See
http://dwb.newsobserver.com/24hour/opinions/story/3258691p-12038464c.html
for a Scripps Howard commentary by Dale McFeatters on the NARA 
declassification/reclassification issue.

I don't agree with everything Mr. McFeatters writes.  Reviewing government 
records to see what can be released can get into some very complex issues.  And 
some records clearly need to be restricted.  So I cringed when I saw Mr. 
McFeatters's facetious recommendation that all the reclassified records be 
indiscriminately dumped out for public view.  

The difficulty lies in reconciling the potentially competing views of various 
stakeholders and doing it with integrity so as to uphold the public trust.  
It makes me sad to see Mr. McFeatters write, "But it took the staid, august 
National Archives, guardian of our most precious records, to elevate the suitably 
ludicrous expression "double super secret" into government policy."  But I 
tend to think that this is a situation NARA could have avoided while still 
ensuring that restrictable information was protected.  Why the Archives' lawyers 
didn't protect NARA and its officials and subordinate employees more strongly, I 
do not know.  Of course, the NARA lawyers didn't protect me and my colleagues 
in 1992, at all.  From where I sat, they seemed to only have the interests of 
the most powerful players in mind (Nixon, DOJ, etc.), not the employees who 
do the work at the Archives.  Now the agency is paying the price in terms of 
potshots such as those by Scripps Howard.

I've given some thought to some of Richard Cox's comments from last week.  He 
mentioned that organizations other than SAA have uncovered recent problems 
such as the reclassification matter, implying that SAA has been too passive.  
Richard mentions the National Security Archives.  Of course, the National 
Security Archive has a different purpose than SAA and I don't view the two as being 
the same.  However, given what I know about NARA from my own past experiences, 
and what we're now learning about this latest flap, I do think SAA probably 
needs to take a page from the National Security Archive's playbook and start 
submitting Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to get to the bottom of 
some issues.  It's hard to get at the facts just by talking to NARA officials 
and press officers -- the extent to which they can be candid is really going to 
vary.  FOIA has the force of law behind it.  Unfortunately, this is Washington 
and to get to the bottom of some matters, that is what it sometimes takes. 

Maarja

 

A posting from the Archives & Archivists LISTSERV List sponsored by the Society of American Archivists, www.archivists.org.
For the terms of participation, please refer to http://www.archivists.org/listservs/arch_listserv_terms.asp.

To subscribe or unsubscribe, send e-mail to [log in to unmask]
      In body of message:  SUB ARCHIVES firstname lastname
                    *or*:  UNSUB ARCHIVES
To post a message, send e-mail to [log in to unmask]

Or to do *anything* (and enjoy doing it!), use the web interface at
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/archives.html

Problems?  Send e-mail to Robert F Schmidt <[log in to unmask]>