April 25, 2010, 8:00 a.m.
2:30 p.m. update: Murley responds (see bottom of this entry)
April 26, 9:30 update: Meeks responds (see bottom of this entry)
[This is the eighth in what is, as of this morning, an eight-part series on the Iowa City schools search for a new superintendent: "School Boundaries: There Are Better Ways," April 16, 2010 (with links to 23 prior, related blog entries and other writing); "How to Pick a School Superintendent; And My Questions for Candidates," April 17, 2010; "Bringing Home the Bacon and Bezek," April 20, 2010, "ICCSD's Triple Play: From Bezek to Murley to Meeks; Bezek Can Talk the Talk -- On Four Hours' Sleep," April 21, 2010; "Hurlyburly Over Murley," April 22, 2010; "IC Board Peeks at Meeks; Brad Meeks Rounds Out Three Finalists," April 23, 2010; and "Finalists Responses? Decision Sunday? Finalists Offered Last Word," April 24, 2010.]
Constituent Relations Important -- But No Deal Breaker
(brought to you by FromDC2Iowa.blogspot.com*)
Yesterday I reported that I'd emailed an offer last Friday to each of the three finalists for the ICCSD superintendent position. It was an offer to reproduce in this blog, without editing or responsive comment from me, any last minute message they'd like to pass on to the Iowa City community. I indicated I'd report back to you here what happened next. "Finalists Responses? Decision Sunday? Finalists Offered Last Word," April 24, 2010.
What happened was that Mark Bezek acknowledged receipt of the email and provided some comments, and that Steve Murley and Brad Meeks failed to acknowledge the email in any way.
(Bezek's prompt reply said that he "really enjoyed my interview session in Iowa City... I came away very impressed with the community, school system and the administrative team, all were very personable and helpful throughout my day...... [. . .] .... Regardless of what the outcome is, I feel I gave it my best shot even with limited sleep and I feel that my interview was reflective of the type of person/leader I am.... What you see is what you get with me [. . .]." (Bracketed ellipses are mine; others are his.))
So one of those things you see, and get, from Bezek is a reply to your email, in an age in which much of a superintendent's constituent relations are going to take place in that medium.
Do I think the results of this little experiment should weigh heavily in the Board's decision of whom to pick? Of course not. But do I think it should at least be one of dozens of the variables in what I've characterized as a "back and forth discussion and fruitless efforts to resolve a classic, impenetrable, multiple-variable-comparative analysis"? Absolutely. ("IC Board Peeks at Meeks," April 23, 2010, last sentence.)
Look, I know as well as anyone the difficulty of staying on top of incoming email. I maintain a number of email addresses, each of which I monitor more than once a day. At the present time there is a substantial backlog, even after the junk mail and list-serv distributions have been stripped out, that involves the organizations, persons and projects with which I have some relationship or responsibility and for which maintain a folder of ongoing email exchanges -- plus a variety of requests from people, formerly unknown, to whom responses are also provided. My goal is to respond to every email within 24 hours. I am not, now, meeting my goal. During a couple weeks of editing student papers, and holding conferences, on top of other obligations, starting early and working into the evenings, my daily triage of responsibilities resulted in the email backlog I am now trying to dig out from under.
So I can understand and sympathize with anyone undergoing superintendent interviews (often multiple and near-simultaneously) in various communities and their triage decisions about email. There are, in short, many reasons why Murley and Meeks might have not responded other than a disrespect and dismissal of constituent email. That's why the failure to respond should not be accorded significant weight.
But the experience is an illustrative lead-in to a discussion of a superintendent's -- and school board member's, for that matter -- constituent relations by email.
So where do my attitudes and practices regarding personal email come from?
The FCC is an "independent regulatory commission," sometimes referred to as "an arm of Congress." A commissioner has no direct responsibility to the President. As Maritime Administrator, however (my first presidential appointment from President Johnson), and "presidential adviser" (White House Conference on Libraries and Information Services; President Carter), the service was part of the Executive Branch and "at the pleasure of the President."
One of the responsibilities of the Maritime Administrator, as it turned out, was to comply with President Johnson's policy on citizens' mail. (This was the pre-Internet age of postal mail.) Any letter addressed to the President, that involved issues within the Maritime Administrator's areas of responsibility, was (a) to be answered, (b) signed by a presidential appointee, and (c) mailed within 24 hours of receipt. The same policy was applied to all presidential appointees.
Senator John Pastore, of Rhode Island, was Chair of the Senate Communications Sub-Committee. Because he had formerly been governor of Rhode Island, I asked him during an informal conversation how he managed his flow of correspondence when governor. His policy was to clean his desk every evening before leaving for home.
In my later years at the University of Iowa I was impressed with President David Skorton (for a variety of reasons; he's now president of Cornell University) and his equivalent approach to email -- promptly answering seemingly every one he received. Another classy educational administrator the Regents ran off, Mike Hogan (now president of University of Connecticut), seems to do the same (as well as maintaining his own personal blog). I've noticed that other successful CEOs and institutional leaders seem to be able to do so as well.
Needless to say, having started my federal government service at Maritime at the tender and impressionable age of 29, I tried to emulate the practices of my elders.
As a school board member, I tried to do the same thing while noting, "As a school board member you may not get any pay, but at least you get a lot of grief." You also get a lot of email. No one holds a gun to your head and forces you to run for school board. Having chosen to do so and having been elected, however, the position imposes some responsibilities. The effort to learn about the ICCSD, Iowa education law, innovations in K-12 education globally and in the U.S., write a column about K-12 issues for the local paper every two weeks for three years, and time spent preparing for and attending Board meetings -- and answering email -- often added a not-insignificant number of hours to my work week.
When I commented to a superintendent (not Lane Plugge) about the email load and asked for advice, it produced what I found to be a startling response: "Just ignore it. Don't answer. If you answer their emails you'll just get more." Needless to say, I found the counsel neither responsible nor persuasive. But apparently some of the other board members followed the advice.
There have been a number of times, still to this day, when an Iowa City resident will describe some occasion and issue, and say with appreciation, "You know, I emailed every Board member and the Superintendent, and you were the only one who ever answered." That has always been reward enough for the hours and effort.
For a superintendent, or school board member, to simply ignore constituents' email is (in my opinion) the modern-day, electronic equivalent of holding a public meeting for constituent input on some issue while board members sit hear-no-evil-see-no-evil-speak-no-evil silent, with no response, as if to say, "Our decision has been made, don't try to confuse us with the facts."
I made the offer to the finalists of space in the blog sincerely. (1) It is consistent with the FCC's former "Fairness Doctrine" to give someone who has been the subject of media reporting and commentary (with today's definition of "media" including blogs such as this) an opportunity to respond to what has been said. (2) It could have been useful for the ICCSD Board and community members to have the benefit of a final word from each finalist.
But I was also engaged in a bit of an experiment. "If you build it will they come?"; if they are emailed, do they respond?
The answer, it turns out (at least on this occasion, and within this timeframe), is that Mark Bezek responds, does so promptly, and with a friendly spirit; and that Steve Murley and Brad Meeks do not even acknowledge receipt of the email.
Because most everything of what the community knows of these three gentlemen is based on what they (and others) say rather than what they do, perhaps this one example of what they do will be useful.
But to emphasize again: there can be many reasons for the failure to respond, and in no event should the experiment be given more than minimal, marginal consideration in comparing the qualities of the three.
Finally, of course the invitation still stands -- both this week and throughout the years of service of whomever is ultimately chosen by the Board: anytime they want to communicate to this blog's readership directly they can do so with whatever they want to say (including scathing criticism of myself).
As emailed Friday, I wish each of them good luck in their pursuit, have not designated any to be a personal favorite, and look forward to welcoming to Iowa City and the school district whomever the Board ultimately selects this evening.
[P.S. As an interesting sidebar on the saga of superintendent selection for the ICCSD, and the seeming inability of the District's Board members and their search firm to find any possible candidates anywhere throughout the entire state of Iowa (and its 350-plus school districts), our neighbor to the west, the Clear Creek-Amana School District is now considering four finalists for its superintendent position. How many Iowans could it find? Four. Four out of four. All of them (at least one of whom is from the sizable city of Waterloo). Amazing! How on earth could they have done that? Maybe we should ask them next time. Or perhaps we might just check the Iowa Department of Education's list of 361 superintendents with their names and phone numbers and start calling around. "CCA Announces Superintendent Candidates," Iowa City Press-Citizen, April 23, 2010; Editorial, "Our Quick Take on Last Week's News Stories; Superintendent Candidates -- CCA," Iowa City Press-Citizen, April 25, 2010.]
2:30 Update: Murley Responds
Upon my return home from a noontime event today I found an email from Steve Murley, timestamped 11:34 a.m.
The most significant excerpt from that email, which provides as much or more of his useful and reassuring insight into our Board members as our additional insight into him (which it also does):
One comment that you made in your blog post from April 17 deserves to be revisited. You stated that, "Indeed, one should be extremely suspicious of anyone who would be willing to be considered for the job of working with such a school board." Your comment was made in reference to concerns that you enumerated about the lack of a clear governance system, delineation of measurable goals, discussion of educational innovations, and absence of metrics for results measurement related to boundary changes. I am in full agreement with you that these are indeed important issues for the Board to tackle. However, the absence of these does not indicate to me that the Board has chosen to ignore them or that the Board thinks they are unworthy of attention. In fact, I would argue that from my limited interaction with the Board, just the opposite is true. During my first interaction with the Board concerns about board governance were raised and, to a Board member, all agreed that the issue needed to be addressed to further solidify the work in front of them. The presence of measurable goals is one that we discussed at length and that the Board seems to clearly understand are needed to assess progress over time. The issue of concern about educational innovation was also raised frequently by Board members, most notably, when I asked them to provide for me their thoughts about where they wanted to see the District in 5, 10, or 15 years during the last public interview. Finally, although the boundary discussion has been underway for the past eight months, I felt that all of the Board members were clearly concerned about the students in each of the schools and were sincerely working to find the best outcome. In working with many different Board members over the past 11 years in Wausau I would argue that dedicated, committed Board members who recognize the issues in front of the District and are willing to tackle all problems, big or small, hard or easy, are what best serve the students and residents of a community. That is why I chose to return to the Iowa City School District as a finalist and why I hope to have the opportunity to serve the students of the ICCSD.
As promised in "Finalists Responses? Decision Sunday? Finalists Offered Last Word," April 24, 2010, I will leave his comment to stand on its own, which it is quite capable of doing, rather than responding to it.
April 26, 9:30 a.m. Update: Meeks Responds
And as of Monday morning, here is Brad Meeks response in its entirety:
It was good meeting you last week. I appreciate you taking the time to study the process, perspectives of the candidates and a willingness to discuss the issues. Being a former school board member, I’m sure you can readily understand that selecting a superintendent is one of the most important responsibilities of the school board and having the citizens involved in the process is important. It was an enjoyable day touring the community and meeting the people of the district.
I wish the board and community well as the decision is made on the selection of a new superintendent. Iowa City has a great school system and community.
_______________
* Why do I put this blog ID at the top of the entry, when you know full well what blog you're reading? Because there are a number of Internet sites that, for whatever reason, simply take the blog entries of others and reproduce them as their own without crediting the source. I don't mind the flattering attention, but would appreciate acknowledgment as the source -- even if I have to embed it myself.
-- Nicholas Johnson
# # #
April 21, 2010, 9:00 a.m.
[This is essentially the fourth in what is, as of this morning, a four-part series on the Iowa City schools search for a new superintendent: "School Boundaries: There Are Better Ways," April 16, 2010 (with links to 23 prior, related blog entries and other writing); "How to Pick a School Superintendent; And My Questions for Candidates," April 17, 2010; and "Bringing Home the Bacon and Bezek," April 20, 2010.]
Bezek Can Talk the Talk -- On Four Hours' Sleep
(Brought to you by FromDC2Iowa.blogspot.com*)
Last night was opening night for the ICCSD School Board's show, "Superintendent Search." Each of the Board members played themselves, and the role of the superintendent was played by Mark Bezek. All turned in impressive performances. For any community members who cared, there was also a "meet and greet" with the lead actor before curtain, from 6:15 to 7:00 -- complete with cookies and coffee. It provided an opportunity to put a one-on-one question or two to Bezek as he mingled with the crowd. (Of course there was to be no talking, with all cell phones turned off, during the performance as is usual practice in the theater.)
Rob Daniel, "Candidate stresses trust, transparency; Bezek the first superintendent hopeful to meet public," Iowa City Press-Citizen, April 21, 2010. For perhaps the best take/commentary of the five on Bezek's evening, see Jeff Charis-Carlson's, "Faith, Trust and Transparency: Mark Bezek's Superintendent Interview," The Record/Iowa City Press-Citizen, April 21, 2010. (The Record is a free, membership site; the "five" are the two mentioned here and, linked from Charis-Carlson's piece, The Gazette and Daily Iowan stories -- plus (he modestly adds) this blog entry.) Nora Heaton, "School Board interviews first finalist for superintendent [in print edition as "Board Interviews Hopeful; Iowa City is a 'mirror image' of the first candidate's current district, he says"], Daily Iowan, April 21, 2010, p. A2; Gregg Hennigan, "Superintendent Candidate Familiar with Challenges Facing Iowa City School District," Gazetteonline, April 20, 2010.
On any given evening in Iowa City there is "the place to be." Last night it was the ICCSD Central Administrative Office, Board Meeting room (Harrison & Clinton Streets).
The show runs through Thursday night; same cookies, same format ("meet and greet" at 6:15, curtain at 7:00). The role of the superintendent will be played by Steve Murley this evening and Brad Meeks on Thursday.
Note: I'm teaching my seminar (Cyberspace Law) this evening during the hours of Murley's performance, so I'm relying on the notes and impressions of anyone reading this who attends this evening's session with Murley. Send them along.
Bezek's performance was especially impressive, given that he's been playing this show on the road, had to make an all-night drive from the Minneapolis area Monday night that meant he didn't get to bed until 3:00 a.m. yesterday. (He's been looking for a new position, and was one of six finalists for the position in St. Paul last November, but fell into the group of three unanimously eliminated from that group by the Board. For an index of stories about him during his position before Elk River, see the Fergus Falls Daily Journal.)
(For a delightful, well-written -- if slightly over-the-top -- curmudgeonly column that provides a sense of perspective about the utility of superintendent searches in general, but the St. Paul search in particular, see Joe Soucheray, "School super search costs a bundle and 'achieves' nothing," St. Paul Pioneer Press/twincities.com, updated December 28, 2009.)
So what's the bottom line on Bezek, based on last evening? As it happened, my own take totally squared with that of someone who really does know educational administration inside and out (which I concede I don't). As she said when I asked her take on the evening, "He said all the right things; 100%. But you'll never know what you need to know until you've talked to a wide swath of the people in Elk River, to get a sense of the assessments of those both inside and outside that school system."
It echoed a sentiment and urging of mine in an earlier blog entry, "How to Pick a School Superintendent; And My Questions for Candidates," April 17, 2010 ("Hopefully, someone at one of the community's three local papers . . . will be assigned the task of some really in-depth investigation of the lives and careers of these three individuals. Hopefully, individual citizens will do the same. With access to a telephone, an Internet connection, some research skills, and a willingness to talk to strangers, the community can be provided a lot more background on these individuals than is likely to come from the Board or the 45-minute public meetings each will hold with local stakeholders. In my experience, search firms don't do that -- as was detailed in the blog entry, Nicholas Johnson, 'School Board Can't Do Job? There They Go Again,' January 7, 2010").
In that connection, it might be worth following up with the Bismarck, North Dakota, Public Schools board as well as those where Bezek has worked. He applied for the superintendent position in Bismarck, and here's what the Bismarck Tribune reported last Friday:
The favored candidate, . . . , withdrew his application after accepting a job in Washington state. . . .
[T]he board wants the search firm . . . to see if it can find an outstanding candidate or two to apply by April 22. . . .
The other finalists were Bismarck Assistant Superintendent . . .; Elk River, Minn., Superintendent Mark Bezek; Rugby Superintendent . . .; and Conroe, Texas, Associate Superintendent . . ..
Bezek and . . . ranked the highest after an informal ranking of the remaining four candidates. . . . Ultimately, though, the board felt none of the candidates had the combination of experience, vision and depth wanted for Bismarck’s next superintendent.
“What I’m hearing is discomfiture with the three who don’t fit right now,” said Board President Marcia Olson. . . .
Bezek looked like a “safe” choice because he has district administrative experience in a similar size school district. Board members said they were not impressed, however, with his vague or superficial answers. Also, his application had many details that were overlooked and a reference letter for a St. Paul, Minn., job.
Sara Kincaid, "Bismarck Superintendent Search Continues," Bismarck Tribune, April 16, 2010. (To be clear, I have no independent knowledge of these events, have spoken with no one in Bismarck, know nothing about the qualifications of the Bismarck school board members, and believe it would be both unfair and unwise for our local Board members to use this story in their comparative evaluations of the candidates without doing further investigation.)
The Board should be congratulated and thanked for setting up these sessions and conducting (at least this one) as they did. They were at their civil, quiz show best -- relaxed, casual, yet inquiring with thoughtful questions. There was a sense of good relationships between them, and between them and Bezek.
They may not have been digging with as sharp a shovel as a BBC interviewer -- but, then, neither is anyone in the national American media, so that's a little unrealistic a standard to which to hold a school board member.
The fact is they've opened up the process to any community member who cares to find out as much as one can from briefly meeting the candidates and listening to the Board's questioning of them.
When someone in my father's presence would use the line, "We've only just scratched the surface," he'd respond, "What else is there to scratch but the surface?"
That's kind of how I felt about Bezek's performance. It was reminiscent of the Broadway musical, "Hair," with which I had a loose association. Like a successful political campaign, "Hair" managed to generate public support by at least mentioning many of the ideas, words, and symbols of the generation to which it was designed to appeal -- without ever pursuing any of them in depth: long hair, drugs, nudity, rock music, anti-war, astrology, anti-materialism and personal freedom.
The subjects and slogans Bezek touched on were, of course, much more serious and substantive than those in "Hair." And there was little more that he or anyone else could possibly do with one-to-three-minute answers to serious questions. (Photo credit: Elk River, MN, School District)
Moreover, it really was an impressive tour-de-force romp through K-12's "best practices" and the business literature on management, leadership, administration, human and public relations. As my friend said, "100%."
In my conversations with him ahead of time I had the impression he had not seen the "My Questions for Candidates" list. Yet he managed to touch on a number of them.
Here's a sample:
He doesn't want to "just manage" our school district, he wants "to take it to the next level."
The public has to be involved in the decision making process because "They're your schools, we're just managing them."
He wants to "hire good people, set them up to succeed, and then support them;" it's a matter of "spotting and then developing talent." "The trick to success with any program is getting the right person." (The current phrase, which he did not use, is "getting the right people on the bus.")
"Faith, trust and transparency" and "good relationships" are central to successful administration. The superintendent needs to create and maintain good relationships with all employee groups; and s/he can't just invite their participation, you need to reach out, go to buildings, ask, do surveys, use focus groups. (He also avoided the phrase, "MBWA: management by walking around" -- but seemed to be a practitioner of that approach.)
"Problems are our friends," but then you need to be able to "spot the red flags" and "work collaboratively to find solutions."
He admires and says he follows former GE CEO Jack Welch's "4 E's wrapped in a P are the ingredients of success." See, e.g., Bryan Macktinger, "Jack Wows GSB; Ex-GE CEO Jack Welch Speaks on Campus," GSB News, Chicago Business, October 22/November 12, 2001 ("Energy (to succeed, you must have it), Energizing (instill it in others around you), Edge (the ability to say 'yes' or 'no' and to not say 'maybe'), and Execute (the key to success is not planning for it to happen, but in delivering it). The 'P' is for Passion, or 'caring more than the next person'").
He also quoted from Michael Fullan, The Six Secrets of Change: What the Best Leaders Do to Help Their Organizations Survive and Thrive, 2008.
You need to have agreement on what the roles of board members and the superintendent are; the relationship between board members and other administrators (the elements of what I refer to as a "governance model").
You have to have evaluations, measurement, built into every new project to see if you're hitting the target. "We don't just collect data, we use data" (what I refer to as a management information reporting system).
Planning and vision are key. Everything comes down to priorities and process. What are your priorities? What do you value? What is your long term vision, your five-year plan? You need to communicate it to the local community and get citizens' buy-in; the superintendent should be the district's cheerleader.
Have a process agreed on and in place ahead of time, before "hot spots" arise. He had experience laying out how boundaries would be changed ahead of time, with the community aware that would happen every two or three years (essentially an approach certainly consistent with what I've been advocating).
Look at a wider environment; know what's going on in other districts; there are few problems you'll confront that haven't been successfully dealt with by someone out there before you (a line I've often used, and something consistent with what the Board did at meetings when I served, a feature called "Ed News").
A late hour request for examples of what "moving our district to the 'next level' might mean," brought a quick offering of (presumably) extemporaneous ideas: a magnet school in the UIHC; a vocational, trades, magnet school [although he didn't mention it, the idea reminded me of a German approach I've written about in the past]; and more collaboration in general with Kirkwood Community College and the University of Iowa.
In short, much of the rhetoric mirrors my own and is something to which I respond positively: long term planning and vision; evaluation with metrics; governance principles that all have bought into; openness to change and the search for, and implementation of, "best practices" (rather than merely managing what you have). School districts are not Fortune 500 for-profit corporations with CEOs; but properly modified and adapted I see value (rather than horror) in borrowing from the best of the business literature and case studies that which can improve school district administration.
There's always the one major caveat with which I began: any evaluation of Bezek based on last evening (or the other two to follow) has to be reviewed and modified based on what a diverse group of folks from the communities where he's served before have to say about him. That's the only way one can tell for sure how much is hat and how much is cowboy.
But aside from that, and what some may find an over-use of buzz words, I came away favorably impressed.
_______________
* Why do I put this blog ID at the top of the entry, when you know full well what blog you're reading? Because there are a number of Internet sites that, for whatever reason, simply take the blog entries of others and reproduce them as their own without crediting the source. I don't mind the flattering attention, but would appreciate acknowledgment as the source, even if I have to embed it myself.
-- Nicholas Johnson
# # #
April 20, 2010, 8:00 a.m.
Protecting the Press from the Police
(brought to you by FromDC2Iowa.blogspot.com*)
TONIGHT! -- Superintendent; School Board; ICCSD; Mark Bezek
For background, and a list of the questions I'd put to Bezek if I had a couple hours with him, see "How To Pick a School Superintendent; And My Questions for Candidates," April 17, 2010, and "School Boundaries: There Are Better Ways," April 16, 2010.
"Finalists for the Iowa City Schools superintendent job will meet with the public and the school board at 6:15 p.m. beginning today at the district's central administrative offices.
Mark Bezek, superintendent of the Elk River, Minn., School District, will appear today at a meet-and-greet with the community at 6:15 p.m. . . . The session will be followed by an interview with the school board at 7 p.m. The interview will be open to the public but no comments will be taken . . .." Excerpts from "Mark Bezek Interview is Tonight," Iowa City Press-Citizen, April 20, 2010.
The ICCSD Central Administrative Offices are located in the first city block immediately south of the Post Office (between Clinton and Dubuque Streets). The other two of the three finalists will go through a similar procedure Wednesday and Thursday evenings: Steve Murley, superintendent of the Wausau, Wis., School District, and Brad Meeks, superintendent of the Farmington, Minn., School District, respectively. For brief bios on each of the three see links from the two blog entries linked above.
City High's New Principal; (with James Bond delivery) Plugge Brings Home the Bacon, John Bacon; Mark Hanson's Mystery
In some ways even bigger local school news is the announcement that Lemme Elementary's well-regarded principal, and City High grad (1992) John Bacon, will likely be named to replace Mark Hanson as City High's principal next fall.
At least for City High's parents, teachers and students that is likely to have more direct impact on their day-to-day lives and interactions with the District than the Board's choice of superintendent.
Meanwhile, the departure of City High's current principal, Mark Hanson, who has his own devoted band of fans, remains a mystery. This is the second time (since I've been watching the local schools) that a City High principal has mysteriously disappeared. We'll wish John Bacon better luck, longevity and transparency as some of his former teachers receive him back as their principal. (Photo credit: Iowa City Press-Citizen.) Rob Daniel, "Lemme's Bacon Likely to Be City's Principal," Iowa City Press-Citizen, April 20, 2010.
Protecting Student Papers' Confidential Sources, Photos, Outtakes
Meanwhile, news comes from the East (James Madison University's The Breeze newspaper) and the West (Huffington Post) of a police raid on the offices of yet another student newspaper.
This ought to be a major focus of our local papers -- especially The Daily Iowan -- but I've yet to see any local stories about it.
Our Constitution, courts and legislative bodies struggle with the balance between the First Amendment values served by protecting the confidentiality of reporters sources, notes, photos and video outtakes, on the one hand, and the national security and law enforcement benefits of making them available to law enforcement officials, on the other.
The benefits, to all of us, of protecting their confidentiality is that once the media is seen by the public as an arm of law enforcement, once we know that what we tell a reporter may end up in a police file -- or as evidence in a court trial -- sources tend to dry up, recordings of interviews and reporters' notes, extra photos and video may be destroyed, or never created in the first place. (As Breeze editor Katie Thisdell succinctly put it in Aaron Koepper's story, linked below, “I decided I was not going to release them because I felt that it wasn’t our mission. We shouldn’t be the arm of the police.”) To the extent sources dry up, ultimately it is we, the reading, listening and viewing public, that end up being less well informed. (Of course, this all assumes that (a) we're not talking about a reporter or her employer having violated the law and withholding evidence for those self-serving purposes, and (b) we are talking about what did not make it into the paper, or on air.)
The benefits to law enforcement to having access to the media's raw material is that this source of names, photos, and other information may be the only source available -- or at least the most voluminous. And it is so much easier and cheaper to search through a newspaper's files than to have to go out and do original investigations and information gathering on their own. Of course, a part of the reason this is true is that potential witnesses are more willing to talk to reporters than police -- which is a part of the reason for protecting those confidences (but also a reason why the sources may be especially valuable).
This is a nuanced area of the law. The outcome in any given case is one of those situations in the law where the answer comes back, "Well, it depends." Sometimes there is an effort to strike a balance: Does law enforcement really need this information? Have they exhausted all other sources? How significant is the crime? Is there reason to believe the request is little more than a fishing expedition? Might a judge look through the potential evidence first to ascertain what is, and is not, central to the case? Can the search warrant be limited to nothing more than the absolute essentials?
In short, there is a recognition that the media is special, that it is worthy of some deference when it comes to routine search warrants and subpoenas -- but that it is not totally immune from the obligations all citizens have to cooperate with law enforcement efforts and judicial proceedings.
In this instance, The Breeze has photos of a large disturbance which local police wanted to see in order to find individuals to prosecute. The paper refused. The local prosecutor got a search warrant, entered the student paper's premises and threatened to take all of its computers if the staff would not provide the police copies of all the photos it had.
The paper now has legal counsel, and The Breeze reports, "In an agreement reached between the attorney for the commonwealth and The Breeze’s attorney, the images seized during Friday’s raid on The Breeze office have been temporarily sealed until a further agreement can be reached. According to Katie Thisdell, editor-in-chief for The Breeze, the attorney’s agreed Sunday to have a third-party source hold the seized disks, while the commonwealth’s attorney continues to press for the release of at least some of them." Aaron Koepper, "Breeze Receives Legal Counsel After Friday's Raid," The Breeze, April 19, 2010.
For additional reporting on the matter, see Jordan Fifter, "Police seize riot photos from JMU student newspaper; Officers took hundreds of photographs taken by The Breeze during last week's off-campus riot," The Roanoke Times, April 17, 2010; Leah Finnegan, "JMU Newsroom RAID: Police Seize Riot Photographs," Huffington Post, April 19, 2010; Adam Goldstein, "Search Warrant Served on Student Newsroom Violates Federal Law," Huffington Post, April 16, 2010.
For the Supreme Court case that gave rise to the law ("Privacy Protection Act") that Goldstein alleges was violated by the Commonwealth Attorney and seven policemen showing up at the school paper and threatening to remove their computers (before they could get legal counsel), see Zurcher v. Stanford Daily, 436 U.S. 547 (1978).
The Privacy Protection Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000aa, linked above, was Congress' response, essentially overturning, or at least substantially modifying, the Zurcher, decision. For more of the history and discussion, see "The Privacy Protection Act of 1980," Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC).
_______________
* Why do I put this blog ID at the top of the entry, when you know full well what blog you're reading? Because there are a number of Internet sites that, for whatever reason, simply take the blog entries of others and reproduce them as their own without crediting the source. I don't mind the flattering attention, but would appreciate acknowledgment as the source, even if I have to embed it myself.
-- Nicholas Johnson
# # #
