I ]!E Ltgt .tr y JUIIE rr tst ndr ruurJt r\ ur ilt tErrtr,tud! rr Eruuilr

Virginina. Black.538 U.S. 343 (2003). Waldron, 1.2009. Dignity and defamation: The visibility of hate. Haraartl Laut Rea iew 123: 1596 -1657. Waldron, Jeremy. 2012. The harm in hate speech. Cambridge MA: Harvarc'l University Press.

Webb, Thomas J, 2011. Verbal poison-criminalizing hate speech: A comp,rr ative analysis and a proposal for the American system (note).Washhw u lntellectual Freedom and U.S. Law our n al 50: 445 482. J - Secrecyr West a. DerhyUnifud School District No. 260,206 F.3d 1358 (10th Cir), cert. Government denied,531 U.S. 825 (2000). Wisconsina. U.S. 476 (1993). Mitchell.508 Susan Maret Yalrco! Inc. u. LaLigue Contre Le Rucisme Et UAntisettitisme.433 F.3d 1199 (9th Cir.2006). The idea of intellectual liberty is under attack * from two directions. On tlrc one side are its tlrcoretical enemies, 1 the apologists oftotalitarianisrt and tlrc 1 on other its i immediate, practical enemieq monopoly and bureaucracy. 1l -George Orwell (1946)

I i lntellectual freedom assumes a free press, access to libraries, transparency t- of laws and regulationt open records and archives, and a social world that l provides a foundation for exploration, expressiorl discussion of diverse per- i npectives, and the protection of rights. This rich climate potentially molds in- dividual thought and actiory but also civic participation, as "people do need novels and dramas and paintings and poems, 'because they will be called upon to vote"' (Meiklejohn 1961,263\.Inte1lectual freedom implies potential empowerment through information and communication regarding common life, for without knowledge there is no chance to exercise power (Bok 1989b). 'lhrough intellectual freedom, individuals are better able to come to terms with the times in which they live and the history they inherit. Essential for the creation of trust and confidence so critical in addressing issues of mutual concern, intellectual freedom is also related to a reduction of uncertainty, for in accessing certain kinds of information,2 individuals as well as govern- ments are able to assess risk and security (Daase and Kessler 200[ Edelstein 2004), In this chapter, I investigate intellectual freedom in the United States within the confines of government secrecy. First, I discuss intellectual free- dom through a lens of law and human rights, and in the following sections,

I The author thanks Mark Alfino, Ivan Greenberg, and Mickey Huff for their feed- back on this chapter. ? lnformation as intended here means "knowledge communicated' (Capurro 2003). r ne Lrorary Jutce Press HanooooK oI tnleilectuat Freeoont Ulargl: lnlellectual lrge(lurn dlltr Lr.J. \tevEl lllllEllt JEr,rtLy

I utilize political scientist Carl j. Friedriclls models of functional and tli., Intellectual freedom is also tied to the right to know (RTK) by way ol ittt functional secrecy and tampering with communications in assessing "wlr,rt open media, of which Kent Cooper of the Associated Press observctl tlr,rl is and is not discreditable by examining particular practices of secrecy" citizenis entitled to have access to news, fully and accurately prt'scltlt'tl, (li 'k "i 1989b, 9). Friedrich's modes of secrecy not only illustrate the demands s,, There cannot be political freedom in one country or the world, without rt'' crecy places on intellectual freedom, but allow for the discussion of secrecv'., spect for the right to know"' (The Nezo York Times 1945 18). It is with Ctxr- close cousins, propaganda, censorship and surveillance. pir we witness the birth of the contemporary RTK movement in the Unitctl States during the 1"940s, in part based on the ideal of an informed citizenship lntellectual Freedom-A Global Right made possible through access to information. The RTK movement_ gainecl furthei ground with the work of Harold L. Cross, counsel to the lVezu York The cornerstones of intellectual freedom, the ability to access and commu rr i Herald Tribune, who was enlisted by the American Society of Newspaper cate information, including the "right to speak anonymously, the right to usr. Editors (ASNE) to compile "a comprehensive report on customs, laws and encryption tools and the right to be free from unwarranted monitoring arrtl court decisions affecting our free access to public information whether it is surveillance" (Article 19 2003; United Nations General Assembly 1966) as recorded on police blotters or the files of national government" (Cross 1953, tablish the power to research, write, publish, affiliate, protesf and assembh, xv). Among the rights identified by Cross is the "right of inspection"' traced Furthermore, intellectual freedom is the right to hold beliefs, express opin to English Common Law where ionq and share information "regardless of frontiers" (United Nations Gt'rr or by his eral Assembly,1948). Simply, intellectual freedom is defined as the "freeclorrr Eoery person is entitled to the inspection, either personally judicial re' of the mind and as such it is both a personal liberty and a prerequisite for ,rll agent, of public records, including legislatiae, executitte, and enable freedoms leading to actior{' (American Library Association 201Q xvii). cords, proaided he has sn inttrest therein which is such as would him to maintain or defend un action in znhich the document or reclrd The Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution 5789) andlaws such as the Atl can eaidence 0t necessaryinformation. (Cross 1953,26) ministrative Procedure Act P.L. 79-404 (1946), Freedom of Information Ar I sought furnish P.L.89-487 (1966),3 Federal Advisory Committee Act P.L. 92-463 (1972), thr InThe People's Right to Know: Legal Access to Public Records and Proceedings, Covernment in Sunshine Act P.L. 94-409 $976), Paperwork Reduction Ar I cross reviewed staiutes on the definition of a public lecord, privacy laws, Amendments of 1996 P.L. 104-13, Electronic Freedom of Information Ar I and identified five "non-inspection doctrines" that outline instances where Amendments of 1996 (P,L.104231), and Open Government Act of 2007 (P.l records can be withheld (953,203-273). in this work, Cross also argues for 110:175) extend political rights and civil liberties associated with intellectrr. the addition of a constitutional amendment to clarify the First Amendment al freedom.a In addition, rights associated with intellectual freedom in thr, on access to information. Cross' book remains a groundbreaking early in- United States are affirmed through a variety of international declaratiurrr ventory of freedom of information laws and a measure of U.S. government and conventions.s secrecy and was an inspiration for the creation of the Freedom of Informa- tion Act of 1966, or FOIA (Lemov 2011). Both Cooper and Cross suggest that The Act was perceived by many in Congress and in federal agencies that adnrirr the RTK is best realized by an investigative press and media, coupled with istered FOIA as a way to allow the release of legitimate secrets (Mackenzie lt)t)/, of government policies and actions.6 12) and also began a longstanding'tollision course" with the National Securill' publicity and transparency Act and its provisions (MacKenzie for secrecy 1997, 12:13). FOIA was subsl,rrr of Racial Discrimination 59691, the International Covenant on Civil and Politi- amended 1974, tially in and de facto modified in 1984 by the CIA Informatiorr cal Rights 5976), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Act which exempts operational files of the Agency fiom release. Rights (L976), and the Convention against Torture and other Cruel Inhuman A case can be made that intellectual freedom is furthered by environmental law.' orbegrading Treatment or Punishment Q98n. The Rio Declaration on Environ- such as the Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act (P.1,. utl ment and Development, especially Principle 10 also reinforces the need for in- 499), the National Environmental Protection Act of 1959 (P.L. 91-190), callt'tl tlrr, formation in decisionmaking (United Nations Conference on Environment and ecological Magna Carta (Auerbach1972), and the Occupational Safety and I lt'irlllr Development 1992). Act of 1970 (P.L.91-596) which mandates a worker's right to know of chenricirl ,rrrrl 6 Note the distinctions between publicity and transparency as Daniel Naurin radiation hazards in the workplace. (2006) observes: "accountability is primarily a function of publicity rather than Such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 0948), particularly Artir h,., transparency, Publicity, one can say, is a causal mechanism linking transparency 18, 19,26, and 27, the lnternational Conve'ntiorr orr tht lllintination of All l;olrrrr and accountability." (91). r rrs Lrvr ql y ,gtLE rr gJJ nqrrsvvv^ vl lllttllEl,ludl rl EEuulrl

tril l Secrecy: Functional or Disfunctional? is deemed protective and necessary, which fall into Friedrich's typology of the functional use of secrecy (Aftergood 1999; Blanton 2003; Commission on Limits on intellectual freedom are associated with shades of government se- Protecting and Reducing Government Secrecy 1997;Hoffman1987; McDer- crecy, as the secret is "the ultimate sociological form for the regulation ol' mott 201f Powers 1998; Schoenfeld 201.1"; Sunstein1986; and Thompson 1999). the flow and distribution of information' (Hazekigg7969,324). Secrecy may To further support this view, historically, secrecy was frequently employed include the use of codes, disguises, markings, costumes, and specific colors by the Framers during the establishment of the U:rited Statgl government (Bok 1989a; Simmel 1906) and is connected to the clandestine, or "any activ- to protect policies against foreign influence (Hoffman 1981; Halstuk 2002). ity or operation sponsored or conducted by governmental departments or Moreover: agencies with the intent to assure secrecy and concealment" (Department of Pubticitywns neaer opposed in pincipte; rather it wns seen as unwork- Defense 2012). Bnt it is secrecy as the consciouslywilled concealment of informa- able in iertain contexis or spheres of actiaity' As a result, the ualues of ef' fion (Simme11906,449) with sanctions for disclosure phils 1956) employed goaernment and accauntable goaernment had to be balanced and from the establishment of the United States across branches of government 'reconciled.fectiae The deaice accomplishing this was institutional as a weapo& technique,T strategy, and policy that involves 'tonflicts of power faaored for plur ali s m. (Hof f man 1981', 79) that come through controlling the flow of information" (Bok 1989b, 18-19). of delib- As Cass Sunstein observes, our current understanding of the |effersoniarr The Framers' functional use of secrecy is perhaps an early form model of freedom of information, with its emphasis on the ability of citizens erative privilege, which protects internal discussions as they are shaped by to make informed decisions by way of access to a wide variety of informa- legislators and policymakers before opened for public discussion (Depart tion, "oversimplifies the constitutional system, which delegates authority kr m6nt of ]ustice 2oOOj. for example, The Resolution of Secrecy adopted by the representatives as well as to citizens" (986,891). Sunstein notes that political Continental Congress called for members decisions are not always made by individuals but their elected representa- Not to diaulge, directly sv indirectly, anymatter or thing agitated or de- tives, who themselves are under legal and administrative constraints (1986, bated in Congress, before the same shall haae been determined, without 894). What the ieffersonian philosophy does accomplish, according to Sun- leaae of the Congress; nff any matter or thing determined in Congress, steiry is something interdependent, for if information "is kept secret, publn' which a majority of the Congress shall order to be lnpt secref' (Conti- deliberation cannot occur; the risks of self-interested representation and fac- nental Congress 1775) tional tyranny increase dramatically. The ]effersonian model thus calls for Daniel N. Hoffman believes the Framers "made it clear that the substantial limitations on governmental secrecy' (1986,894). While this may Historian had a place for secrecy, specifically with respect to the national be so in a general philosophical sense, as this chapter indicates, throughout Constitution the executive branch. No suggestion made that U.S. history, government secrecy is often at odds with the rights associatecl security functions bf _was should be practiced in other spheres, or that it would be with access to information. se.tu.y would or even as to these" (1981, 34). in this vein, Article I, Sec. 5, Cl' 3, of the Given this rdsum6, Friedrict/s model of functional and disfunctional se- absolute Congress guidance for secret keeping (Amer 2008, 1) crecy is of value in examining government secrecy (Friedrich 1972,175-176; u.s. constitution offers s Sec. 2 suggeits a basis for executive secrecy, or "the right of Merton 1940,561). First, Friedrich observes that in specific circumstances, and Article II branch officers to withhold informa- secrecy can be system-developing, "system-maintaining and like conflict, the president and high-level executive tionjrom those who hal e compulsory power" (Rozell 2002,403\. This right is may even be needed for the functioning of the system" 0972,5). Friedrich "absolute, executive privilege is often subject to the compul- associates official secrets, especially concerning foreign or military matters not viewed as as of the other branches" (Rozell 1002, +031.n However, as Friedrich that are "subject to the strictest secrecy" with some functional secrecy, evcrl sory powers though such secrecy'tonflicts with the principle of popular control and rt'- "Injunction by secrecy," Standing Rule 36 (paragraph 3) of the U.S. Senate, autho- freedom lated of the press and generally of expressior( (1972,177). In this riies publicition of treaties after completion of secret negotiations' See Amer way, specific conditions are reported in the research literature where secrecy (2008) and Manley O. Hudson $929) for a fascinating historical look at Rule 36. 7 Technique as employed here reflects Merton's description of Ellul as "any conrplt'r IJnited States u. Nixon (1974) recognized executive privilege, but declined to apply of standardized means for attaining a predetermined result" (1964). Techniqur, it to protect the watergate tapes. The concept of the "unitary executive theoty," as used in this chapter rnay perhaps be extended to Foucault's (1972) 'tliscursivr, held by the second Bush administration, holds that the president has authority practices." over tlie F.xccutive branch. For an extended discussion see Rosenberg (2008). I llE Llur dl y JullE r! t:)) rr.lllqgoolt Ol llllellgcf Ual ifeeqom lvlcllEU lllltlltl,lUCl rl EEsvllr srre v'r'

points out the "functionality of secrecy is often too readily assumed willr l%9; Bok 1989b; Blanton 2003; Cook 1996; Friedrich 1972; Gibbs 2011; GUP adequate proof ." In his discussion of official secrecy, Friedrich observes th,rl 2000; Halperin, et al 1976;Halperin and Woods 1990-1991;Kerty 1997;Leon- "many of the matters secreted by such agencies as the CIA and the FBI cou k I ard}}ll,Olmsted 1996; Wise and Ross 1964). just as well be a matter of public record, and other such matters subject to scrutiny by Congress and other administrative agencies" Q972,190). The Moynihan Commission and Government Secrecy Conversely, secrecy is identified as 'dysfunctional" by Friedrich wht'rr functionality "declines to a poini where the particular part hurts and dc Referred to as the Moynihan Commission for its chairman, Senator Daniel P' stroys the system" (1972, 7).In this way, disfunctional secrecy no lonl',t'r Moynihary the commission on Protecting and Reducing Government secre- includes and sustains an "adequately informed public opinion" (Friedrit lr cy ipplied sociologist Max weber's analysis to dissect the "onion structure" 1972,177). Historical and contemporary examples of disfunctional secrct v oi th" b,tr"un.tu.!, a system that is "organizationally shockproof against are plentiful in the scholarly and popular literature, ranging from subjects the factuality of t'he reil world" (Arendi 1968, 100). What Weber.offers to such as the overclassification of information, leaks and national security, irr the study oiU.S. government secrecy is a descriptiol qJ q specialized, dis- telligence budgets, trade policies, to confidential business information, covt'rl ciplined "power iistrument of the first order" (1978,gg7)-highly.dependent actions, surveillance of U.S. citizens, dual-use technology, the environmcrrl, on controiof information. The bureaucracy, according to Weber, is naturally international relations, and military matters (Aftergood 2000;2009; Anrcricutr secretive regarding knowledge and intentions whether out of functional or Ciuil Liberties Union and the Ameican Gail Liberties Union Foundation u Ll.S pure power-motives (1978, 992-93). But there is more-a bureaucracy Department of 2013; Bok 1989b; Colby 1976; Cole 1987;Felbinger urrrl lustice that uses its knowledge and capacityfor concealment to escape inspection Reppy 2011; Fisher 2006; Foerstel1991.; 1992; Gibbs 195; 2011.; Gravel 197?; and control jeopardiies legal domination by usurping the rule-making or Hinson 2010; Hook 1988; House Special Investigations Division 2004; Housr, decision-miking p\rlrers ihat should ideally result from the political and Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats, and Internation,rl legislatia e pr 0 ce ss. (Bendix 1962, 452) Relations 2006; Johnson 2000; Lutter 2013; Mendelsohn 1996; New York'l'itrtru his historical-sociological analysis, Weber identified rationality, techni- Co.aDepartrnent of lustice2013;Pillz 2011; Reporiers Committee for Freetlt'rrr In rules" (1958,21,5),and the'quantitative of the Press 2005; Roberts 2006; Rourke 1957;1960; Rozell 2002; Senate Sckr I cal superiority, reliance onttalculable of bureaucracy's inner Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligcrrr,' exteniion of idministrative tasks" at the foundation "among those social structures Activities 1976; Senate Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights 1972; Shuv workings (968, 969). Bureaucracy, although "insttument for'societalizing'- 2006; Shils 1956; Thompsonl999; Turner 1994; Welsome 2000; Wise and l{osr which ire'the hardest to destroy" is also an the.discussion of le64). relations of power" (weber 1958-,228).Of deep relevance to bureaucracy's The abundant literature on disfunctional secrecy also includes analysir lntellectual ?reedom and government secrecy, the of the state secrets privilege, a creature of judge-made law under the Fcrft'rrrl secretiae tendency exists e\)en in the absence of plausible justifications. Rules of Eaidence, which lacks grounding in federal statutes and, many lurv,, Eaery bureaucracy witl conceal its knowledge and ope-tation unless argued, any grounding in the Constitution. Its use has frustrated judit'i,rl to disclose ihem, and it witl, if need be, simulate the existence of 'hostileforced redress for constitutional wrongdoing, including "government assassinatiorr, interests to justifu such concealment. (Bendix 1962,452) torture, kidnapping, illegal surveillance" (Open the Governm ent 2012, 17 \, the finer aspects of weber's work were not expressly discussed Disfunctional secrecy is associated with what might be considered "st,t'tr'l Although the Moinihan Commission in its study, they,nevertheless are essential to laws" such as classified National Decision Directives, which "do not app(\u by information practices and policies of U.S' federal agencies, for it is to be issued under statutory authority conferred by Congress and thus tl,' airalyzing the of the bureaucricy, archives, all of it, print and digital, not have the force and effect of law" (General Accounting Office 1992, 1) irrr,l files-"therecords pait and present-that are subject to secrecy,_powet, authority, rules, privi- Presidential Study Directives (Federation of American Scientists 2011), In th i', and compartmentalization' Weber writes: way, disfunctional secrecy can exemplify sociologist Georg Simmel's "sot'iu iege, territory, logical expression of moral badness" (1906,463) when it is utilized to rcslrir I Management of the modetn organization is based upon.written docu' and rearrange information of a potentially embarrassing nature ancl to t'lo,r1. ment{ (the fitbs"), which are pteseraed in their original or draft t'orm, corruption, abuse, and misconduct (Aclams and Balfour 2011; Altcr'1',ot'.1 and upon a itaff of subaltern oft'icials und scribes of all sorts' (978,957\ r rrE Lrrr! c'y Jurce rress nanqDOOK Ot lntellectual Ffgedom Maret: lntellectual Freedom and U.5. {rovernmenr 5ecrecy

Intre.asingly all order in pubtic and priaate organizations is dependent the Commission's historical review reports an almost cyclical use of sL'crct'y y.t,lrc of the discipiines 2plm fites,and of officialdom, that meaus, its that includes the use of propaganda, censorship and surveillance by thc U.S. hnb^it of painstaking obedience within tts wonied spneri E actioi. pvrc, government in response to concerns over national security, conspiracy, and eB8) domestic subversion.r 2 u.tilizing example, Alien Sedition wcber's sociological investigation into the nature of bureaucrir For the Commission drew parallels between the cy, the Commission 1798, where "|ohn say free press maintains tht' describei secrecy in"government in the following way: Act of Adams could that'a majesty of the people' and champion the Sedition Act that threatened five A forry of goaernment regulation. There are manqr such forms, but a years in prison to anyone whose opinions besmirched the good name of a ge.neral diuision can be.lnde behaeen regulations dealing ziith domestic government official or sowed confusion among the people" and the Espio- and thae dealing zoith ffiirs, foreign"oyoirr, In the first caigrry, it nage Act of 1917 that quelled political speech and public protest over the ge.ner.ally the case, that goaeinmeitliis*iues I zohai the ciilzZn mag, World War (WW1) as the "United States Government grew reckless do; I draft in the second c.ategory, it is grnr.*ily the case that gorrriiiit prr_ in its infringement of liberty" (Schultz 2003, 39). The conviction of Charles scribes what the cifizen mayknou,. 1tOiZ! Schenk under the Espionage Act for distributing anti.draft pamphlets dur- These distinctions led ?"ltot Moynihan to remark that two regurat.ry ing WWI-the "peoples' war" as Woodrow Wilson termed it-led the Su- .'r9gimes" exist in the united states: ihe first regime allows for freedom preme Court to deny Schenk's argument that his activities were protected information through public 't disclosure, discoveiy, and due pro.urr, ancr is by the First Amendment. Writing the opinion for the Court, Justice Oliver under public sclutify. The second Holmes proposed speech in the concept of regime is 'tonceared *itii" u vast [rrr- Wendell distinctions for rights reaucratic complex," wherein.'som_e congressionar oversight may take prar. 'tlear and present danger": and some presidential control" (tgg7).In"this latter regffi in"luuti. i. ,..,,, Words which, ordinarily and in mnnyplaces, would be zoithin the free- excluded altogether, but the sysiem ,,,iisaiuur-,tii.,, is fraught with tutiru.t dom of speech protected by the First Amendment maybecome subject venfure, where limited oversight and pubriJreview takes prace, also suggt,st, to prohibihon when of such a nature snd used in such circumstances a possibilities for betrayal and_col"upliin (Friedrich tgZZ,hi),;tti.l fuitrr,,,, to create a clear and present danger that thegt will bring about the sub- (Bean 2011; c tgz6;Farral 20r1; ?W Leonlra zor t; anaiittizbiij'*a adnrirr stnntiue eails which Congress has a right to preaent. (Schencka. United istrative evil (Adams and Balfour 2009;2011). States 1919) By far the most noteworthy of the Commissiont contributions to adva't ing theory,.secrecy Moreover, the Committee on Public Information (CPI), or Creel Commit- by regulition acts as a barometu, or ,oii" ioi gaugi'1' * secret keeping government. tee, played a significant role in shaping public opinion shortly after Ameri- r while weber never expounded on the uses .l secrecy and its forms ca's entry into World War I. In1917, eighteen categories of information were in relation to the files, he brought together the essenti,rl ingredients t published inThe New YorkTimes and proposed for restriction via "voluntary for the Moynihan Commission's model"of ,..i".y by reguratit,rr, or "'government secrety,' which more properry .o"rJu" iui^li;ua*r,..i, censorshiy''by the Committee on grounds of providing information to the secrecy."'r. enemy. The list of categories, from boat schedules, battle plans, and "tech- fative That is, secrecy by reguiation provides a means to stutry those techniques nical inventions," were disclosed by the Committee after Washington cor- that establish tr,it*r foir".r".y'thro,rgt ..,rtorr,,-ru*, .u1;,, lation, p.olitics, and specific respondents "declined to consider them" (Tlu New York Times 1917, 4). One techniques, and/or adminiitrative toois such ,r,, nond.lsclosure agreements, reason offered for rejection of the regulations by the press is that they "would compartmentalizatioru over-classification antl rr, classification,rl In characterizing government secrecy as a form declaring that previously published articles contained secrets" (The Progressiae "i;;il];ii,;;,, 1e7e) 10 P"lt t."l *t"ntist Frances E. Rourke (19s7;7960),the Moynihan commission, ,rrrtl Friedrich ,,administ'r"tl"" 12 For example, see the Central Intelligence Agency'sDispatch: Countering criticism of all refer to government secrecy as ,".r..y;ioilowirrp, Max Weber (1968,992). theWarrenReport,whichsought to "provide material for countering and discred- iting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such tl Reclassffication is also termed "retroactive secrecy.,, see unifrrd stnk,s Arttrrrr rr of claims in other countries 5967, 1). The Dispatch contains a lengthy analysis of OJyrilf ,, The-Progressiae Inc., Enuin Knoll, Satruei Doy, lr., ,tn,l llorwrr,i M,trlurt,t books written on the assassination of President Kennedy. Also see Chang (2002) Defendants, where the praintiff "acrvancecr the concept of rt,troactivc s(,(.r(,( \. and Greenberg (2012). n anq v'J' l.rr,YE| rr"rErrL vsv' !!' rne uoraryJurce Press Handbook of lntellectual Freedonr Maret: lntellectual Ffeeoom

rlil Appendix A)'rr rhe Na- and Reducing col-er11911secrecy 1997' bar speculation about possible peace or differences of opinion with allies ,,r f'rotecting collection antl Act of 19'47 (p.L. 80-253) advanced intelii-gence neutrals" (The N ezn York Times l9l7, 1), Through its domestic and foreign cl i v r tional Security Agency''o thl Department of thc sions, the CPI placed the press and movie industry "upon their honor, arr,l analvsis in creating th. C;i;;i r"t"iligt"t" of the activities of the Na- made them partners of Government in guarding military informatiotr ol ir#;;;;;""J li, e"*"ii,t.'toirdination tangible benefit to the enemy" (Committee on Public Information 1920, llt\ ttonat tvtititary Establishment'"ts ,,permanent weber,s character of the bureau- These features of the National Security State (NSS) suggest great opporturrr with this hisiory il;t.d" *tfa"q to secrecy by regulation' a1d finds a ties for "misadventures" as observed by Senator Moynihan. They also inrlrll cratic machine" (1958, i8f it of the national ieculity state (NSS)' The opportunities for disfunctional secrecy, which endanger the very enjoynrt'rrt home in the contempo*ry *odel l t on the technical superiority of of rights that sustain intellectual freedom, including the ability of electt',| NSS model advances W"d#;;"*utiot rlr q-uantify' share' in its t" t^p ttte' ana\yze'manrpul-ale. representatives to provide oversight and individuals to exercise the resporr the buteaucracy ' information' It u.A p,"'"""-'""ttifty of personal and-public sibilities of citizenship and assume a right to privacy. As a side note, tht'sr, categorize,t6 by regula- ,,rpporiioi in."*i"ty rvr"y"il-tan commissior{s secrecy voluntary press restrictions are similar to those proposed by President Johrr also provide, and reorganization of U.s. government,rT F. Kennedy in L961. to the Association of Newspaper Editors during the Coltl tion and postgllL,tt"u.riuuu.ratic w"ion r"r'oi and seiret cvber-warfare War, and in more recent times, information was voluntarily withheld by'l ltr ili#:, #i. ;l ;il.-di"uJ lcwor)r8 Neru York Times rcgarding an American drone base located in Saudi Aralri,r 13"Bornclassified'orclassifiedatbirthprotects"sensitiveinformationwhich had an opportunity to assess its (Fresh Air 2013). Cases of dual-use research where "journal editors scr('('n, would not be aiuufi.J U"f"tt the Uniteilstates action" (D-eVolpi et al. 1"981, 59). review, and potentially reject manuscripts on the basis of their weapons pt' importance u"a t"ri" Jpp-r"priut" .iu*ifi.ution National SecuritY Council, which provided tential" such as H5N1. influenza research (Gottron and 5hea2072,8; Felbirlir,r l.l The National Security ect cieatea the Agencv as i"g:,P"I*"nt agency and Reppy 201.1) have also been proposed for informal press restrictiorrs orr for the superviti"^ Jf;i;'t;;i Intelligence T f uriher mandated that the Director the basis of harm to national security. (Centrat tnt.tfig.n.l Agu;11OOet Theict intelligence sources Intelligence%nit u" responsible for protecthg of central Section u"""*notired disclosurd' (Naiional Security Act 1942 Secrecy by Regulation and the NationalSecurity State and methods fro* 2 d (3). 102 to all outlines "1{ynal security" and refers A combination of Executive Orders (EOs) and legislation further institutiorr l5 The National security Ac! Sec' 101 from which derived and including infor- alizes the use of secrecy by the U.S. government. The Roosevelt administr,r intelligence, regardless ;,h.;;.. i mationgatheredwithinoro*ria.theunitedstates,that:A)pertains,asdeter- tion's L940 EO 8381 built on an 1869 Army order concerning {orts to alkru, by Presiden! to more than one mined consistent with issued- .the the "Secretary of War or the Secretary of the Navy as'secret' tonfidenti,rl,' ";;;id;tttt s) tt ut in"ol"es: 1) threats to the united united states Governm.;i"?;;;;;;J, use or'restricted and all such articles or equipment which may hereafter bt' so 2) the development' proliferation' or States, its people, prop",iy, o"' intl'e't'; marked with the approval or at the direction of the President (Quist 2002, ott,ur matter bearing on United states of weapons of mass d.rt;i;;;;-;;11 uny 46; Committee on Government Reform,2}} in1942, EO 9182, "Con- ).Issued nationil or homeland securitY' solidating Certain War information Functions into an Office of War lrrlirr. lnformation that requires safeguarding l6 Such as CUL or Controlled Unclassified mation" outlined the security categories of SECRET, CONFIDENTIAI,, arrrl consistent with liW regulations' and or disseminatioo.ootroi, poiruur,t to and (Executive order RESTRICTED (Executive Order L942). Truman Executive Order 10290 furtlrr,r' poticies.'cu1 classified information formalized the security classification system the creating of TOP Sli il;;;ilide "*.tua", with 13555,2009). rr_,--^,^-r CRET, SECRET and CONFIDENTIAL classifications (Executive O'Cer 102t)(l Security 17 The creation of the Department of Homeland 1951). The EO also defined classified security information as 'bfficial inkrr "t:lg,|lt^L:::1i11 U:"ff ffi of the Na- mation the safeguarding of which is necessary in the interest of national sr, il]iii",j*ffrtdilTr;;;n"iirioitilLioz;toro.!,.1inlu,.YT-1TJ?:s:::::::s:#il':i":: administration with itJenactment curity." This same Order moved philosophy into policy by defining inforrrr,r tional SecuritY Act. of war and non-war ' ' ' an orchestrat- tion as "knowledge which can be communicated, either orally or by mclnu 18 The GWOT is described as the 'tlements operations other than war' and op- of material" (Part III. Definitions). Legislation such as the Atomic Energy Ar I ed mdlange of comUai operations' military departments of government (Record of 1946 (P.L. 79-585) and1954 (P.L. 83-703) especially placed protectiorrs orr erations conducted by various nonmilitary not meet formal definitions of war "atomic" information and created security categories such as Restrictt tl I ),rl,r 2003, 6). o'Connell .18*;tl; CWoiiolt (RD), Formerly Restrictt'rl Data (FRD), ancl "bonl classificd" (Comrnissiorr ,'rr ttntlcr internationirl law (2005' 1)' r r rs Lrrrr dr y rurle rress nangDooK ot lntgllectual Freedonl lvldlElr llllgltgvlvql t IsEevrrr srle v.v. vlrty't

(sangar and shanker 2013). il The NSS is described as having the followirrli disinformation (from the Russian, "dezinformatsia") to counterpropagan(la elements: (Cunningham 2002, 66J1) and been classed as a type of communicatitttt l . (Cunningham 2002,77). While Friedrich never defines propaganda in his Control of the public sphere (Raskin and LeVan 2005) The Pathology of Poliics, which makes it difficult to fully carve out its territory Covert actions ' and the rise of secrecy regarding state actions with secrecy, he does associate propaganda with manipulation of informa- (Raskin i and LeVan 2005) tion and communication. The American Library Association's (2005) "Reso- ' Federal (and local) law enforcement metamorphosing into secu- lution on Disinformation, Media Manipulation, and Destruction of Public In- rity enforcement and surveillance (Raven_Hansen 20b5) formation" comes close to suggesting Friedrich's intent in that propaganda is "Iflaccurate information, distortions of truth, excessive limitations on access L^imiting or undermining individual rights (Raskin ' and Levan propaganda, Fried- 2005) to information." Nevertheless, in connecting secrecy and rich opens the theoretical door to expand on additional, significant relation- ilt . Nuclear w_eapons are a key component of the NSS (Dwyer and ships secrecy has with censorship and surveillance. These specific conditions Dwyer 2005) of information are discussed below as they relate to government secrecy and ' for war, cold war, and limited war (Raskin the tampering with communications. i 9.g1lt:_Tg ancl Le_ Van 2005) lii Censorship These features of the NSS suggest great opportunities for ,,misac1vt,rr tTr:s" a.: observed by Senator Moynihan. They also imply opportunities t.r According to Cull, Culbert, and Welch (2003), censorship takes two forms: the disfunctional secrecy, which the very enyoyment of tigr,tr that srr.. selection of information to support a particular viewpoint, or the deliberate tain intellectual 9"4TsuI freedom,-in9luding the ability of'eiected repre"sentatives r. manipulation or doctoring of information to create an impression different provide-oversight and individuals to exercise'the responsibilities of citiz.rr from the original one intended. The latter issue of "doctoring" not only sug- ship and assume a right to privacy. 1i1 gests Carl Friedricl/s tampering but also a dynamic where secrecy/ proPa- ganda, and censorship work in tandem: Friedrich's "Tampering with Communications', In order to conduct propagandn, there mustbe some barrier behaeen the Friedrich, public and the eaent, Access to the real enaironment must be limited, in addition to theorizing that secrecy has a functional usc lrrrl L may also before angnne can create apseudo-enuironment thathe thinks is taise or be a disfunctional state, ties secrecy to ihe "tampering with c.rrr munications" de sir able, (Lippmann 1922) especially when it is coupled to propaganda. That"ir, as Irritrl rich observes, while secrecy withholds ,disr'rrr informatioi, propaganda Censorship is characterized as "not only a story that was never published, it information or even adds misinformation" (1972,176). i*'rfi"aillh, pr.1,0 is any story that does not get widespread distribution regardless of its factual gTd.", like secrecy,, seems to conflict with the norm of candor and sinct,rily, nature and significance to the society at large and its systems of democratic which are considered ethically good" (1972,126). Friedrich also theorizetl tlr' government" (Phillips and Huff 2017,156). Much like secrec)4 censorship 'trucial function of both.political proplganda and secrecy is to manipul,rr. is intentional in prohibiting access to controversial works and/or materials men in relation to the political order"-(Fiiedrich 1972,176). As with secr(\ v, characterized as %ny expression or its author as subversive or dangetous" Friedrich is clear that p-ropaganda can play a functional 5972,230) or tlit (American Library Association 2002). functional (pathologicai) role in poritics ind political systems ltsi z, t tz1. Though "many forms of censorship are invisible and difficult to trace, As one scholar writes of propaganda, there is a "lingering uncertai^ry,, since censorship normally takes place in an atmosphere of secrecy" (De Baets "definability and indeed, ::l^" lT.:"l"ept's its very utiity,,"1cunnirr1,,h,rirr 207L,54), we can identify the paths censorship may take. Recalling Weber's 2002,37)'1e Categories range from agitatio., propugrncta, biack propal;^rrtr,r, bureaucracy and the Moynihan Commission, censorship can be promoted see controls and techniques such as security 19 Cull, Culbert, and welch (2003) for multiple definitions of propaganda; whrr,, through administrative-regulatory there is no (Chomsky L989; Patter- set definition, propaganda g.ne.ally, is a technique'to infl"ucncc prrr,rr, classification and markings, historical engineering opinions. rorr 1988), thought control (Patterson, L988), redaction, or the blacking out or rsrrL!t r ne uDrary Jurce Fress HanoDooK or lntellectual rreedom Maret: lnlglleclual rtgggulll cllltr L,.J. svverrfrrrsrra

ili

investigtttitttts exclusion of informatior;2o and prepublication review If we follow Friedriclr, Against Al Qaeda, revealed details about the USS Cole and9/11. these activities can be functional or disfunctional in nature; if we recall th,' in the book. Deletions Moynihan Commission and its nod to Weber, secrecy by regulation allows seemhard to explain 0n securitygrounds. Among them, accotding to the for the very bureaucratic techniques and instifutionalized controls that err people zuho haae seen the cortesponden-ce, n p\a;1 t'1ory Mr' Sout'an's able secrecy tied to censorship, '2009 -is rtnd testimony at a senate hearing, freely aaailable both as aideo One particular institutionalized technique prepublication review, regu transcript on theWeb' (Shane 2011) lates the communication and transmission of federal agency informatiurr, former FBI translator sibel Edmonds submitted her An example from the National Security Agency/Central Security Servitr, In another challenge, The sibel Edmonds story twice to the FBf w,|ich pro- describes the types of the materials that federal employees and contractors book classified womai: the National whistleblowers Center (NWC)is- must submit for review: longed the review. In2012, r,t"i u statement documenting Edmonds' illegal termination from the FBi, of her book (Boiling Frogs 2012). Al- Any Agencyrelated material that is intended for publication or dissemi- continuing harassment, and ce-nsorship l terms of nation must undergo pre-publication reaiew, This includes, but is not ino"gf, pftpublication review impfiej a comprehensive review in is (e'g', limited to: books, biographies, articles, book reviews, aideos, co-lp re- identlfication and removal of classified information before it disclosed ports, speeches, press releases, conference briefings, research papers antl published), Lt. Colonel Daniel Davis came under qu9$ionilg^for distribut- Seni.or Military internet postings. (National Security Agency 2009) ir,g ut unclassified paper he wrote titled Derekction_of DutyII: Lilder's Loss of IntegrilyWounds Afghan War Effort. Davis voluntarily submit- Although Hedley describes prepublication review as a functional mearrr ted his rupoti to a-n internal Army review for approval, .b"t T: l"ntagon to'hssist authors in avoiding inadvertent disclosure of classified informaliorr refused permission for Davis to publish the report (H_astinqs- 2aT2). Rolling- which, if disclosed, would be damaging to national security-just that artrl .Sfore eve'ntually publishe d Deretiitionin February ZOlZ,byttyilhout approval nothing more" Q007), there are cases of former federal employees who hrl from the Army. Davis' d.isclosure offers insight into Friedrictis disfunctional lowed agency prepublication review policies only to have it censored throulilr $ecrecy and tampering of communications: redaction and in some cases, contested for public release. The first book pul' wat I witnessed in my most recently concluded 1.2 month depl,oytrnent lished in the United States that contained 1"68 blank pages marked "delt tcrl" to Afghanistan has seen that deception reach an intolerable high. I will by the CIA "to indicate portions censored by the government" was Vit'lor proiiA, a aerybrief sumnary of the ,pe,n s,wce information that would Marchetti and D. Marks' (197a) The CIA and the CuIt of Intelligence (Mde I ]ohn 'allout these clnims, But if the public any American citizen-to.aeflfu .hnd en2ie1997,51"). Works by Phillip Agee (1975), Frank Snepp (977), James llarrr be' access ti these classified reports they wottld see the dramatic gulf ford (L982), Ralph McGehee (1983), T,J Waters (2006),Ishmael]ones (2008), arrrl futeen what is often said in public by our senior leaders and what is Anthony Shaffer (2010F' were contested in varying ways by U.S. intelligt'nt c actually true behind the scenes. (Davis 2012,2) agencies. These titles remain valuable documentary works in that they rcvt'rtl the inner dynamics of the intelligence community, its successes and failirr;it, Another example of prepublication review is reminiscent of the Creel and post 9f1L, enhanced interrogation and extraordinary renditions.tr li'r Committee's attempt to resirict specific categories of information during example, Ali H. Soufan, a former FBI interrogator and counterterrorism sltr' combat, the Office of th. ,tr-y Suqgeon Generalls (2005) Release of Actionable cialist who authored The Black Banners: The lnside Story of 9/11 and tln' Wnt Medical lnformation Policy Memorandum, which to reaiew abstracts, manuscripts,. journal mticles, A simple perusal of the Declassified Documents Reference System w!!l inrlicrrh. sets forth procedures aerurc where professio.nal medical ac' the majority of declassified documents are redacted, some in sections of rt'lcrtrr.rl speiches,'and otlur ,pen s,urce are reported using medical-information records and othert entire documents. Public documents are also redack tl, rrrr ln tiaities, analllaes, antlfor research informatian on the case of the 9/11 Commission report with 28 missing pages (Elliott 201l). deiaed froi a combat Theuter. This includes medical members, cioilians, and enemycombatants (in anystatus: enemy n On January 1$ 2013, the Department of Defense declassified 198 redactions ln llrr, service etc.)^iniure.d in contbat Theater but 2010editionof Shaffer'sbookOperationDarkHeart (Departrnentof Deft'nst,2(ll 11 prisoner of war, retained personnel, 'treated of the Army Surgeon General 22 See Accesslnfo Europe and Reprieve (2011), Singh (2013) and the llenrlitiorr I'rl; oittidt of tlrc Thiater, (Office ect (n.d.). 2010, 2) t, Maret: lnfglltscfual rrEg(t{.IIt dil(l v.J. \lvuEr rrilrertr rser s!t

policy was issued .This during a period of increasing concerns that mt,tlr and 'tontrol is exercised over journalists, restricting their access to theaters cal information "provided_in a variety of forums (profissional journals, rr,r of operation, misinforming about specific military operations, concealing in- tional meetings, discussg{ "aiding in the media) was the enemy" (Cortrr.. formation, and minimizing discussion of causalities" (Sharkey 199'1",23-26). Brosch, and Holcomb 2008, s16). However, the use of"prepublication revir,rr During the invasion of Grenada in 1983, the Pentagon applied the British me- in this case raises concerns related to censorship ur i trop.ting: first, rlr,, dia model utilized during the L982 Falklands War with Argentina (Sharkey restriction of "actionable medical information" his not been subj6ct to oPr,rr 1991, 4), During Operation Desert Storm, or the First Gulf War (1990-91), the debate in congress, the press, or inpublic venues. secondly, if freely repoit,,,l Pentagon "was unwilling to disclose what it knew about the likelihood of and discussed the peer in reviewed medical literature and at medical conlt,r civilian casualties caused by the U.S. and allied bombing" (Sharkey 1991,,3). grygs,-emergency medicine/trauma techniques devised in the field antl irr Discrepancies in reported numbers of Iraqi civilian deaths beginning with DoD facilities have the potential ability to benefit society at large.z3 Lastly, ,rt the 2003 invasion and into the Iraqi occupation by coalition forces continue. actionable medical information is restricted, there remain quuriior,, as tri t5,, In 2010 Wikileaks released the Iraqi war logs, which document approxi- of.existing y.e11city public information, including government generaterl st,r mately 109,000 deaths in the Iraq war; the Opinion Research Business study tistics, on tervice members, civilians, and enemJr-combatants fin any statrrr rcported at least one million Iraqi deaths (Phillips and Huff 2011). A recent enemy prisoner of war, retained personnef etc.),;ze investigation approximates "half million deaths in Iraq could be attributable Censorship-as a tampering . oftommunications also extends to regulari.rr to the war" between 2003-2011. (Hagopian et al. 20L3). of speech by federal agency employees. In one example, a NoAA"clinr,rt' lwo additional cases illustrate the link between secrecy and censorship research scientist "whose published-modeling t"r"utch suggested the likr,li m a tampering with communications. First, the President |ohn F. Kennedy hood of increased hurricane_intensity under"projected futirie global warrrr Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992 (P.L.102-526), or the JFK Acf ing was kept aley from the briefing" [Katrina] (pirtz 2011,22si. rnadcliti'rr, legislated the "opening of the files [that] would quash unmerited speculation Hansen, Director James of NASAs Goddard-inrtitutu for space studies, rr, and paranoia that was having a corrosive effect on faith in our government's ported that NASA officials ai headquarters ,,t. ordered the public affairs stafi lnstitutions" (Horne 2009,18). However, per the JFK Act, release of assassina- review his coming lectures, paperi, postings on the Gbddard web sitt, ,rrrrl tlon records can be postponed beyond the year 2017 if "the President certi- requests for interviewl-lloT-jol."alists" (viltz z}tt, 22g). The susperrsi'rr fles" that 1) 'tontinued postponement is made necessary by an identifiable and reinstatement of wildlife biologist Dr. Charles Monneit by the Burcarr ,,1 harm to the military, defense, intelligence operations,law enforcement or Energy Management, 9*31 Regulation & Enforcement (BoE'MRE, fornrt,rll, conduct of foreign relations;" and, 2) "the identifiable harm is of such gravity the Minerals Management service) raises continuing concerns as to thc ,rlril lhat it outweighs the public interest in disclosure" (Assassination Records ity of scientists federal in employ to freely conduct sc"holarly research, as n,r,ll Review Board 1998,8). as interpret and communicate their resuits to the large scientific commurrily The second case concerns release of records from the National Commis- (Barringer PEER 2010;2012; _2011; and Union of ConcJrned Scientists 2(XF)) tlon on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (P.L. 107-30) hearings, here- Censorship also can be ,i,,rrr . thought of as regulative, where informatio. tfter referred to as the 9111, Commission. The Intelligence Authorization be amended or revolutionized in ways thatiaise or lower bod.y counts, nurrr Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (P.L. 107-36) Sec. 602 (3) (4) directed the Commission ber of books banned or citizens ghettoized or'gulaged"' (f'ansen 1991, rt) b "make a make a full and complete accounting of the circumstances sur- negrllatl):9 censorship is illustrated by techniquui ur6a by ihe u.s. govt,rrr rounding the attacks" (2003). The 9/11 Commission encouraged the release ment to "limit and_shape news coverage" during the vietnim, Grena,Ta, l,,rrr of records after its investigation for those records "not aheady publicly avail- ama, and the Gulf wars (sharkey 1991.,1), Images of war were ',sanitizt,tl," rble should be made available to the public, to the greatest extent possible consistent with the terms of this letter, beginning on January 2, 2009 (Na- 23 For additional cases of military secrecy, see Maret (2011c) on the manipulrrli'rr llonal Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States 2004). How- of sarin research at Rocky Mountain Arsenaf coser on th; cold war ('1903), nrr,l over, only 35o/o of. the Commission's archived textual records are presently military casualties :1Y_s. obtained through FoIA by The Meirrory'il,,r,, dcclassified (National Archives and Records Administration n.d) and many (Carter**"r 2004). lrc redacted. As legislative branch records are exempt from FOIA, the Act .lg. :"u1p]? the Congressional Research service report on military cau$.rrirh,,, lrnnot be utilized by researchers to obtain the remaining 526 cubic ft. of 9/11, (Fischer 2013). ( rrmmission records, which include a thirty page summary of an ApiI29, I ne Ltprary Jutce rress HanoDooK ot tntellectual Freedonl Maret: lntelEctual hreeoom and u.5, government Secrecy

l

I 2004_interview,by the commission with former President George w. lrrr.,rr U.S. citizens, whose communications were collected or reviewed under Scc-

L and vice President Dick Cheney (Paltrow 2011). As in the case of-the JFK n, tion702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-511) or ; cords, there are stipulations placed on the release of records: the FISA Amendment. The Senators wete informed by the NSA Inspector General "he and NSA leadership agreed that an IG review of the sort Records should notbe disclosed if they (a) contain information thnt con- that iili would itself violate the privacy of U.S. persons" (Ackerman 20L2; tinues to be classified; (b) disclose priaate information that the Commis- suggested Webster 2012). This is not only a significant finding in terms of the reaches sion agreed to protect t'rom pubkc disclosure; or (c) are otherwise barred of government secrecy; it is also a serious affront to intellectual freedom and from pubkc disclosure bylaw, as deturmined by the Archialsf . (National privacy, of past reports by the press and whistleblowers Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States 2004) particularly in terms li of domestic warranfless wiretapping and global surveillance of communi- Surveillance cations by the NSA and the FBI, with the assistance of telecommunications carriers and contractors (Bamford 201"2; Cohn 2010; Cole 2011; Gorman 2008; secrecy and censorship take on new ground through watching and spyirrli, Government Accountability Project n.d.; Markey 2012; Greenwald 2013; Ris- ri especially when the latter is considered as a form of zurveillancJ$ansen 1q.r | , en 2006); 14). censorship then becomes a "bad police measure, for it does not achit,v,. NSA surveillance, coupled with compilation of secret watchlists (e.g" the what it intends, i and it does not intend what it achieves" (Marx 1842). In rt-t.r,rrt Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment, investigative Data Warehouse, times, revelations by former NSA contractor Edward snowden of the Nat i.r r Secure Flight No Fly List and Selectee List), Suspicious Activity Reporting al security Agency (NSA) secret global surveillance exemplifies Frieclrit.h'r (Farrall 2011), the lnfraGard program25, and the RIOT or Rapid Information disfunctional secrecy and tampering with communications. The snowth,rr Overlay Technology program (Gallagher 2013), often implemented with assis- leak of NSA documents present a case where secrecy/ censorship ancl srrr tance from contractors in the "privatization of national security" (Monahan veillance intersect not only in terms of the range and depth of spy progr,rrrru and Palmer 2009; Bean 201.1) indicate the reach of the national security state by federal agencies, but public understanding of gorrernment surveillanr.r, ,,1 trureaucracy where information is mined, classified, shared, and restricted personal communications. As shocking as the Snowden disclosures art', tlrt,y by federal agencies, national and regional ]oint Terrorism Task Forces (}TTF), also call into question the integrity of government information usecl by tlrr. fusion centers26, the private sector27, and international law enforcement and public, the media, and researchers as critical oversight tools. For exampli', tlr,, lntelligence agencies. While the public is left to speculate as to the criteria for nonprofit "Open the Government" reported its disillusionment with govt,rrr ruch secrecy, censorship and spying, Friedrich reminds us that if "secrets ment generated information, which the organization analyzes in itsirrrlr,rl secrecy_Report. open the Government's concern with thb veracity of tl,rl,r from federal agencies is worth in 25 Infragard is a "partnership" between FBI Field offices and "businesses, academic reporting full below as it exposes ho* 11,u agencies, and other participants ernment generated information may not be an accurate portiayal of fetit,rnl institutions, state and local law enforcement acts in the policies and programs (emphasis added): dedicated to sharing information and intelligence to prevent hostile United States." See h ttps:// ww w.in f ragaLd. n et. For the last few years we have been reporting on the use of Nationar sr. According toWashington Posf reporters Dana Priest and William M. Arkin (2010) curity Letters (NSLs) and on the government's applications to the Firrli;,in X there are L,271, government organizations and f931 private companies working Intelligence surveillance court (FISC). No*, howlver, we have to qucstiirn on programs related to counterterrorism, homeland security and intelligence, the accuracy and meaningfulness of such numbers and are not irrclutlinli and an estimated 854,000 people hold top-secret security clearances. The exact them in-this year's Report. our distrust of the government's reporterl rruni number of individuals who hold clearances is "murky" (Open the Government bers is focused in four areas: demands for records under section 215 ol tlrc 2013,n). usA PATRIOT Acl the applications made to the FisC under section 7()l ,l 17 See Summar'1 andRecommendations, Secretary's Advisory Committee on Automat- the FISA Amendments Act of 2012; the failure of congressional ovt'rsipihl, ed Personal Data Systems Code of Fair Information Prnctice or FIP9 especially: 1) and our new understandings of the interactions between the FISC arr,l'ih,, There must be no personal data record keeping systems whose very existence is intelligence community, and the expanded role of the Court. (2013, iiD secref and, 2) There must be a way for an individual to find out what informa- Previous to the snowden leaks of NSA records, senators Ron wyrlt,rr ,rrr,l tion about him is in a record and how it is used (U.S. Department of Health and Mark Udall questioned Agency officials on the widespread survcillan.,, ,,r lluman Welfare,1973). r rrs Ltv,qt y JstLE rtEJJ ndil(tut Lrn ut iltleltELludl v.J. sLttswt l rIt:guoflt lVldIEla llllEllELtUdt flEtUsrll Allu vvustrrrrrstrl

ril are suspected on all sides, confidence vanishes and political life becomt's ,' Adams, Guy and Danny L, Balfour, 2011. "Open secrets": The masked nightmare of terrorized suspicions" (197 2, 233). dynamics of ethical failures and administrative evil. In Gouernment Secrecy, Research in Social Problems and Public Policy, 19, Ed. Susan Maret, ril The Tragedy of Democracy 403-419. Bingley, UK Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Adams, Guy B. and Danny L. Balfour. 2009. Unnwsking administratiae eail. The tampering with communications through secrecy, propaganda, censol 3rd ed. Armonk NY M.E. Sharpe. ship, surveillance, or all techniques working as a complex of informati'rr ti Aftergood, Steven. 2009. Reducing government secrecy: Finding what control, influences historical understanding, social memory, and the fulf ill p: ' works. Ynl e L azo an d P oli c y Re ai eut 27 :399 - 416. htt 4 w rv w f a s. orq/sg p/ ment of human righis that support intellecfual freedom. Leaving researchcr., eprirtthftergoori.Bclf (aciessed March 12,2CIr4:- with an incomplete understanding actors, of events and and individuals willr Aftergood, Steven. 2000. Secrecy is back in fashion. Bulletin of the Atomic a less than ideal toolbox to form judgments regarding policies, tampering lr,r., Scientists 56, no. 6:24-30. the potential to erode trust in government. In his observations on the intl,, Aftergood, Steven. 1999. Government secrecy and knowledge production: A ence of bureaucracy in society-perhaps anticipating secrecy by regulatiorr survey of some general issues. In Secrecy and Knowledge Production, Ed. by several decades-Max Weber made a remarkable statemenl democra. v, Judith Ruppy, 17-29.Occasional Paper #23, Cornell University. he wrote, is "defeated not so much by conditions external to itself but by ilr ht tp://w_wr,r'.einaudi.cor nel l.eclu/pcaceproglam/p ublica tions/ own inner tendencies. The tragedy of democracy occurs when it cannot tlr, occasionapapc.rsloccasional-paper23.pdf (accessed March 12, 2012). feat the organizationalforces that evolve, quiet$.and almost invisibly to tll*r, riiii Agee, Philip . 1975. Inside the company: CIA diary New York: Stonehill. possession of it" (quoted in Diggins 1996,85). Amer, Mildred. 2008. Secret sessions of Congress. CRS reports to Congress Through Thomas Emerson's First Amendment "possibilities," perhaps w,, RS20145 March 27. httlr://r,yww,:hs.org/sgp/crslsecrecy/itS20145.pdf canjudge the weight of secrecy on intellectual freedom. Emerson's four pos (accessed April 7, 2012). sibilities, which mirror the outcomes of the numerous civil and human rililrtr American Ciail Liberties Union and the Americsn Ciail Liberties Union Foun- declarations and laws mentioned earlier in this chapter, consist of "inclivirl dntion a .U.5. Department of 3.12 Civ. 79a (CM). ual self'fulfillment, advancement of knowledge and discovery of truth, arrtl lushce.2013. January http://N'ww.aclu.orgfnational-security/anwar-alar,r'laki-foiarequest participation in decision making by all members of the society." Emersorr - d istrict-cou r t- opinion (accessed 7, 2013). suggests that a "more adaptable and hence stable community" is attairrirhh. |anuary American Library Association. 2010.Intellectual manual. Sth ed. Chi- through these values (quoted in Baker 1989,47). As guiding principles, lrrrr freedom Library Association. ersont utopian principles are a means to evaluate the avenuei to which lrollr cago IL: American functional and disfunctional secrecy may curb intellectual freedom in llrr, American Library Association. 2005. Resolution on disinformatio& media i;ilLii lives of individuals and broadly in the social world. Whether functional or manipulatiory and destruction of public information. a/gove rna disfunctional secrecy or the tampering with communication utilized in tlrr. http:/www. ala.or g/aboutal nce/golicyrnanuaV drive to protect national security, all of these conditions of informatioh nrrr! updatedpolicmanualr/section2/S2libsvcsanclrespon - 52"0 (accessed carry the seeds of disfunction within. March 12,2012). American Library Association Council. 2002. Resolution reaffirming the References principles of intellectual freedom in the aftermath of terrorist attacks. ht tp: //www. ala.or g/offi ces/oif/statementspqls/if resolutions/ Accesslnfo Europe and Repriev e.2l11.Rendition on record. resolutionreaffirming (accessed Aprtl 7, 2012). http://wlvw.q:cessinfqorg/enlcivil-liberties/212-rendition-orr-rct or,l Arendt, Hannah.L968. Between past and future: Eight exercises in political (accessed lune 14, 2012). thought. New York: Viking Press. Ackerman, Spencer. 2012. NSA: It would violate your privacy to say if wt, Articlel9.org. 2003. Statement on the right to communicate. spied on y olu. Wired Iune 18. h t tp://www.w irerl.co n_y' nt tP://www.articl@tions/right-to-com mu nicate.pd I d angerroom/ 201 2/06/n sa-spic.d / (accessed Janua ry 5, 2013). (accessed Apr il 17, 2012). l' I ilE Ll[Idty ,uruB rre>5 nanupg9l( oI Infellectual Freeoom

Assassination Records Review Board. 1998. Final report. September. capurrq Rafael and Birger Hjorland. 2003, The concept of-information. ' t' (accessed May,1', 2012)' http://ww w. archives.gqy/repea{h/jfVreview-board/report (accesset I htqr,/ w w w. cafru r 16. de/inf oconcep html is me June 5, 2012). Carter,biil. 2004. Pentagon ban on pictures of dead troops bro\91 0 : w comI 2!0 4 I 4 I 23 Atomic Energy Act of 1954. P.L. 83-703. https://forms,nrc.gov/alroutrrrc/ N ew Y ork T im e s. Afi il 23. http f / w w'ny times' / May 1,' 2012)' governing-laws.html (accessed January 17, 2013). national/23PH0lhtml (accessed Atomic Energy Act of 1946, P.L. 79 -585. http://rvww. os ti. gOy' CenGt Intelligence Agency. 2008. A look back. https:l/www'cia'goV I a tom icencrgy a c t. p d f (accessed January 17, 2013). newsinformation/"featnre.l-storv-archiue/2008-feat.,red-storvarchive/ 1, 2012\' Auerbactu 5.L 1972. Ecology, ecologists and the E.S.A. Ecology53, no. nationil-security-act-of-t9+7.html (accessed May 'Ct, Press' 2:206-207. .t g, Nancy. 2002. Silencing political dissent. New York Seven Stories Necessaryillusion: Thought control in democratic societ- Baker, C. Edwin. 1989, Human liberty and freedom of speech. New York Oxforrl Chomlsky, Noam. 1989. University Press. les. Cambridge: South End Press. warrantless rationales. on ll Bamford, ]ames. 20L2. The NSA is building the country's biggest spy cenk'r Cohn, Cindy. 201-0. Lawless surveillance, loutnal (Watch what you say). March 10. http:/wwnrr,rrired.com/ Teletommunications €t High Technology Law 8: 351'-357' a free society' l threatlevel/201.2/03/ff nsadatacenter/all (accessed Aprrl77, 2012). Colby, William E.lg76.Intelligence seclecy and security in The International Securityl, no' 2: 3-14. I Bamford, James. 7982. puzzle palace: Areport on Awerica's most secret 11: What we still dor{t know. The New agency. Boston: Houghton Miffl in. cole,- - David. 20LL. Afterseptember Barringer, Felicity. 2011. Report on dead polar bears gets a biologist sus- YorkReaiew of Books.september 29. http://wr,-vw.nlzbopks-cory/articles/ iil pended. The N eu York Times lvly 28, urchiv"r/201i/ru'/29lifturru'tu*but-11-*hut-t""-ttill-dot",t-kno* 16.- https:/r.vn'r,gnytipes.com/2011/0729/science/earth/29polar.html?_ I cessed january 12, 2012). and the constitution: sacri' (accessed |une 1", 2012). Cole, David and ]ames X. Dempsey. 2006. Tettorism New York New Press. Bean, Hamilton. 2011. Is open source intelligence an ethical issue? In Cor,- fcing ciail liberties in tlu name of national secutity. ernment Secrery, Research in Social Problems and Pubkc Policy,19, Ed. Sus,rrr cole, Leonar d.1987. Clouds of secrecy:llrc Armys getm wmt'are tests oaer popu- Maret. 385-402. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Iated areas. New York: Rowman and Littlefield. Government Secrecy. 1997' Report l Bendix, Reinhard. 1962. MaxWeber: An intellectual portrait. New York An- commission on Protecting and Reducing chor Books. of the commission on-Protecting and Reducing Government secrecy: on Governmental Affairs' united states iiil Blantoru Thomas. 2003. National security and open government in the Hearing before the committee United States: Beyond the balancing test. In National Securityand Oyr:tr Senate,-LO5th Congress, first session, May 7. Washington, Go]9TT""t I Gwernment: Striking the Rrght Balance. Campbell Public Affairs institult, Printing Office. hnp: / / w May 1, 2012). and the Open Society Justice Initiative, 33-73. gontentdetail.html (accessed http://www.ma xwell.syr.edu /campbell/events/past/papers/ Committee on Government Reform. 2004. Secrecy in the Bush administra- NSOC.p cU. (accessedMa r ch 12, 2012). tion. September 14. U.S. House of Representa-tives httPs:/www.fas'or8/ Boiling Frogs. 2012. Press release: FBI attempts to hold Sibel Edmonds' btxrk sgp/libiary/waxman.pdf (accessed May 13, 2013)' hostage: Investigation shows agency used contract to censor whistle- committ"" on Public Information. 1920. Complete report of the chairman. blowers. April 10. http://w ww.boi I ingf rogspos t.com/201 2 /04 / 1 0/_ washington: Government Printing office. http: /archive.or&/detaild press{elease-fbiattemp-tj;-to-hold-sibel-edmonds-book-hos tage com ple te re p or tof 0 Ounit (accessed May 1', 2012)'

-ille lly u ncons t it utio na lly (acces s e d May 1,, 2012). 1775. Resolution of seclecy adople{ Continen- €la Continental Congress. !1the I Bok, Sissela. 1989a. Lying: Moral choice in public and priaate lfe. New York: tal CongresslNovember 9. h!tp://ava lon.lawrvale.e d'/18th century/ Vintage Books. cortst01, asp (accessed April 19, 2012). Bok, Sissela. 1989b. Secrets: On tlrc ethics of concealment and reuelation. Ntw Cook, Blanche Wi"tut. 1996. Presiclential papers in crisis: Some thoughts on York: Vintage Books. lies, secrets, and silence. Presidential Studies Quartetly 26:285-92' I ne Ltprary Jutce rress HanooooK or lntellectual Freedont MareI: lntellectual lreeqom anq u.). u9vernmenr )erreuy

Cordts, Paul R., Laura A. Brosch, andJohn B. Holcomb. 2008. Now and tht'rr Dwyer, Anabel L. and David J. Dwyer. 2005. Courts and universities as Combat-casualty care policies for operation Iraqi Freedom and opera. institutions in the national security state. In DemocraSs shadoza: Tlrc tion Enduring Freedom compared with those of vietnam. The iournat t,1 secret world of nntional security, Ed. Marcus G. Raskin and A. Carl LeVan, trauma injury infection, and critical care. February supplemenr s14-s20. 765-204. New York: Nation Books, Coser, Lewis. 1963. The dysfunctions of military secrecy. sociar problems 11, Earl, fennifer. 2009. Information access and protest policing post-9111,: no.l:13-22. Studying the policing of the 2004 Republican National Corwention. Cross, Harold L. 1953. The people's right to know: Legal access to public American B eh aaior al S cientist 53:44- 60. records and proceedings. Morningside Heights, Ny AMS preis. Edelstein,' Michael R. 2004. Contaminated communities: Copingwithresidential Daase, Christopher and Oliver Kessler. 2007. Construction of danger: toxic u(plsure. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Knowns and unknowns in the 'war on terror': uncertainty and the Edmonds, Sibel. 2012. Classifiedwunan: The Sibel Edmonds story: A memoir. political construction of danger. Security Dialogue Z8: 4lI-434. Alexandria, VA: Sibel Edmonds. Davis, Daniel. 2012. Dereliction of duty II: senior military leadert loss of Elliott, Justin. 201L. The enduring mysteries of 9/71. Salon,SeptemberT. integrity wounds Afghan war effort. lanuary 27. http://www.salon.com/2011/09/0Zsept l,l unanswerecl questions (ac- http://ww rv1. rollingston e. corn/extras/ RS R Epolt r.pclf (accessed Jan u cessed ]anuary 19, 2013). ary17,2013). Elluf ]acques.1964.The technological society. Trans. John Wilkinson. New Davis, David Brion. 197'J.. The fear of conspirary Inruges of un-Anrcrican suhtn,r York Alfred Knopf. sion froru the reaolution to the present ithaca: Coineli university press. Executive Order 1"3556. 2009. Controlled unclassified information, De Baets, Antoon. 2011. Taxonomy of concepts related to censorship of his- ht tp:// w ww a rchi ves. &ov/cui (access ]anuary 16, 2013). torl Goaernment secrecy, Research problems public polic,r,', ]n in social nnd I ixecutive Order 10290. 1957. Prescribing regulations establishing mini- 19,Ed. Susan Maret,53-65. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group publishing mum standards for the classification, transmission, and handling by Limited. depariments and agencies of the executive branch of official informa- Department of Defense. 2013. Request for prepublication review of opera- tion which requires safeguarding in the interest of the security of the tion Dark Heart manuscript. Ref: I 0-5-271 011. http://wwwfhs.ory/s1;1,, United States. htt n://lt ww.tr umanlibrarv.oru /executiveorders/ iud/shaff'er1012413-review.pdf (accessed ]anuary fS, ZOLZ1, incle t phlr?pid=262 (accesse d Apr 11 19, 20L2). Department of Defense. 2012. Dictionary of military and associated terms. JP llxecutive Order. 1942, Consolidating certain war information functions into 1-02. March 12. htip:/w ww.dtic.mil/doctri.ne/tlod dic tiqrrarv/ (ac- an Office Of War Information. ]une 13. cessed April 19, 20i2)i. http:/w wn:p residr'ncy.rrcsb.ed u/u's/ intlex. php?pid=1 6273&st= Department of Justice. 2009. Guide to the Freedom of Information Act, Executve+Order+9182&st1= (accessed June 14, 2013). Exemption 5. http://wwwjustice.govfoip/foia guide0g/exemptionS. 1', r r lhrrall, Kenneth. 201.1. Suspicious activity reporting: U.S. domestic intel- (accessed June 10, 2013). ligence in a postpriv acy age? In Goaernment Secrecy, Research in Social DeVolpi, Alexander, Gerald E. Marsh, Ted A. Postol, and George stanfortr. Problems and Public Policy,19, Ed. Susan Maret, 247-276. Bingley, UK: 1981. Born secret:The H-bomb, tlrc Progressiae case and nstionar seutritlt. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. New York Pergamon Press. Itderation of American Scientists. 2011. Presidential Study Directives [PSD] Diggcns, John Patrick.1996. MaxWeber and the spirit of tragedy New york: Barack Obama administration. https:#www,fas.org/irp/r:ffdocs/psc1/ Basic Books. i ndex.html (accessed January 11,, 2013). Dodd, Christopher 1.1997. Human rights information act. Congressionar l;clbinger, ]onathan and Judith Reppy. 20L1. Classifying knowledge, creat- Record,September 25. https:/n'ww.fas.org/sgp/congress/il 220.hr_lr I (rr ing secrets: Government policy for dual-use technology. InGouernment cessed Janua ry 16, 2013). Secrecy, Research in Social Problems and Public Policy,19, Ed. Susan Maret, Donner, Frank. 1990. Protectors of priuilege: Red squads and police reprassiort ttt 2n-299. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. rirran, urban America. Berkeley: Universityof California press. f Christopher M. 2007. From the Palmer raids to tlu Patriot Act: Ahistory of the fight for free speechin America. Boston: Beacon Press.

* r ne uDrarv Jurce Press Handbook ot lntellectual Freedorrr il8ret:lntellecfualrreeuullldlluv'J'vvvsrrrrrrErr!J!!'stt

FBI and ciail liberttes sncL' Fischer, Hannah. 2013, U,S. military casualty statistics: Operation new ( ireenberg, Ivan. 2010. The dangers of dissent: The "l dawn, operation Iraqi freedom, and operation enduring freedom. 9 6 5. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. February5.RS22452.http://wwtr.f as.org/sgpLcrs/natseclRS22452.L.,lt (ireenwald, G. 2013. NSA whistlebl0wer Edward snowden: 'I dorLt want Guardian, 9. (accessed February & 2013). to hve ln a society that does these sort of things.' The June t, tAA/, s-,-^-.1 ^.^^..-,1,-,. Fisher, Louis. 2006. In the name of national security: Unchecked presidential power and the Reymolds case.Lawtence: University Press of Kansas. liaes and classifud deatlrc nt the ClA. Foerstel, Herbert. N. 1992. Secret science: Federal control of American scient't rur,l t ;up;red- zo 00. The book of honor: Coaert technology. Westport CT Praeger. New York: DoubledaY. Borosage, and.Christine Foerstel, Herbert. N. 1991. Suraeillance in the stacks: The FBI's library awnrtnr,,, I lalperin, Morton H., Jeriy ]. Berman,Robert L' 'Marwick LI.S. intelligence agencies. prlgrnm. New York: Greenwood Press. .1976. The tiiless state: The uimes of the Foucault Michel. 1972. The archaeology of knowledge and the discourse on Inn- New York: Penguin Books. Ending the Cold War at guage.Pantheon Books, New York. I lrrlperin, Morton ulnd Juut',t" M. Woods. 1990:1991,. 128-143. Fresh Air. 2013. The sticky questions surrounding drones and kill lists. home. Foreign P olicy, no. 81: secrecy-pattern of deception: What feder- interview with Scott Shane. NPR. February 11. llnlstuk,' " Martin E.2002.Policy of aboui a public rigfrt to know,1794-98. Communica- htrp:I / u, w w.npr,or g/ 2013 / 02/ 12 / 17 17 19082 / the-sticky atslleaders thought -questionssurroundin8-drones-an*k dl-lists (accessed February 12, tion Lau and PolicYT:51-76. objections to 2013). llrrmilton, Alexander. 1788. Certain general and miscellaneous No. 84' Friedrich, Carll.1972.The pathologg'of politics. New York: Harper Row. the Constitution considered and answercd.The Federnkst centu f'e d84. (accessed ]une 1.4, Gallagher, Ryan. 2013. Software that tracks people on social media crealt'rl h t tp://avalon.lawrvaie.e du/ 18th rf Er!

) r r 2013) by defence hrm. The Guardian February 10. http;//wwru guardia n-.r't I r Pentagon doest{t want r,r,orld/20'l3/feb110/sof trvare-tracks-socialmqclia-riefence (accessecl I lnstings, Michael. 2012. The Afghanistan report the read. Rolling Stone,FJb,t.y hitp://www.rollngstorle.corn '- February 10,2013). td io 10: General Accounting Office. 1992,The use of presidential directives to nr,rh,' politicslblogs/natlonal-aflairs/theafghanistryr:regor-t-the-q?ll?gott (accessed November 4, 2013)' and implement U.S. policy. ]anuary 14. NSIAD-92-72. @ 1969. Areexamination of simmells'The secret and the h tt p://w ww.gao.gov/produ cts/ NSI A D-92-72 (accessed Janu ary 11, 20 I t) I l,rzelrgg, Lawrence. . S o ci al ot c e s 47, no' 3:323 -330' Gibbs, David N. 2011. Sigmund Freud as a theorist of government secrt't'y. secieT socie ty': Nine propositions t' of CIA authors: Secrets, ln Goaernment Secrecy, Reseqrch itr Social Problems qnd Puhlic Policy,79,l';! llt,tllev lohn Hoilister.Z}lZ.Reviewing the work iblary".er-rter:foilhe Susan Maret, 5-22. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limitcd. f t6"'tp"uch, and fig leaves. https:/qrwrv,cia,goVl (accessed May L, Gibbs, David N. 1995. Secrecy and international relations.lournal of Perur -stucly-olinteliigeicer/kentcsi/clocs/v41i3a0lp.htm 2012). Re s e ar ch 32, no.Z: n3 -228. information action: Danger for de- Gormar; Siobhan, 2008. NSAs domestic spying grows as agency sweeps I llrrson,'christopher L. 2010. Negative Behauioral Scientist, 53:826-847' up data. W aII Str eet ournal, Mar ch 10. ht tB:/onl ine.wsj.corn/a r t i

House special Investigations Division. 2004. secrecyin the Bush administra- Lutter, Randall, Craig Barrow, Christopher |. Borgerf James W Conrad Jr,, tion. u.s. House of Representatives, committee on Government Reforrr, Debra Edwards, and Alian Felsot.2013. Data disclosure for chemical Minority printing Staff. Washington: Government Office. evaluations. Enaironmental Health Perspectiues 12L, no.Z: 145:148. House subcommittee on National security, EmergingThreats, and Interna- i McDermott, Patrice. 2011. Secrecy reform or secrecy redux? Access to infor- tional Relations. 2006. Droloning l in a sea offaui seirets: Policies on hnntlling mation in the Obama administration. In Gwernment Secrecy, Researchin of_dassifud ', and sensifiae informaiion: Hearing before the subcommittee rirr Social Problems and Public Policy,19, Ed. Susan Maret, 189-217. Bingley, National security, Emerging Threats, and international Relations of tlrt, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. committee on Government Reform, I House of Representatives, 109 2ntl McGehee, Ralph W. 1983. Deadly deceits: 25 yars in the CIA. New York: sessio& March printing W 14. Washington: Government Office. ' Sheridan Square Publications. Hudson, Manley_o. l929iIhe'injunction of secrecy' withiespect to Ameri- Mackenzig Angus. 1997. Secrets: The CIA's war athome. Berkeley: University can treaties. The Ameican lournal of Internntional Laut 23 no.2: g2g ggs. l of California Press. intelligence Authorization year p.L. Act for Fiscal 2003. 107-g6.116 Stat. 238:l MacKenzie, Debra. 2002. U.S. Non-lethal weapons report suppressed, Near

(accessed January S cientist, May 2. http://www.newscientist.com,/article/dn2254 1t 2013). -usnonlethal-weapon-reports-suppressed.html (accessed May 1,, 2012). ri'i c^urly. 1991,. censorship: The Jansen,sue knot thatbintls power andknowletlgt. Marchetti, Victor and D. Marks. 1974. Tlrc CIA and the cult of intelligence, Oxford: John Oxford University Press. http:/avalon.law.yale.eclu/ New York, Knopf. 18th centu rylfed64. asp (accessed Apr il 25, 2012). il Markey, Edward. 2012. Letters to mobile carriers regarding use of cell phone t-z-ss. york Jay, John. ]h9 powers of the senate from the New packet. The I ttl tracking by law enforcement. http;//rnarkeFhouse.gov/qontent/ erallsf No. 64. March 7. http: / / av alon.lawr@ let ters-rnobi le-carriers-reagrdingusc-cell-phone-tracking-law feri 6.t. a sp (accessed Muydhrs),.--._ -errforccmcn t (accessed luly 1, 2072). Chalmers. 2000. Blowback: Johnson, Tlrc costs and clnsequences of Anterican Meiklejohn, Alexander. 1961. The First Amendment is an absolute. The Su- li entpire. New York: Metropolitan Books. preme Court Reaiew 1961: 245 466. ishmael. 2008. Human Jones, factor:_lnside the CIA's dpfunctional intelligence Mendelsohn, William R. 1996. In camera review of classified environmental culture. New York Encounter Books. impact statements: A threatened opportunity? Boston college enuironmen- Kennedy, lohn !. 1961.. The president and the press: Address before the Americntt tal ffiirs law reaiew 23,no.3: 679-698. N ewspaper Publishers Assoaation. April 27. http://w wwjfklibrary.org/ Merton, Robert K. 1940. Bureaucratic structure and personality. Social Research/ Research-Aids/ forces ReadyReference/JFICSPeeches/The 1& no. 4: 560-568. Monaharu Torin and Neal A. Palmer. 2009. The emerging politics of DHS il -Publishers-Association. aspx (accessed ary 11,, 2013\. Janu fusion centers. Security Dialogue, 40:(fl7 -636. Kerfy, lohn.1997. Growing intelligence budgets, Congressional Record,May I Monnett, Charles and S. Gleason. 2006. Observations of mortality http: //wwwfas,orglbglr/congressAerri.htrnl |effrey (aicessed May 1, 2012), associated with extended open-water swimming by polar bears in the Kunstler, william M. 2004. The emergingpolice state: resistingiltegitimate Alaskan Beaufort Sea. PolarbiologyL9 no. 8: 68L-687. authoity. Ed. Michael Steven Smith, Goldmaru Karin rtuns"tler, ancl dcri:10.1002s0030000501052 (accessed May 1, 2012). Kunstler, Sarah. New York Ocean press. lili Moynihan, Daniel P.1997. Secrecy as government regulation, Congressional Lemov, Michael R, 2011. People's,warrior: lorm Moss and the fightfor freedont ,l record May 1. httpl/www.fas.org/sgB/congsss/kerry.html (accessed information and consumer ights.Lanham, MD: Rowman.& il littiefieltt, May7,2012). Leonard, william. 2011. The corrupting J. influence of secrecy on national Nntional Archives and Records Administration. n.d. 9/11 Commission records. policy decisions. In Goaernment Secricg', Research in Sociaf problems ottl lrttlr:/www.archives,gov/research/9-11 (accessed fu:ne 2, 2012). Pubkc Policy,19,Ed. Susan Maret, 421:$4. Bingley, UK: Emerald Grr,1r1, Publishing Limited. I

# +. . . !-r r rsrrsvven sl IrttgtttLtudt rtEguullt lvlqlEl. tlltEllEv[ssr r IEEsVrtr qtlu v.J. vvrErtrrrrL.rr

l1 National commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the united states. 2004. Paltrow Scot J. 2011. National Archives sits on 9/1.1 Commission records. Le t ter to H on or able ohn.w. Carlin. l I Augustle httB://www a rch ives. go r.y' Reuters,September 8. http://wwr,treuters.com/article/201V09/08/ foia/9-11-cornmission-le tter.pclf (acceised 1un" i, ZU4 u s-se p t I 1-a rc hivc i d USI R E7872OI201 10908 (accessed lune 2, 2012). National Security Act. 1947. Pub.L, 80 253, 61, SIat. 495. Pattersoru Thomas G. 1988, Thought control and the writing of history, In httrr://intellige'ce.senate.gov/'saactlg4zpcrf il (accessed January 2,2013) Freedom at risk: Secrery censorship and repression in the 1980s, Ed. Richard National security Agency/Central security service. 2009. pre-pubiication O. Curry,60-68. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. 1e1ieY' (accessctl PEER, 2012. Polar bear probe lumbers into its third year. April5. March 1,2012). hrtp:/www.peer.org/news/news jrl.rrhp?row The New YorkTimes.1945. The right to know. |anuary 23. ' id=1570&titie=POLAR20BEAI{ PROBE I"UMBEBS INTO ITS TFIIRI) The New Yorkrimes.1917. Censor creel gives out ruies for newspapers. May YER (accessed ]une 2,2012). 28. ITER. 2010. Ocean scientists' work screened by public relations staff. The Neut YorkTimes a.l.lnited states Department of lustice.2013.11 Civ. 9336 November 10. http://wvt'w.peet.org/news/news id.php?row ic{=1423 pM). January 3. !ttp;/wwW. aclu.orglnationalsecurity/ (accessed June 2, 2012). (aicessed January Z Phillips, Peter and Mickey Huff. 2011, Project Censored international Col- 2013). leges and universities validate independent news and challenge global The Nezo Yorkrinrcs Co. o.Ilnited states.19T1.403 us 213. Retrieved from media censorship. Researchin Social Problems and Public Policyl9:153-169. ht tps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/403 /Zl3lkAse,html Piltz, Rick. 2011. Secrecy, complicity, and resistance: Political control of o'Connelf Mary Ellen. 2005. when is a war not a war? The myth of the climate science communication under the Bush-Cheney administration. global war on terror. ILSA lournal of rnternational & Comparatiue Laut 12, In Gouernment Secrecgt, Research in Social Problems and Public Policy, 19, Ed. no.2:1-5. Susan Maret, n9-246. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. ii officeof the Army surgeon General. 2070. Rerease of actionable mecli- Powers, Robert Gid. 1998. Introduction.In Secreqr. Ed. Daniel Patrick Moyni- cal information. http://www.ddeamc.amecLl.army.m i l&linical/ hary 1-58. New Haven: Yale University Press. lnyestigation/c{ocqments/10032 _Release of Aciionairle Medical I'riest, Dana and William M. Arkin,2010. A hidden world, growing beyond In f ormationg,6 581 % SD.pd f (accesse d May 1,, 2012). control Top secret America. The Washington Post, July 19. it office of the Army surgeon General. 2005. Release of actionable medical htLp://proiec ts.wa shingtgnpps t.com/ krB-sec re t-arnerica/a r ticleV g{9r1atio1 p!1icy memorandum. http://www..epinews.comlfiles/ ahidden-worJd-growin&beyond-control (accessed May 28, 2012). (u..;;;.r Muyt 'fhe Progressiae.1979.The H-bomb secret: How we got i! why we're telling it. 2012). http://w ww.prosressive,ore/i maees/pdf / 1 179.pdf (accessed March 1, olmsted, Kathryn s. 2011. Government secrecy and conspiracy theories. l. 2012). prob[ems Goaernment secrecy, Research in social and public policv,rg,EcI. Quist, Arvin 5.2002. Security classification of information. Oak Ridge, TN: susan Mare! 91-1"00. Bingrey, UK: Emerald Gt;;p il;itrr,-i"jli*it,,.r. Oak Ridge Classification Associates, LLC. https://wu,'w.fas.org/sgp/ olmsted, Kathryn i s.1ry9. chnttenging tht seuet goaeriment: The pist watar- libra ry/clu is t/i ndex. htm I (accessed May 28, 2013). gate in.aestigations of the CIA and FBl. Chapel Hill universityof North Raskin Marcus G. and Carl A. LeVan. 2005. The national security state and Carolina Press. the tragedy of empire. InDemocraq{s shadow: The secret toorld of national Openthegovernment.org. 2012. Secrecy report. security, Ed. Marcus G. Raskin and A. Carl LeVan,3-42. New York: Na- iir wuropenthegovernme-nt. lr!t!://n org/node/357g (accessed october r ( ), tion Books. 2012). llaven-Hansen, Peter. 2005. Security's conquest of federal law enforcement, orwell, George. 1946.lhe preoention of literature. http://gutenbt:rg..ct.,1rr/ ln Democrnct's shadaw: The secret world of national secuity, Ed. Marcus G. ebooks03/0300011h.html - part46 (accessed Wiy i,@. Raskin and A. Carl LeVan, 217-236. New York Nation Books.

* r ne uDrary Jurce Press Handbool( of lntellectual Freedom Maret:lnlellefiualrreegglrldtlu\r.ar.rrl'YtrrrrrrErr!rElrset

Operations with Respect Record, ieffrey. 2003. Bounding the global war on terrorism. Strategic Stutl senate select committee to study Governmental Resolution ies Institutg U.S. Army War College, December. to Intelligence Activities. 1OiS. tntelligence,actiztities*Senate 21.: Heariigs before the Select Committel tl g:aernmental http:/www.strategicstudiesinstitute,army,mil/pclffiles/pub207.pdf (rr lt1td7 9p.':o':o* . vols. cessed january 11, 2073). with Respict ti lntelligence Actiaities of the lJnited state.s senate,94-1;7 Rendition Project. n.d. Timelines. http://wwnrtherenclitionproject.org.uk/ (accessed MaY 1,2012). timeline/index.html (accessed |une 1Q 2013). j::._\epa$s.hiu 1972. ll.S. army surueillance Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. 2005. Homefront confiden- Senate Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights. g2d congress, 2d session. washing- tial How the war on terrorism affects access to information and the ' of ciailians: A documentaryanalSnis, public's right to know. 6th ed. September. http;/f www.rcfp.orgl ton, DC: Government Printing Office. honrefrontconfi clential (accessed February 25, 2012). May 1., 2012). Risen, James. 2006. State of zuar: The secret history of the CIA and the Bush ad- (accessed special ops on the ministration. New York Free Press. Shafier, Anthony-2010. Operation darkheart: Spyrqt'! and and the path to aictory. New York Thomas Dunne Roberts, Alasdair. 2006. Blacktd out: Goaernment secrecyin the information agt frontlines of Afghanistan Books. i New York Cambridge University Press. meets social policy: culturg identity Rosenberg, Morton. 2008. Presidential claims of executive privilege: Hiskrry, shane, Peter, M. 2006. social theory i september '11,. I/s: A of Law law, practice and recent developments. August 21. CRS report to Congrn,' and public information policy after Journal RL30319. http://www.fas.orglsgp/crs/secrecy/Rl30319.pdf (accessecl and P olicy 2, no.1: i-xxi. cuts inbook abo$9/11' and terror rigll April27,2012). shane, scott.2011. cIA demands , The N ew Yotk Times. August 25. ht tps:/rvw!r''nytimes.cq!!201!'0U?61: l Rourke, Francis 8.1960. Administrative secrecy: A congressional dilemmir, (accessed May 1', 2012). Americsn political science reaieut 54, no.3: 684-694, us26aecu$Jml l IJnder LI.S. militaryre-strictions the media Rourke, Francis 8.1957. Secrecy in American bureaucracy. Political Scienc,' Sfrarkey iaJq"eline. 1.991. fire: .on front the Persian Gulf War' Center for Public integrity' Quarterly, 72 no. 4: 540-564. Gr'enada-to ic inte grity.or&/assets/pdf/ UNDEIiFIRE. pclf (accessed Rozell, Mark j. 2002. Executive privilege revived? Secrecy and conflict clur- ht tp://www.publ May1,2012). ing the Bush administration. DuL,t Law lournal52,no.2:4A3-421". iqSO. The torment of secrery The hackground nnd consequences of http:l/scholarship.law.duke.edu /dVvol52/iss2 (accessed April 2$ 20 I 2) Shils, Edwara. securitypokcles. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press, 1955' Sangar, David E. and Thom Shanker,2013. Broad powers seen for Obama irr American The of secrecy and seoet societies. The cyberstrikes.Tlrc New YorkTimes, February 3. simmel, Georg. rqo6. sociology Sociology ll', no.4: 441- 498' https;//wrv w. nytimes.comf 2013/02/04 /us/ broad-porvels-seen American i ournal of extraordi- -folebama-in-cyberstrikes.html?pagewantetl=1& r=1&r'ef=global Singh, Amrit. 2013. Giobalizing torture:CIA secret detention and -homr-'& (accessed February 3, 2013). nary rendition. Open Society Foundations.

S cl rc n ck a. Unite d S t at e s. \919. 249 U.S. +7. btp,Jfo w w,SWZ{XgL s aW (accessed April 28, 2012). Schoenfeld Gabriel. 2011. Necessarysecrets: National security, the media, arul lhr February 5,2013). harm: A account.ot' o-ne age.nt took rule of law. New York W. W. Norton & Co. Srrepp, Frank. 1999.Irreparable t'irsthand -how 'in in an epic battle ouer seciecy and speech. New York Random ii Schultz, William F. 2003. Taintedlegacy:9/11 and tlu ruin of human rights. the CIA free Thunder's Mouth Press/Nation Books. House. L Snepp, Frank. 1977. Decent interaal: An insider's account of Saigon's indecent end' New York: RandomHouse' against sOu fan, Ali. 2011. The blackbanners: TIrc inside story of 9/11 und the war Al-Qaeda.New York : WW. Norton & Co' t ile Lrutdry Jutcs rress nanqoooK oMtellecrual treedom Marel:lnlgllecludlrteEqullldllftrrtrJrvvusrrrrrrL'rrrLr'rUt

sociologyt Sunstein, Cass R. 1986. Government control of information. California Law weber, Max. 1978. Economy and society: An outline of interpretiae Claus. Berke- Reaiew 74, no.3: 889-92:1.. Trans. Ephraim Fischoff. Ed. Guenther Roth and wittich, Press. Theoharis, Athan G. 2011. Abuse of power: How ColdWar suraeillance and ley: University of California of interpretiue sociology' secrecypolicy shaped the response to 9/11,. Philadelphia: Temple University Webei Max. 1968. Economyand society: An outline , Claus. Berke- Press. Trans. Ephraim fischoff. Ed. Guenther Roth and Wittich, Theoharis, Athan G. 2004. The FBI I Ameican demotacy: Abrief criticalhis- ley: University of California Press. Ed. and Trans. H.H. tory. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas. Webei Max, 1958. Fro m MaxWeber: Essap in sociology. York: Oxford University Press' Theoharis, Athan G. 1978. S?Wng on Americans: Political suraeillance Gerth and Mills, C. Wright. New t'rom Americans we've Hooaer to the Huston plan. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Webster, Stephen C.2A72.NSA: Revealing-how many violate their privacy. Sfoly, June L9' Thompsory Dennis F,1999, Democratic secrecy. Political Science Quarterlyl14, spied on would T!:".\r* no.2:81-793. (accessed Turner, Robert F.7994. Testimony, secret funding and the'statement and account' clause: Constitutional and policy implications of public dis- 1une19,2012). secret medical experiments closure of an aggregate budget for intelligence and intelligence relaterl Weliome, Eileen. 2000. The plutonium files: America's activities https:/Avwwfas.org/irplcongress/1994 hr/turner.htm (acces. in the Cold War, New York Dell' inaisible goaetnment. New York: ]anuary 11,,2013). wise, David and Thomas B. Ross. 7964.The Union of Concerned Scientists. 2009. Freedom to speak A report card on Random House. media policies. http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific (accessed May 1,

United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. L992, Rio declaration on environment and development. http; // w w w. uncp.orl y Documents.Multilingual/ Detault.a sp?documenti=78&articleid=l 163 (accessed January 1& 2013). United Nations General Assembly. 1948. Declaration of human rights. http://www.un.org/en/documentVudhr/ (accessed March 12, 2012). United Nations General Assembly. 1966. International covenant on civil antl political rishts. httu://rvr,vw2.ohchr.orslerrslish/law/ccnr.lrtm (accessctl March 72,2012). U.S. Department of Healtlu Education & Welfare, Secretary's Advisory Committee on Automated Personal Data Systems.1973. Records, cotttptrl ers and the rights of citizens: Report of the Secretarys adaisory committee ur automated personal data systems. Washington DC: Government Printinl; Office. https://epic.org/privacy/hew1973report/Sum mary.htm (ac- cessed January 1& 2013). Washburru Patrick S. 1986. J. Edgar Hoover and the Black press in World War iL ED271749. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Associu- tion for Education in lournalism and Mass Communication 69th, Norman, OK August 3-6. Waters, T.J.2006. Clqss 11: Inside the CIA's first post-9/11 spq class. New Vrrk: Dutton. Copyright 201 3 respective authors. Contents Published in 2014 by Library Juice Press.

Library Juice Press PO Box 188784 Sacramento, CA 95818 Contents http : //l i braryjuicepress. com/ Acknowledgements This book is printed on acid-free, sustainably-sourced paper. vii

Layout by Martin Wallace. Advisory Board vilt used on the cover is "Stigma Poem No 5,' by Nadia Plesner. The image Contributors ix Nadia Plesner fought a legal battle with Louis Vuitton for the right to use their of her work. Her case went to the Hague, where brand images as an element lntroduction 1. the European Court of Justice decided in her favor in 2011 . Part One: Theories from the Humanities and politics

Philosophies of lntellectual Freedom -Mark Alfino Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Gramsci, Hegemony, and lntellectual Freedom The Library Juice Press handbook of intellectual freedom : concepts, cases -Douglas Raber Laura Koltutsky. and theories / edited by Mark Alfino and Habermas and lntellectual Freedom pages cm -John Buschman lncludes bibliographical references and index. Summary: "Provides a grounding in the philosophical, historical, and legal Feminism and lntellectual Freedom development of the concept of intellectual freedom by providing current -Lauren Pressley a range of intellectual freedom concepts, cases, and controver- thinking on Neoliberalism and lntellectual Freedom sies"- Provided by publisher. -Laura Koltutsky 104 ISBN 978-1 -936117 -57 -4 (alk. papeO property. Privacy, Right of. 4. 1, lntellectual freedom. 2. lntellectual 3. Part Two: Media, Access, and property Academic freedom. 5. Freedom of information. 6. Censorship. 7. Libraries-Censorship. l.Alfino, Mark, 1959-, author, editorof compilation. ll. Journalism for Social Justice Koltutsky, Laura, author, editor of compilation. lll. Title: Handbook of -Susan Forde 131 intellectual freedom. JC598.1534 2014 lntellectual Property and lntellectual Freedom 323.44*dc23 -Robert Tiessen 2014000835