Maarja's reaction to the article at http://shrinkster.com/dwq   

In my numerous postings here and in other forums about my experiences as a Nixon tapes archivist. I've tried to explain that NARA does not exist in a mythical fourth branch of government.  And that it has no firewall around it to protect it from external pressure.  One can expect that NARA's officials will face pressure; how they react depends on a number of factors.  Seymour Hersh noted in his 1992 New Yorker article ("Nixon's Last Coverup") that some outside observers expressed dismay that NARA did not reach out for help when it received a controversial order from the Reagan Department of Justice during the 1980s.  The matter centered on Nixon's ability to block release of his records and was settled (properly in my view)  when a judge threw out the DOJ order in Public Citizen v. Burke, 843 F.2d 1473 (D.C. Cir. 1988).

What about NARA's natural constituents, historians?  Historians, as a group, do not seem to understand the severity of the difficult environment in which archivists may operate at times at NARA. Or the challenges NARA faces in doing the right thing with the nation's recorded memory.  Perhaps these types of news articles will lead to more attention being paid to NARA and more questions being asked by stakeholders.  Since my late sister once worked in NARA's declassification division, I've been following this issue closely.  I await with interest any response from NARA and any follow up news stories.

Maarja