Journalists rank poorly in public opinion polls in terms of engendering trust; they fall in with used car salesmen, politicians and lawyers. (In a Gallup poll last December, 31 percent of Americans surveyed said they didn’t trust reporters. Members of Congress, however, won the boobie prize — they were at the very bottom of the list; 55 percent of those polled gave U.S. representatives and senators a low or very low rating for honesty and ethical standards.)
The public’s lack of faith in reporters is unfortunate, not only for the profession, but also for democracy on the whole. That’s because journalists stand in for ordinary citizens at local meetings, pose questions the public doesn’t have time to ask and mine data, memos, budgets, audits and reports.
Reporters act as “surrogates for citizens,” as Doug Clifton, director of the New England First Amendment Center, put it.
Clifton spoke at a Vermont Press Association meeting on Friday as part of an open government conference held at the Capitol Plaza and Hotel in Montpelier. David Cuillier, chairman of the Society of Professional Journalists Freedom of Information Committee, was the featured speaker for the four-hour workshop.
Cuillier delivered a rousing pep talk to a group of about 30 Vermont journalists as part of his “Access Across America” tour. The event was attended by representatives from the Burlington Free Press, The Herald of Randolph, Seven Days, the Stowe Reporter, The Montpelier Bridge, the Barton Chronicle, The Hardwick Gazette, among others.
Reporters exercise the public’s right to access government information as they dig into the affairs of government, Cuillier said. And like any exercise regimen, they either use it or lose it. Journalists must demand access to public documents and closed-door meetings – even when state and local officials are less than enthusiastic about cooperating.
The problem is, the keepers of the government’s records are often reluctant to release records. And with the decline of the news media, journalists are in a weaker position to insist on compliance with public records and open meeting laws, Clifton said. Newspapers are less likely these days to take cases to court for financial reasons.
Individual citizens typically have even fewer resources to take on a court fight over government records, Clifton said. He described a case in which an Ohio woman took a right to know case to the Ohio Supreme Court. It took six years and nearly drove her to bankruptcy. (See video at the end of this story for Clifton’s complete description.)
“It’s a heck of a mess when ordinary people have to push for this kind of thing,” Clifton said. “And it’s exactly why ordinary people don’t do it because it’s beyond their capacity. Traditionally, it’s been the press. The press steps forward with deeper pockets, with attorneys and with the ability to press these cases and a willingness to press these cases.”
“But times have changed,” Clifton said. “The deep pockets that used to be the norm and the willingness to send the lawyers out to open records has diminished a great deal. And so the obligation of the citizen becomes greater.”
As a result, journalists on the front lines of government reporting must become the “cops” on the nation’s public-right-to-know beat, according to Cuillier. Reporters are obliged to call public officials on infringements of the law; no one else, in his view, is standing up for citizens when state and local officials refuse to comply.
“There are no (Freedom of Information Act) police,” Cuillier said. “It is our ethical responsibility to enforce government transparency. … When the government says no to us, they’re saying no to the public.”
Cuillier coached the Vermont journalists on tricks of the trade, on how best to access public documents, how to write a public records request that gets results; and how to sidestep excuses made by local, state and federal officials when they have refused to comply with the law.
As Cuillier put it: “This is about democracy.”
“We’re in charge of USA Inc.,” he said. “A lot of people think government is still in charge, but we (American citizens) are in charge.”
Cuillier told reporters to take an assertive stance, to “Be the Donald” (as in Donald Trump). When they ask for a public document, they should assume, “It’s mine, and I’m entitled to look at it.”
Cuillier refuses to call the letters he files with government agencies “public record requests;” instead he calls them “records checkouts.”
“I say show me our papers,” Cuillier said.
Clifton gave concrete examples of how information garnered through public records requests have led to major investigative stories and changes in state laws and policies, and have even overturned elections.
When he was executive editor of the Miami Herald, Clifton said his staff uncovered a rampant case of voter fraud during the 1998 mayoral election in Miami. The city resisted giving Herald reporters voter registration data as it began its investigation. The Herald requested the information through its marketing department and then reporters tracked down the addresses of voters, Clifton said, and found that absentee ballots had been cast by “ghost voters,” such as residents with addresses at abandoned properties and nursing home inhabitants who were incompetent to vote. As a result of the reporters’ work, the election was overturned. The newspaper won the Pulitzer Prize for its investigation.
“What makes for rich reporting is the ability … to see the workings of government,” Clifton said.
In a state like Vermont, where the “sunshine” laws are relatively weak, getting public information can be a challenge, according to Cuillier. When officials break the public records law in Vermont and other states across the nation, they are, with a few exceptions, not held accountable.
Vermont is ranked 25th in the nation for transparency and public access to government records, Cuillier said.
He recommended that Vermont journalists strengthen the state public records law by asking for legislation addressing the following:
1. The state should enforce the law by imposing fines or jail time for officials when they break the law by refusing to allow access to public information to citizens or reporters.
2. The Secretary of State’s office should hire an ombudsman for right-to-know issues.
3. The state should extend the public access law to court documents. Currently, Vermont’s law only applies to local, state and legislative government activities.
4. Autopsy reports should be made public.
These changes in Vermont law would help the state develop a culture of open government, Cuillier said.
Of the four items he ticked off on the list, he said enforcement provisions would be the most meaningful. In Texas and Florida, violations of the public record law can lead to jail time. In Washington state, the penalty for refusing to turn over a public record is a $100-a-day fine. In one case, Washington had to pay out $360,000 to an inmate who was refused public information. A town in Washington also was held liable for $240,000 in penalties when it balked at turning over documents.
Right now in Vermont, Cullier said, “the only enforcement is you.”
“You are the last defenders of democracy,” Cuillier said to the small gathering of journalists. “Without you we end up with Stalinist Russia. Unless we get these records, hold government accountable and improve our reporting, it’s all just talk. Get the goods and hold the line on access, or else we’re all going to lose it.”
