I agree with the disappointment expressed by Margaret and by Bill Leonard in 
his letter at the decision by the Washington Post to publish the article about 
Matthew Aid.  I direct most of that disappointment at the editors of the Post 
and, to some degree, at the reporter.  Don't reporters usually receive their 
assignments from superiors?  At any rate, I can't tell if someone directed 
Christopher Lee to write this story or if he wrote it on his own iniative.

As to the retired Federal employee, she probably had a narrow perspective on 
the issue.  For some reason, she chose to focus on what she knew old records 
showed about Mr. Aid's past, not on how the National Archives best could serve 
the nation as a whole.  I would hope that any former Federal employee's 
reaction to the reclassification flap would be, "well, these are complex issues that 
need to be worked out properly between the National Archives and the records 
creating agencies -- everyone needs to preserve trust and integrity and 
protect the governental processes, to the extent possible."  I believe that agencies 
have a stewardship obligation, not just in protecting records, but in acting 
in such a way that preserves institutional integrity and credibility.  But you 
never know how any Fed is going to view this.

Unfortunately, we don't know exactly why the woman whose husband filed the 
FOIA focused instead on Aid.  It sounds like a shoot the messenger reaction.  It 
did come across as vindictive to me, but, as I've explained, I'm very 
sensitive about mud slinging in stories about archival matters so that affects my 
ability to judge her actions.  Something about the fact that Aid complained to 
NARA about historical records triggered the reaction it did for this woman.  I'm 
guessing she didn't stop and think this through very carefully.  Of course, 
it wasn't her job to take a big picture view.  

Few people outside the Archives think in broad arcs and with a longterm 
perspective about NARA's mission.  And the press has become so tabloid in nature, 
it's probably easy to find a media outlet which breathlessly will print 
sensational news about someone, especially when that person becomes a public figure.  
(We certainly see this ad nauseum during political campaigns, such tactics 
are used against and on behalf of candidates of all parties.)  I happen to 
prefer focusing on policies, practices, positions articulated, etc., rather than 
personal "dirt."

In the case of Mr. Aid, I don't condone the actions that became the subject 
of court martial.  But, as Mr. Leonard points out, they are not relevant to the 
complaint he made about the classification reviews.  And they occurred 
decades ago.  (I know, there are people who go digging into political figures' 
youthful actions, early jobs or early military careers all the time, hoping to find 
dirt to throw at them.  For some, this simply is a way of doing business.)  I 
think the Post's editors should have thought more carefully about whether 
there was a broad public interest  served in writing about the Aid matter - just 
as I hope they would do that with any information received about any of us.  
Or about well known public figures.

At any rate, good for Bill Leonard for speaking up on this.  If I were an 
archivist, I would feel comfortable working for Mr. Leonard.   Given a choice to 
speak on even more controversial matters, his predecessor as ISOO director, 
Steve Garfinkel, once made a different choice in the past.  Anyone who read Sy 
Hersh's Nixon tapes article in 1992 will know why I'm saying that.  Although 
the article is part of the public record, I'd rather not get into the issues 
here.  I'll just say that people build up and use their professional capital in 
different ways, that's what makes Washington such an interesting place to work. 
 

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]>