Slashdot Mirror


FBI Will Revert To Using Fax Machines, Snail Mail For FOIA Requests (dailydot.com)

blottsie writes: Starting next month, the FBI will no longer accept Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests via email. Instead, the U.S. agency will largely require requests be made via fax machine or the U.S. Postal Service. [The FBI will also accept a small number of requests via an online portal, "provided users agree to a terms-of-service agreement and are willing to provide the FBI with personal information, including a phone number and physical address."] The Daily Dot reports: "It's a huge step backwards for the FBI to switch from a proven, ubiquitous, user-friendly technology like email to a portal that has consistently shown problems, ranging from restricting how often citizens can access their right to government oversight to legitimate privacy concerns," says Michael Morisy, co-founder of MuckRock, a nonprofit that has helped people file over 28,271 public records requests at more than 6,690 state, federal, and local agencies. "Given that email has worked well for millions of requests over the years, this seems like a move designed to reduce participation and transparency, and we hope that the FBI will reverse course," Morisy added.

10 of 245 comments (clear)

  1. google should adopt this by someone1234 · · Score: 5, Funny

    for dmca takedown notices :D

    --
    Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
    1. Re:google should adopt this by DickBreath · · Score: 5, Funny

      How far can such stalling and obfuscating be stretched? What are the limits?
      An inspirational example is below. But one thing it makes clear. Our country is deeply divided. Not just two toxic political parties bitterly fighting (through the people who support each), but also how the government (which is made of people) are divided against the citizens. Also how the divide between rich and poor is increasing. Neither side in any of these divisions even makes a pretense of playing fair, clean or by the rules anymore. But now the example of obfuscating . . .


      “But the plans were on display”
      “On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.”
      “That’s the display department.”
      “With a flashlight.”
      “Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.”
      “So had the stairs.”
      “But look, you found the notice, didn’t you?”
      “Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.”

      Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    2. Re:google should adopt this by DickBreath · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes. The media is largely responsible. I remember when CNN was respectable. It was about real news. I watched it deteriorate over decades. They got rid of Headline News. Replaced it with basically gossip and fluff. Stopped doing real analysis. The invasion of the Talking Heads. Sound Bites.

      I remember when CNN closed their foreign bureaus. Fired their investigative journalists. At the time, a friend and I wondered how CNN would continue to operate. Now it is clear. Pretend news. Infotainment. It's mostly editorial. Regurgitating government hand outs. The government figured out with 9/11 that it could seize control of the news media with "embedded journalists". They could simultaneously sanitize the war news coverage while also holding the news media hostage to the deliciously addictive handouts of news bits from the government as long as journalists play nice and don't get their access revoked. You can see this today in the white house press briefing room.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  2. deliberate attempt to stall the process by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Snowden is correct that the enemy is within.

  3. This is not surprising by HangingChad · · Score: 5, Interesting

    After their interference in the last election where the FBI was on the same side of a US election as the GRU, is this any real surprise? The perception it creates is an image of a law enforcement agency that's gone off the rails. Snooping without a warrant and the nearly unchecked expansion of surveillance powers makes me wonder where this country is headed and whether the FBI needs a reboot.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    1. Re: This is not surprising by squiggleslash · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If Clinton had been a "proven criminal" she'd have been convicted of something. As it was even congressional investigations by a Republican Congress couldn't pin anything on her. The FBI investigations were because people kept making allegations about her, allegations that in many cases the FBI was obliged to investigate.

      I could probably ruin your life by having a group of us continually, for 25 years, make up allegations against you, accusing you of murdering anyone who you have a connection with who's died, pretending that anything that goes wrong that you have a vague relationship to was caused by deliberate actions on your part, looking for cases where standard practices in your industry change over eight years and highlighting cases where you didn't go along, and so on. Eventually you'd end up under multiple investigations.

      Clinton was never a great candidate. She believed too strongly she needed the blessing of those in power to gain power, and she was too much of a hawk on issues related to war. But she wasn't the criminal mastermind her critics pretended she was.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    2. Re: This is not surprising by Dragonslicer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And then, there's Benghazi. Clear case of treason, and no Democrat is interested.

      If it was such a clear case of treason, wouldn't you expect that a Republican-controlled Congress would figure that out during their investigation?

  4. FOIA joke by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Funny

    [redacted] [redacted] [redacted] [redacted] [redacted] [redacted] [redacted] [redacted] [redacted][redacted][redacted][redacted][redacted][redacted][redacted][redacted][redacted][redacted] the [redacted][redacted][redacted]in [redacted][redacted][redacted] [redacted][redacted][redacted][redacted][redacted][redacted][redacted] a [redacted][redacted]

    What's the use of FOIA requests nowadays anyway. The above is what you're likely to get.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  5. Re:Very common legal requirement by ravenshrike · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bingo. Also, while it may reduce participation, it increases transparency as it forces those doing the requesting to be much more transparent about their location and who they are. Not to mention if you're too lazy to run down to Kinko's to send off a FOIA request you should fuck right off.

  6. Re:Not a good look by kilfarsnar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    An agency that no longer exists is an agency that can no longer abuse its power.

    Maybe we should address the abuse of power, rather than throwing up our hands. Or don't you like having clean water to drink?

    --
    "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)