Slashdot Mirror
Highway Safety Agency Silences Engineers
nbauman writes "Nichole R. Nason, administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, put a new rule into effect that NHTSA officials, including scientists and engineers, are no longer allowed to be quoted by reporters, according to the New York Times. If the officials want to say anything it has to be off the record. The only one they can quote is Nason herself. However, she refused to be interviewed about the no-attribution policy."
because 'off the record' is soo respected by reporters anyway. I don't even want to read TFA to see what spawned this blunder.
An I.T. motto in the hands of an idiot is a dangerous thing...
I think you missed the point of this move. This move does not prohibit employees from talking with the press, what it explicitly enforces is that the only official voice of the organization is its head. I fail to see how this is a lack of transparency, because anything employees say can still meet the press. Any allegations of bribery etc, can still get to the press. This just means that a random engineer can't claim to represent the whole organization. This seems like a very sensible policy to have in place. Many organizations have to have their lawyers present whenever anyone gets interviewed or have a pre-interview with the lawyers where they delineate what things the engineers are allowed to comment on and what they are not. With a blanket ban on this, there is no misunderstanding, the press knows that no employees can be considered to represent the organization without explicit clear approval. On a case by case basis, the head could allow specific people to meet on the record for specific purposes.
If I'm wrong or missing something please let me know.
Gravity Sucks
I am increasingly unsure who won the cold war. Seems as if I live in the Soviet Republic of America. You'll need a passport to visit a national park in the near future, which is just a step to needing to show your "papers" to travel state to state. This is just the latest step on the road to our fascist future. Welcome to America Comrade. Heil Bush. (Yes I understand the commies and fascists were at opposite ends of the political spectrum, but they both have totalitarianism in common. We are riding down the slippery slope now, and I don't believe we will be able to stop short of a very unpleasant bottom. Best of luck to you.....
This is NOT first post!!!! Yeah.. New trend!! Everyone post NOT FIRST POST!!
I'm a computer nerd who happens to work for the City of New York (you might have heard of us). My agency has a communications bureau whose job it is to deal with the press. Why should I be on the hot seat in front of a bunch of blazing cameras, answering questions from interviewers who are trying to lead me down a dark path toward fanning the flames of controversy? Responding to the media is not my job and our training programs teach us to direct the press to the communications office -- that's the right thing to do. My agency has many specialized bureaus and the issue of the day that the media is interested in is likely to be in a realm in which I am not an expert...even if the issue is within my bureau, I am an expert in TECHNOLOGY and should never put myself in a position where someone is asking me questions about, say Immunology. If I am stupid enough to answer the media's questions, the media will say that "a Health Department official said this, that, and the other," and broadcast it to anyone willing to take it as truth...even though I have my head lodged deep in my @$$. Now, if I see something disturbing while in the course of my official duties, I can not resolve the situation internally (I have excellent management; issues get resolved in my bureau -- this has not hapenned in my 5 years here so far), and the other avenues for resolving this issue are blocked (say, I take the issue to mediation within the city and I get struck down because I'm a peon taking on one of the big-wigs) AND the issue harms the taxpayers that I am working to protect THEN I have an obligation to my community in the City of New York to go to the media with my issue. And if I do this frivolously or am simply in the wrong on the issue, then I need to be a man and face the consequences of my actions, including dismissal and being sued by the city for slander or libel.
Anyone who has ever bad-mouthed the "lazy government unions" needs to think about this type of directive next time they utter those words. Because of Union protections, this type of directive is rarely enforceable against career government employees.
Suppose an employee defies this prohibition and speaks with the press. Management is constrained in how it can retaliate. Certainly it can deny future advancement opportunities, but most employees are semi-immune to this type of intimidation because of the civil service system.
Don't get me wrong -- the same protection that apply to a conscientious employee who feels the need to speak with the press also protects (to a limited degree) someone who sits and plays solitaire all day. But Unions and the civil service system shine at moments like this.
The same thing was done with the Real ID Act. I tried to ask some questions on why include the Driver License Agreement which would put traffic tickets and driver records on a North American "Ledger" where records can be accessed ranging from Nunavut all the way down to Cancun and farther. When I contacted the House Judiciary which was chaired by Francis James Sensenbrenner, Jr, I was told in no uncertain terms that it was none of my g------d business. Seems like the sunshine laws from the 1960's/1970's are being eroded away. Even some states want to jump on the secrecy bandwagon as well.
The case where an engineer has a responsibility to talk to the press is if they know of a safety or financial issue that they can not resolve internally (perhaps due to management incompetence or corruption). Short of that, they should focus on their job...which is saving lives.
On one hand the government insists reporters name their anonymous sources. Refusal to answer is contempt of court.
On the other hand, the reporter is forbidden to name their source if that person is employed by the NHTSA.
That sort of dilemna seems destined to trigger a long series of court challenges and appeals. This regulation is one that only a lawyer would impose. Wait, Ms. Nason's background and qualifications are... Oh, never mind!