pro board of directors. She is leading a chapter effort to have the “Censorship by PIO” issue addressed on the Hill as a stand-alone issue. The Union of Concerned Scientists was behind the joint hearings July 17.
Foxhall had been in contact with Rep. Paul Tonko’s staff earlier this year about how to go about pushing for a hearing, and was notified by a staffer of this one. She responded with some information, then was asked to provide the language of the 2017 SPJ resolution.
“It’s great to ensure, as the bill would, that scientists can talk to reporters, but anyone should be able to talk to reporters,” Foxhall said. “I really have the feeling that we can raise this issue in Congress, if we work at it.”
Here is her blog post about it. More information on the joint hearing — and a copy of the resolution — follows.
The House Subcommittee on Research and Technology and the Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight held a joint hearing Wednesday, July 17, 2019, on
Scientific Integrity in Federal Agencies
Time: 10:00 a.m.
Location: 2318 Rayburn House Office Building
Link here.
House Committee on Science, Space and Technology Chairwoman Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-Texas, made an opening statement. The lead-off remarks follow:
Good morning to our witnesses and welcome to the hearing.
I am proud to be an original co-sponsor of the Scientific Integrity Act, and I commend Congressman [Paul] Tonko[, D-N.Y.,] for his hard work in preparing the bill.
As I see it, scientific integrity consists of two major elements. The first is respect for the truth. Science does not have a political agenda. When science is done well, when trained professionals can follow the data and subject their findings to rigorous peer review, the information speaks for itself. The meaning of science-based decision-making is being informed by the best possible science and deciding what to do.
The second is respect for scientists themselves. As I see it, a big part of scientific integrity is allowing the scientists who serve this country to conduct their work unimpeded by undue outside influence. It’s about allowing them to speak freely in their capacity as experts with the American public and the media. It’s about allowing them to serve on advisory boards, join scientific societies, and engage with the scientific community. Unfortunately, we know that federal agencies do not always make this possible for their scientists. Sometimes Congress throws up roadblocks for federal scientists, too, and we need to do better.
As I see it, scientific integrity consists of two major elements. The first is respect for the truth. Science does not have a political agenda. . . . The second is respect for scientists themselves. . . . It’s about allowing them to speak freely in their capacity as experts with the American public and the media.
— Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-Texas
On a related note, I want to share my disappointment about who is missing from our panel of witnesses today. The Committee invited Dr. Francesca Grifo, the Scientific Integrity Official for EPA, to testify. Of all the Scientific Integrity Officials across the two dozen or so agencies that conduct or oversee science, Dr. Grifo is arguably the most experienced, and EPA’s Scientific Integrity policy is among the most robust. We were eager to hear from her about EPA’s process for implementing their policy and handling staff issues, as well as best practices to consider.
But EPA refused to make Dr. Grifo available and offered another official, the Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator for Science, in her place. While we appreciate this person’s credentials and experience, she has never served as a scientific integrity official for a federal agency. She did not help draft the EPA Science Integrity Policy, and she has never personally adjudicated a formal complaint from a federal scientist. We wanted to hear from Dr. Grifo because she hears directly from EPA employees who have concerns, questions and disputes. A major purpose of this hearing is to understand the day-to-day experiences of a scientific integrity official. EPA did not explain to this Committee why it would not make Dr. Grifo available, but only stated in vague terms that they believed their alternate official would be “adequate” for today’s meeting.
As the Chairwoman of this Committee, I believe EPA’s response to our invitation was not adequate, and I hope to hear from Dr. Grifo at a future date.
Also making an opening statement was Rep. Mikie Sherrill, D-N.J., chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight. Her remarks included:
Federal agencies need to listen to scientists and allow them to do their work unhindered by political considerations. They also need to appreciate the value of science in policymaking and actively incorporate scientific findings into the deliberative process. The leadership of an agency should never be hostile to its scientists or treat scientific findings as a threat. Any leader who would do so is merely revealing that their beliefs are determined by ideology rather than the facts. That kind of thinking is pernicious and does not serve the public.
. . .
We also need a government that communicates scientific information clearly and effectively to the American people. This nation has the best scientists in the world, and the ones that work with the federal government are working to help us overcome the greatest challenges of our time. When we allow federal scientists to do their jobs without interference, their efforts make the country stronger, safer and more prosperous.
~~~~~
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the Society of Professional Journalists, meeting in convention in Anaheim, California, on September 9, 2017, calls on journalists to put the public’s need to know above the professional desire not to anger official sources.
Resolution No. 2:
Calling on Journalists to Oppose the Mandated Clearance Culture
Submitted by: FOI Committee member Kathryn Foxhall
Committee recommendation: Favorable
Delegate Action: Approved ♦
WHEREAS the Society of Professional Journalists has decried the harmful cultural norm of prohibiting public employees and private experts from communicating with reporters;
WHEREAS SPJ recognizes that public information officers play an important role and often provide critical assistance to journalists;
WHEREAS the Society recognizes the legitimate need for organizations to withhold certain information for legal or proprietary reasons;
WHEREAS, nevertheless, SPJ has clearly stated in previous resolutions its concerns regarding the harm done by restrictions on access, including mandates that reporters always go through PIOs;
WHEREAS SPJ has demonstrated its leadership on this form of censorship in letters to President Barack Obama and President Donald Trump signed by scores of journalism organizations and other groups, by meeting with White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest in 2015 and in a letter to the New York Times in 2016;
WHEREAS former SPJ president and Kennesaw State University professor Carolyn Carlson has conducted, with SPJ’s sponsorship, seven surveys over five years that show “Censorship by PIO” has become pervasive;
WHEREAS these surveys reveal both a lack of concern about the consequences of enforced silence and a chilling assumption by officials that this is appropriate;
WHEREAS these controls on public access threaten the free flow of information essential to a democratic society;
WHEREAS these restrictions on access pose a grave risk to the public welfare;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the Society of Professional Journalists, meeting in convention in Anaheim, California, on September 9, 2017, calls on journalists to put the public’s need to know above the professional desire not to anger official sources.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that journalists should resist official efforts to make reporters nothing more than stenographers and openly oppose restrictions on access.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that SPJ calls on all journalists, journalism groups, publishers, editors, journalism schools and freedom of information groups to start and continue discussions on eliminating these restrictions and to explain to the public the hazards to society posed by these restrictions.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that SPJ calls on all journalists, journalism groups, publishers, editors, journalism schools and freedom of information groups to start and continue discussions on eliminating these restrictions and to explain to the public the hazards to society posed by these restrictions.
