USA Photographers in row with The White House

Here is the letter



November 21, 2013
Jay Carney
Press Secretary
The White House
VIA HAND DELIVERY
Dear Mr. Carney:
We write to protest the limits on access curren
tly barring photographers who cover the White
House. We hope this letter w
ill serve as the first step in
removing these restrictions and,
therefore, we also request a meeting with you
to discuss this critical issue further.
Journalists are routinely being de
nied the right to photograph or vi
deotape the President while he
is performing his official duties. As surely as
if they were placing a hand over a journalist’s
camera lens, officials in this administration are
blocking the public from having an independent
view of important func
tions of the Executive Branch of government.
To be clear, we are talking about
Presidential activities of a funda
mentally public nature. To be
equally clear, we are not talking about open acce
ss to the residence or to
areas restricted, for
example, for national security purposes.
The apparent reason for closing certain events to
photographers is that th
ese events have been
deemed “private.” That rationale, howeve
r, is undermined when the White House
contemporaneously releases its own photograph
of a so-called privat
e event through social
media. The restrictions im
posed by the White House on photog
raphers covering these events,
followed by the routine releas
e by the White House of photographs made by government
employees of these same events, is an arbitr
ary restraint and unwarra
nted interference on
legitimate newsgathering ac
tivities. You are, in effect,
replacing independe
nt photojournalism
with visual press releases.
All of the following events, with the exception of
the McCain-Graham meeting, were reported as
“read-outs” by the White House with “official”
White House photo(s) attached. They illustrate
the troubling breadth of the restrictions placed
upon newsgathering by the White House to record
governmental activity of undisputed
and wide public interest:
•
On July 10, 2013, the President met with me
mbers of the Congressional Hispanic
Caucus.
•
On July 11, 2013, the President met with the Co
-Chairs of the U.S. - China Strategic and
Economic Dialogue.
•
On July 29, 2013, the President met with former
Secretary of State
Clinton (White House
photo also distributed via Twitter).
•
On July 30, 2013, the President and Vice Pres
ident met with Isra
eli and Palestinian
negotiators.
•
On August 26, 2013, the President met with
African-American Faith Leaders.
•
On September 2, 2013, the President met w
ith Senators McCain and Graham.
•
On October. 11, 2013, the President and fam
ily members met with Pakistani human
rights activist Malala Yousafzai, a
person of great public interest.
While certain of these events may appear “privat
e” in nature, the decision of the White House to
release its own contemporaneous photograph(s)
suggests that the White House believes these
events are, in fact, news
worthy and not private.
The right of journalists to gath
er the news is most critical wh
en covering government officials
acting in their official capaciti
es. Previous administrations ha
ve recognized this, and have
granted press access to visually cover precisely th
ese types of events, thus creating government
transparency. It is clear that the restricti
ons imposed by your office on photographers undercut
the President’s stated de
sire to continue and broaden that
tradition. To exclude the press
from these functions is a major break from how
previous administrations have worked with the
press.
Moreover, these restrictions raise constitutional c
oncerns. As the Supreme Court has stated, the
First Amendment protects “the public
and the press from abridgment
of their rights of access to
information about the operat
ion of their government,”
Richmond Newspapers Inc. v. Virginia
,
448 U.S. 555, 584 (1980). The fact that there
is no access whatsoever only heightens those
concerns. As one court has noted
in considering a similar restric
tion: “The total exclusion of
television representatives from White House pool c
overage denies the pub
lic and the press their
limited right of access, guaranteed by the Firs
t Amendment of the Cons
titution of the United
States."
Cable News Network, Inc. v. American Broadcasting Companies, Inc., et al.
518
F.Supp. 1238, 1245 (N.D. GA 1981).
The organizations and individuals
signing this letter strongly
believe that imposing limits on
press access, as your office has done, represents
a troubling precedent with a direct and adverse
impact on the public’s ability to independently
monitor and see what its government is doing.
We consider this a most serious matter a
nd urge you to provide appropriate access for
independent photojournalists to all public gove
rnmental events in which the President
participates.
Again, we see this letter as the first step towa
rd restoring full press access to these events.
Accordingly, we request an immediate meeting w
ith you in order to resolve this very serious
situation. We ask that you contact Stev
e Thomma, President of the White House
Correspondents’ Association, and Sam Feist, current
television pool chair,
to set up the meeting.
Thank you.