Wednesday, March 16, 2005

An article on the light side of dissidence

The New York Times > New York Region > No Need to Stew: A Few Tips to Cope With Life's Annoyances: "Work slowdowns are methods commonly used by labor unions to apply pressure without actually striking. During the Solidarity movement in Poland, people expressed their disapproval of the government-run news media by taking a walk with their hats on backward at exactly 6 p.m. when the state news program started. When the government noticed the trend, it issued curfews, but people then put their televisions in their windows facing outward so that only the police walking the streets would see the broadcasts."

Login with user name "unfortunately" and password "required."


The Culture of Secrecy

There is a clear need for some kinds of secrecy and our government should provide the safety that secrecy can give us. But, when the culture of secrecy is embedded in the administration we have and you add a war to it, there are huge potential problems.

Rick Blum writes a story which appears in the Provo, Utah Daily Herald. His lead paragraph spells out the problem: "Last year our government spent $ 6.5 billion -- or for every woman, man and child in the United States -- to classify and secure its millions of accumulated secrets. That is 60 percent more than it spent just two years before, and the most it has spent on secrecy for at least the past decade -- not even counting the cost of keeping the CIA's extensive records secret. Sorry, the CIA keeps that figure classified."

Blum's closing paragraph: "Openness, not secrecy, makes our democracy and economy strong. Information in the right hands can produce medical breakthroughs, advance technology, apprehend criminals, and make us safer, healthier and more productive. At best, excessive secrecy is an abuse of the fundamental trust that the public places in government. At worst, it puts uncounted lives and communities at risk, and wastes billions of taxpayers' dollars."

Democracy can and does flourish in a society that is open. One of the things we often say of other countries is that they need to have a free and open discussion of ideas. The culture I would prefer is one of openness.

The Culture of Secrecy

There is a clear need for some kinds of secrecy and our government should provide the safety that secrecy can give us. But, when the culture of secrecy is embedded in the administration we have and you add a war to it, there are huge potential problems.

Rick Blum writes a story which appears in the Provo, Utah Daily Herald. His lead paragraph spells out the problem: "Last year our government spent $ 6.5 billion -- or for every woman, man and child in the United States -- to classify and secure its millions of accumulated secrets. That is 60 percent more than it spent just two years before, and the most it has spent on secrecy for at least the past decade -- not even counting the cost of keeping the CIA's extensive records secret. Sorry, the CIA keeps that figure classified."

Blum's closing paragraph: "Openness, not secrecy, makes our democracy and economy strong. Information in the right hands can produce medical breakthroughs, advance technology, apprehend criminals, and make us safer, healthier and more productive. At best, excessive secrecy is an abuse of the fundamental trust that the public places in government. At worst, it puts uncounted lives and communities at risk, and wastes billions of taxpayers' dollars."

Democracy can and does flourish in a society that is open. One of the things we often say of other countries is that they need to have a free and open discussion of ideas. The culture I would prefer is one of openness.

The Culture of Secrecy

There is a clear need for some kinds of secrecy and our government should provide the safety that secrecy can give us. But, when the culture of secrecy is embedded in the administration we have and you add a war to it, there are huge potential problems.

Rick Blum writes a story which appears in the Provo, Utah Daily Herald. His lead paragraph spells out the problem: "Last year our government spent $ 6.5 billion -- or for every woman, man and child in the United States -- to classify and secure its millions of accumulated secrets. That is 60 percent more than it spent just two years before, and the most it has spent on secrecy for at least the past decade -- not even counting the cost of keeping the CIA's extensive records secret. Sorry, the CIA keeps that figure classified."

Blum's closing paragraph: "Openness, not secrecy, makes our democracy and economy strong. Information in the right hands can produce medical breakthroughs, advance technology, apprehend criminals, and make us safer, healthier and more productive. At best, excessive secrecy is an abuse of the fundamental trust that the public places in government. At worst, it puts uncounted lives and communities at risk, and wastes billions of taxpayers' dollars."

Democracy can and does flourish in a society that is open. One of the things we often say of other countries is that they need to have a free and open discussion of ideas. The culture I would prefer is one of openness.

Tuesday, March 15, 2005

What Culture Do You Favor?

When it comes to secrecy, you might hate it or you might embrace it, depending on your background. Businessmen don't like having everybody know what they're doing and why. They want to be able to keep their "advantage" over the competition and will go to great lengths to protect "their territory." That is their mindset. That's the way they live and few see any reason to change that part of their culture.

When it comes to secrecy, we always must keep in mind that when we vote for any candidate we're voting for more than the positions they proclaim to support. We're voting for their cultural position as well. When you vote for managers, you're voting for folk who fear and mistrust the "press." When managers "sell" ideas and concepts they use the same culture they have used to "sell" processes and products. Its their culture, the way they view the world.

In Krugman's Op/Ed piece today in the New York Times, he points out that "The argument over Social Security privatization isn't about rival views on how to secure the program's future - even the administration admits that private accounts would do nothing to help the system's finances. It's a debate about what kind of society America should be." This is a debate over cultures.

What culture do you favor?

Monday, March 14, 2005

When Can Secrecy Harm You?

In today’s USATODAY an Op/Ed piece points out a trend that should have everyone’s attention. “In 2004, the government created 16 million new secrets, 75% more than in the year ending in September 2001. Sixteen million! And each new ‘classification decision’ can involve many documents.

What you don’t know can hurt you. That’s why the nation agreed to, and made into law the Freedom of Information Act. This gave us protection against the unknown from our own government and made it possible for us to vote with greater wisdom.

Fear is the usual reason information flow is slowed or stopped. We’ve been living in an environment of fear now since 9/11, and in our efforts to protect ourselves we may very well have hurt ourselves. In order to be a viable democracy we must have an informed population. They must be able to gather their information from any and all sources or abuses will happen.

Of course adjustments need to be made. That’s almost always true. But, when you couple national fear with a tendency toward secrecy by culture, there can be major problems. When things happen in our government that we are not allowed to know about you can bet the potential is there for our harm.

Sunday, March 13, 2005

What To Watchout For

We all want and need dependable news sources, so that we can make the best possible decisions for ourselves, families and communities. Sometimes we overlook obvious indicators of actual and potential problems. For example, as businesses attempt to increase their profits, they do what is necessary to maintain their product, if possible, and to meet the target for profits set by their owners. This is a problem.

News people have to abide by the same rules other businesses do and they too have been under great pressure to increase or at least maintain profits. There's a limit to what businesses can cut and still maintain their product's integrity. As the cost of labor goes up, fewer can be hired and maintained, and that means potential and now probable problems for those who need reliable news.

When a reporter was expected to research and write three news stories a day and because of costs we now have half as many reporters to fill the news the clients are accustomed to receive. The organization either has to become more efficient or the reporters have to produce more stories each day. Unfortunately, there are lots of folk who are willing and able to supply the news. We call some of them public relations agencies. They package stories which often are very good and at times little more than propaganda.

The New York Times article in today's issue reports that we are in the era of prepackaged news which puts your ability to trust the news in deeper jeopardy.