Re: [Caglist] Ottawa’s media rules muzzling federal scientists, say observers

[Tracey P. Lauriault]

It is hard to have open data if you are not even allowed to have
science for the public good communicated to the public!

On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 7:54 PM, John Newcomb <[hidden email]> wrote:

> CAGers:
>
> Paraphrasing Niemöller's statement, "They first stopped the Census form,
> and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a human geographer. Then they
> muzzled climate change research, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a
> physical geographer..."
>
> John N
>
> Ottawa’s media rules muzzling federal scientists, say observers
>
> MARGARET MUNRO,
> Vancouver Sun
> POSTMEDIA NEWS
> SEPTEMBER 12, 2010 2:02 PM
> COMMENTS (11)
>
> The Harper government has tightened the muzzle on federal scientists,
> going so far as to control when and what they can say about floods at the
> end of the last ice age.
>
> Natural Resources Canada scientists were told this spring they need
> “pre-approval” from Minister Christian Paradis’ office to speak with
> national and international journalists. Their “media lines” also need
> ministerial approval, say documents obtained by Postmedia News through
> access-to-information legislation.
>
> The documents say the “new” rules went into force in March and reveal how
> they apply to not only to contentious issues including the oilsands, but
> benign subjects such as floods that occurred 13,000 years ago.
>
> They also give a glimpse of how Canadians are being cut off from
> scientists whose work is financed by taxpayers, critics say, and is often
> of significant public interest — be it about fish stocks, genetically
> modified crops or mercury pollution in the Athabasca River.
>
> “It’s Orwellian,” says Andrew Weaver, a climatologist at University of
> Victoria. The public, he says, has a right to know what federal scientists
> are discovering and learning.
>
> Scientists at NRCan, many of them world experts, study everything from
> seabeds to melting glaciers. They have long been able to discuss their
> research, until the rules changed this spring.
>
> “We have new media interview procedures that require pre-approval of
> certain types of interview requests by the minister’s office,” wrote Judy
> Samoil, NRCan’s western regional communications manager, in a March 24
> email to colleagues.
>
> The policy applies to “high-profile” issues such as “climate change,
> oilsands” and when “the reporter is with an international or national
> media organization (such as the CBC or the Canwest paper chain),” she
> wrote.
>
> The Canwest papers are now part of Postmedia Network Inc.
>
> Samoil later elaborated, saying “the regional communications managers were
> advised of this change a couple of weeks ago.”
>
> The documents show the new rules being so broadly applied that one
> scientist was not permitted to discuss a study in a major research journal
> without “pre-approval” from political staff in Paradis’ office.
>
> NRCan scientist Scott Dallimore co-authored the study, published in the
> journal Nature on April 1, about a colossal flood that swept across
> northern Canada 13,000 years ago, when massive ice dams gave way at the
> end of the last ice age.
>
> The study was considered so newsworthy that two British universities
> issued releases to alert the international media.
>
> It was, however, deemed so sensitive in Ottawa that Dallimore, who works
> at NRCan’s laboratories outside Victoria, was told he had to wait for
> clearance from the minister’s office.
>
> Dallimore tried to tell the department’s communications managers the flood
> study was anything but politically sensitive. “This is a blue sky science
> paper,” he said in one email, noting: “There are no anticipated links to
> minerals, energy or anthropogenic climate change.”
>
> But the bureaucrats in Ottawa insisted. “We will have to get the
> minister’s office approval before going ahead with this interview,” Patti
> Robson, the department’s media relations manager, wrote in an email after
> a reporter from Postmedia News (then Canwest News Service) approached
> Dallimore.
>
> Robson asked Dallimore to provide the reporter’s questions and “the
> proposed responses,” saying: “We will send it up to MO (minister’s office)
> for approval.” Robson said interviews about the flood study needed
> ministerial approval for two reasons: the inquiring reporter represented a
> “national news outlet” and the “subject has wide-ranging implications.”
>
> Emails flew at NRCan as word of ministerial “pre-approval” rules spread.
>
> “Gosh this is news to me . . . shouldn’t we have something explaining all
> this by an email from the upper ups,” Dallimore wrote in one message. His
> work on gas hydrates and permafrost in the Arctic has attracted national
> and international attention, and until this spring Dallimore had been free
> to discuss his research with reporters.
>
> His boss was also baffled. “Can you direct us to the new media interview
> procedures?” wrote Carmel Lowe, director of the Geological Survey of
> Canada in NRCan Pacific region, on March 29 to Michael Buzzell, manager of
> NRCan’s ministerial communications branch in Ottawa.
>
> Lowe said in a telephone interview that she never did receive
> clarification on the new procedures.
>
> Robson has switched jobs and Micheline Joanisse is now acting media
> relations manager at NRCan. Joanisse says the “new media interview
> procedures” referred to in the documents fit with the government
> communications policy introduced in 2006.
>
> “The minister is the primary spokesperson for Natural Resources Canada. As
> such, he needs to be made aware of issues in the media which involve the
> department so he can effectively fulfil his role,” Joanisse said in a
> prepared statement.
>
> “Departmental officials speaking on behalf of the department are to
> consult the minister’s office in preparing responses,” Joanisse says.
> “While this may have been misinterpreted as being a new policy, it has
> been in place for years.”
>
> The documents show several communications managers, policy advisers,
> political staff and senior officials were involved drafting and vetting
> “media lines” on the ancient flood study.
>
> Dallimore finally got clearance to talk to reporters from Margaux Stastny,
> director of communication in Paradis’ office, on March 31, a week after
> NRCan communications branch was told the study was appearing in Nature,
> and two days after reporters began approaching Dallimore for interviews.
>
> By the time Dallimore and the “media lines” got the OK, the reporters’
> deadlines had passed and they had already completed their stories about
> the ancient flood. Canwest News Service, CBC, ABC, Reuters, and other
> organizations based their reports on interviews with co-authors of the
> study from other universities outside Canada that responded to interview
> requests promptly.
>
> This effectively “muzzled” Dallimore by not allowing him to do timely
> interviews, says Weaver, at the University of Victoria, who says the
> incident shows how “ridiculous” the situation has got in Ottawa.
>
> “If you can’t get access to a nice, feel-good science story about flooding
> at the end of last glaciation, can you imagine trying to get access to
> scientists with information about cadmium and mercury in the Athabasca
> River? Absolutely impossible,” says Weaver, in reference to growing
> controversy over contaminants downstream from Alberta’s oilsands.
>
> Environment Canada and Health Canada now tightly control media access to
> researchers and orchestrate interviews that are approved. Environment
> Canada has even produced “media lines” for federal scientists to stick to
> when discussing climate studies they have co-authored with Weaver and are
> based on research paid for through his university grants.
>
> “There is no question that there is an orchestrated campaign at the
> federal level to make sure that their scientists can’t communicate to the
> public about what they do,” says Weaver, adding that the crackdown is
> seriously undermining morale in federal labs. “Science is about generating
> new knowledge and communicating it to others.”
>
> The control and micro-management points to a high level of “science
> illiteracy” in the upper ranks of the federal government, he says, and
> “incredible disrespect” for both the researchers and the taxpayers footing
> the government’s multi-billion-dollar science bill.
>
> “The sad reality is that these guys in Ottawa think federal scientists
> work for them,” says Weaver. “They don’t, they work for the people of
> Canada.
>
> “This is science funded by Canada for the public good,” he says. “It is
> not science funded to produce briefing notes for ministers so they can get
> elected in the next federal campaign.”
>
> Photo caption:
> Scott Dallimore, a permafrost specialist with the Geological Survey of
> Canada, says the permafrost exposure is eroding at 10 to 20 metres a year.
> So are hundreds of other permafrost ridges and cliffs across Canada's
> north.
>
> http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Ottawa+media+rules+muzzling+federal+scientists+observers/3514002/story.html
> _______________________________________________
> CAGList mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/caglist
>
>

--
Tracey P. Lauriault
613-234-2805

[Glen Newton]

There's an active discussion on this on slashdot:
 http://science.slashdot.org/story/10/09/13/1832216/Canadian-Government-Muzzling-Scientists

-Glen

On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 9:29 PM, Tracey P. Lauriault <[hidden email]> wrote:

> It is hard to have open data if you are not even allowed to have
> science for the public good communicated to the public!
>
> On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 7:54 PM, John Newcomb <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> CAGers:
>>
>> Paraphrasing Niemöller's statement, "They first stopped the Census form,
>> and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a human geographer. Then they
>> muzzled climate change research, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a
>> physical geographer..."
>>
>> John N
>>
>> Ottawa’s media rules muzzling federal scientists, say observers
>>
>> MARGARET MUNRO,
>> Vancouver Sun
>> POSTMEDIA NEWS
>> SEPTEMBER 12, 2010 2:02 PM
>> COMMENTS (11)
>>
>> The Harper government has tightened the muzzle on federal scientists,
>> going so far as to control when and what they can say about floods at the
>> end of the last ice age.
>>
>> Natural Resources Canada scientists were told this spring they need
>> “pre-approval” from Minister Christian Paradis’ office to speak with
>> national and international journalists. Their “media lines” also need
>> ministerial approval, say documents obtained by Postmedia News through
>> access-to-information legislation.
>>
>> The documents say the “new” rules went into force in March and reveal how
>> they apply to not only to contentious issues including the oilsands, but
>> benign subjects such as floods that occurred 13,000 years ago.
>>
>> They also give a glimpse of how Canadians are being cut off from
>> scientists whose work is financed by taxpayers, critics say, and is often
>> of significant public interest — be it about fish stocks, genetically
>> modified crops or mercury pollution in the Athabasca River.
>>
>> “It’s Orwellian,” says Andrew Weaver, a climatologist at University of
>> Victoria. The public, he says, has a right to know what federal scientists
>> are discovering and learning.
>>
>> Scientists at NRCan, many of them world experts, study everything from
>> seabeds to melting glaciers. They have long been able to discuss their
>> research, until the rules changed this spring.
>>
>> “We have new media interview procedures that require pre-approval of
>> certain types of interview requests by the minister’s office,” wrote Judy
>> Samoil, NRCan’s western regional communications manager, in a March 24
>> email to colleagues.
>>
>> The policy applies to “high-profile” issues such as “climate change,
>> oilsands” and when “the reporter is with an international or national
>> media organization (such as the CBC or the Canwest paper chain),” she
>> wrote.
>>
>> The Canwest papers are now part of Postmedia Network Inc.
>>
>> Samoil later elaborated, saying “the regional communications managers were
>> advised of this change a couple of weeks ago.”
>>
>> The documents show the new rules being so broadly applied that one
>> scientist was not permitted to discuss a study in a major research journal
>> without “pre-approval” from political staff in Paradis’ office.
>>
>> NRCan scientist Scott Dallimore co-authored the study, published in the
>> journal Nature on April 1, about a colossal flood that swept across
>> northern Canada 13,000 years ago, when massive ice dams gave way at the
>> end of the last ice age.
>>
>> The study was considered so newsworthy that two British universities
>> issued releases to alert the international media.
>>
>> It was, however, deemed so sensitive in Ottawa that Dallimore, who works
>> at NRCan’s laboratories outside Victoria, was told he had to wait for
>> clearance from the minister’s office.
>>
>> Dallimore tried to tell the department’s communications managers the flood
>> study was anything but politically sensitive. “This is a blue sky science
>> paper,” he said in one email, noting: “There are no anticipated links to
>> minerals, energy or anthropogenic climate change.”
>>
>> But the bureaucrats in Ottawa insisted. “We will have to get the
>> minister’s office approval before going ahead with this interview,” Patti
>> Robson, the department’s media relations manager, wrote in an email after
>> a reporter from Postmedia News (then Canwest News Service) approached
>> Dallimore.
>>
>> Robson asked Dallimore to provide the reporter’s questions and “the
>> proposed responses,” saying: “We will send it up to MO (minister’s office)
>> for approval.” Robson said interviews about the flood study needed
>> ministerial approval for two reasons: the inquiring reporter represented a
>> “national news outlet” and the “subject has wide-ranging implications.”
>>
>> Emails flew at NRCan as word of ministerial “pre-approval” rules spread.
>>
>> “Gosh this is news to me . . . shouldn’t we have something explaining all
>> this by an email from the upper ups,” Dallimore wrote in one message. His
>> work on gas hydrates and permafrost in the Arctic has attracted national
>> and international attention, and until this spring Dallimore had been free
>> to discuss his research with reporters.
>>
>> His boss was also baffled. “Can you direct us to the new media interview
>> procedures?” wrote Carmel Lowe, director of the Geological Survey of
>> Canada in NRCan Pacific region, on March 29 to Michael Buzzell, manager of
>> NRCan’s ministerial communications branch in Ottawa.
>>
>> Lowe said in a telephone interview that she never did receive
>> clarification on the new procedures.
>>
>> Robson has switched jobs and Micheline Joanisse is now acting media
>> relations manager at NRCan. Joanisse says the “new media interview
>> procedures” referred to in the documents fit with the government
>> communications policy introduced in 2006.
>>
>> “The minister is the primary spokesperson for Natural Resources Canada. As
>> such, he needs to be made aware of issues in the media which involve the
>> department so he can effectively fulfil his role,” Joanisse said in a
>> prepared statement.
>>
>> “Departmental officials speaking on behalf of the department are to
>> consult the minister’s office in preparing responses,” Joanisse says.
>> “While this may have been misinterpreted as being a new policy, it has
>> been in place for years.”
>>
>> The documents show several communications managers, policy advisers,
>> political staff and senior officials were involved drafting and vetting
>> “media lines” on the ancient flood study.
>>
>> Dallimore finally got clearance to talk to reporters from Margaux Stastny,
>> director of communication in Paradis’ office, on March 31, a week after
>> NRCan communications branch was told the study was appearing in Nature,
>> and two days after reporters began approaching Dallimore for interviews.
>>
>> By the time Dallimore and the “media lines” got the OK, the reporters’
>> deadlines had passed and they had already completed their stories about
>> the ancient flood. Canwest News Service, CBC, ABC, Reuters, and other
>> organizations based their reports on interviews with co-authors of the
>> study from other universities outside Canada that responded to interview
>> requests promptly.
>>
>> This effectively “muzzled” Dallimore by not allowing him to do timely
>> interviews, says Weaver, at the University of Victoria, who says the
>> incident shows how “ridiculous” the situation has got in Ottawa.
>>
>> “If you can’t get access to a nice, feel-good science story about flooding
>> at the end of last glaciation, can you imagine trying to get access to
>> scientists with information about cadmium and mercury in the Athabasca
>> River? Absolutely impossible,” says Weaver, in reference to growing
>> controversy over contaminants downstream from Alberta’s oilsands.
>>
>> Environment Canada and Health Canada now tightly control media access to
>> researchers and orchestrate interviews that are approved. Environment
>> Canada has even produced “media lines” for federal scientists to stick to
>> when discussing climate studies they have co-authored with Weaver and are
>> based on research paid for through his university grants.
>>
>> “There is no question that there is an orchestrated campaign at the
>> federal level to make sure that their scientists can’t communicate to the
>> public about what they do,” says Weaver, adding that the crackdown is
>> seriously undermining morale in federal labs. “Science is about generating
>> new knowledge and communicating it to others.”
>>
>> The control and micro-management points to a high level of “science
>> illiteracy” in the upper ranks of the federal government, he says, and
>> “incredible disrespect” for both the researchers and the taxpayers footing
>> the government’s multi-billion-dollar science bill.
>>
>> “The sad reality is that these guys in Ottawa think federal scientists
>> work for them,” says Weaver. “They don’t, they work for the people of
>> Canada.
>>
>> “This is science funded by Canada for the public good,” he says. “It is
>> not science funded to produce briefing notes for ministers so they can get
>> elected in the next federal campaign.”
>>
>> Photo caption:
>> Scott Dallimore, a permafrost specialist with the Geological Survey of
>> Canada, says the permafrost exposure is eroding at 10 to 20 metres a year.
>> So are hundreds of other permafrost ridges and cliffs across Canada's
>> north.
>>
>> http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Ottawa+media+rules+muzzling+federal+scientists+observers/3514002/story.html
>> _______________________________________________
>> CAGList mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/caglist
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Tracey P. Lauriault
> 613-234-2805
> _______________________________________________
> CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss
>

--

-