Henceforth All Published IC Comment Should Be Considered Propaganda

Steve Aftergood reports that James Clapper has done what Congress refused to do: forbid any unauthorized contact between Intelligence Community staffers and any member of an unbelievably broadly defined media. The order requires IC employees to obtain authorization for contacts with the media, and report any unplanned contacts.

3. Contact by IC employees with the media on covered matters must be authorized by their IC element.
a. Within the IC, only the head or deputy head of an IC element, the designated public affairs official, and other persons designated in agency policy or authorized by that public affairs official are authorized to have contact with the media on covered matters, except as provided below.
b. IC employees, as defined in EO 12333, Section 3.5(d), not designated in accordance with Section D.3.a, must obtain authorization for contacts with the media on covered matters through the office responsible for public affairs for their IC element, and must also report to that office unplanned or unintentional contact with the media on covered matters.
4. No substantive information should be provided to the media regarding covered matters in the case of unplanned or unintentional contacts. Authorization for a particular contact on covered matters does not constitute authorization for additional media engagement.

And here’s the definition of “media,” which would include civil rights organizations and some attorneys.

4. For purposes of this Directive, media is any person, organization, or entity (other than Federal, State, local, tribal and territorial governments):
a. primarily engaged in the collection, production, or dissemination to the public of information in any form, which includes print, broadcast, film and Internet; or
b. otherwise engaged in the collection, production, or dissemination to the public of information in any form related to topics of national security, which includes print, broadcast, film and Internet.

Employees found to have violated this policy may lose their security clearance and/or their employment.

I guess James Clapper, whose credibility is already shot to shit for lying to Congress and spending 10 months uttering transparent lies, wants to doom the IC’s credibility entirely.

After all, from this point forward, we can assume that any statement citing an IC source is approved propaganda. Thanks for clearing that up, Clapper.


10 replies
  1. bloopie2 says:

    Thank goodness there are a pile of lawsuits going; at least in those we have some hope of getting some unfiltered information. Maybe it’s time for more lawsuits to be filed? Surely there are other causes of action available, not yet complained of in the pending court cases? Death by a thousand cuts.

  2. TomVet says:

    Well at least he’s cleared up one thing. Anyone who publishes anything, in any form, at any time must be a member of the media, hence a journalist. This should help Congress in their deliberations over a shield law.

  3. WilliamOckham says:

    So, the IC folks need a cut-out. Tell your story to an attorney. The attorney talks to the press. Problem solved…

  4. Nate says:

    Frankly this could be a “positive” development, if the policy was enacted in response to legitimate concerns about (1) MORE Edward Snowden’s appearing at any moment, and/or (2) “too many” senior NSA officials talking with reporters “off the record”, either because they believe NSA programs are not being properly “defended” by the White House, or because of concerns with various NSA activities.

    Indeed it is possible the White House wants to control statements made by “defenders” as much as critics, because many “authorized” statements made by NSA defenders are (a) totally incomprehensible; (b) riddled with internal inconsistencies, and/or (c) inconsistent with prior “authorized” public statements on the same subject.

  5. lysias says:

    Somehow I doubt that this will stop the leaks to Seymour Hersh.

    By the way, isn’t it shameful how he has had to publish a second piece on the sarin use in Syria in the London Review of Books, I take it because the New Yorker is unwilling to publish pieces casting doubt on the U.S.’s support of the opposition in the civil war in Syria?

  6. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Losing one’s security clearance in today’s Washington is akin to committing career seppuku. It would make you virtually unemployable in the private or public sector. It would certainly drop your earnings potential considerably. Mr. Clapper, like Mr. Obama, is rolling out a big gun to keep the IC “community” from admitting in public how few clothes its aristocrats are wearing.

  7. What Constitution? says:

    Ooh! Ooh! I’ve got it — to save journalists’ time and maximize NSA information dissemination, we’ll have all inquiries submitted centrally to NSA, and all responses will be collected for periodic publication in some sort of — how do we say it? — “official channel”. And we could call that “Pravda.” So easy, so convenient. “All the news that’s permitted to print.”

Comments are closed.