House, hunting

What gives?

        More fireworks this week in D.C. involving questions and media complaints about how the Obama administration tries to manage the news. But it looks like standard procedure is following a rutted path with ruts that just get deeper. Is this disregard for government's duty to serve the public with transparency except in truly dire circumstances ever going to change?

        Howard Kurtz reports today in the Washington Post: "Less than an hour after President Obama announced his Supreme Court nominee yesterday, two 'senior administration officials' began holding forth for reporters on the virtues of Sonia Sotomayor.

        "Several journalists in the Roosevelt Room briefing protested, saying there was no reason the officials couldn't speak on the record. One of the briefers, senior adviser David Axelrod, would be making a similar case on Fox News, CNN, MSNBC and PBS within hours. But Press Secretary Robert Gibbs stood his ground: No names could be attached."

        Ridiculous. At least a briefing was being held. But with a curtain of secrecy imposed, the briefing amounted to bits of sunshine blasting past the edges of pulled drapes. As Kurtz noted, the drapes were about to be opened. So what gives with the "no-names" dictate? The public's tired of political games. Let the media do their work for us.

        Kurtz reported further: "'We protest in the strongest terms the Obama administration's frequent use of briefings done on a background basis . . . especially when the same officials briefing often appear ubiquitously on television shows with similar information,' said Jennifer Loven of the Associated Press, president of the White House Correspondents' Association. She said this was particularly true on a Supreme Court nomination, 'when the issue does not involve sensitive material such as national security information.' 

        Asked for a response, Gibbs said it was 'interesting' that the AP had no qualms about relying on unnamed 'officials' in breaking the news of Sotomayor's nomination. 'I'm not sure today is the day I'd make that argument,' he said."

        I'm not sure today's the day to feel confident that the public's right to know is a priority. 

Osage nation embraces free press

        One would think that of all the political entities in the U.S., American Indian nations would be among the most entrenched in supporting a free and independent press. Not so. In fact, many tribal newspapers are well-experienced in trying to operate under the oppressive thumb of tribal officials who fear openness in the same vein as China, Russia and other oppressed societies. But that's for a later post. 

        I'm blogging about this because of great news about the Osage nation just received from the Native American Journalists Association, of which I'm a member. NAJA shares the following:

********************P R E S S R E L E A S E********************

For Immediate Release

Osage Nation

Communications Officer Paula Stabler 918/287-5555

From the Office of the Principal Chief

Chief Gray Declares Osage News Independent

Osage Nation, Pawhuska, OK -- In the April 2009 issue of the Osage News, the paper expressed cautious optimism that Chief Gray would issue an executive order declaring the paper's independence. On May 6, 2009, Principal Chief Jim Gray issued "Executive Order 09-03: Providing for a Free Press" thereby ordering elected officials and employs of the Nation to "refrain from interfering with the critical reporting of all issues of relevance to the Osage people," further stating that "the Osage News shall be independent from any undue influence of the Osage Nation Executive Branch and free of any particular political interest."

"I really think this finally sets us on the right path to giving our people reliable and intelligent reporting of information and views that will make our people better able to participate in our government as citizens," stated Principal Chief Gray.

The Executive Order further provides for the establishment of an Editorial Council, "to ensure and protect editorial integrity in an Osage free press and provide proper guidance and oversight," Those eligible for the Editorial Council must be at least 25 years old; not be a convicted felon, have demonstrable professional credential for at least five years, be physically able to carry out the duties, can not be an employee or elected official of the Osage Nation, and must swear an oath to uphold the accepted ethics of professional journalism (emphasis mine).

"I am looking forward to our free press providing reliable and intelligent reporting that will stimulate the free flow of ideas and information amongst our Osage citizenry," stated Principal Chief Gray.

        This is a red-letter day for the Osage nation. But the hardest part is yet to come: testing the nation's resolve in tolerating a free and independent press. Let's hope the Osage heart for truth and light is indeed far more powerful than darkness.