The National Freedom of Information Coalition and the Media Law Resource Center jointly conducted a survey, which showed troubling trends for transparency. Here is an excerpt of the report I wrote for NFOIC and MLRC about the 2013 survey results:
Just as similar informal surveys in 2009 and 2011 had, the 2013 Open Government Survey found a substantial decline over the last two to five years in the amount of resources devoted by media organizations to FOIA and open government issues.
Some 153 representatives of the two organizations participated in the 2013 survey. It showed a continuation of a trend reported two years ago in a prior survey of people in the field who see a decrease in legal resources being applied to FOIA and open government issues. This year 46.2 percent of surveyed MLRC attorneys ("media attorneys") said media organizations had decreased those legal resources substantially, while 35.6 percent of NFOIC representatives indicated the same.
In 2011, 23.37 percent of surveyed media attorneys reported that open government lawsuits had decreased substantially, while 25.5 percent of those surveyed from NFOIC reported the same.
Other results and findings of the jointly administered 2013 survey included these:
* 46.2 percent of the surveyed media attorneys said media organizations had decreased those resources substantially, while 35.6 percent of NFOIC representatives indicated the same.
* 24.6 percent of media attorneys said such resources had decreased slightly, while 25.4 percent of NFOIC representatives indicated the same.
* 3.1. percent of media attorneys said the resources had stayed about the same in contrast to the 20.3 percent of NFOIC representatives who said such resources had stayed on the same level.
* The numbers of respondents in both groups who view that such resources had increased slightly or increased substantially were closer in percentage.
Both media attorneys and freedom of information professionals reported at a high rate that "emerging forms of public data and proactive disclosures" have not made their services and resources less needed over the last two to five years:
*20 percent of media attorneys said their services are much more needed with the rise of public data and proactive disclosure by governmental entities, while 33.9 percent of NFOIC correspondents indicated the same.
* 18.3 percent of media attorneys said their services are slightly more needed, while 21.4 percent of NFOIC respondents indicated the same.
* Fifty percent of media attorneys said there was no change, while 41.1 percent of NFOIC respondents indicated the same.
More NFOIC respondents than media attorneys reported that enforcement mechanisms for noncompliance by governmental officials with open government rules were ineffective:
* 33.9 percent of NFOIC respondents said enforcement measures were not effective at all, while 16.4 percent of media attorneys reported the same thing.
* 32.2 percent of NFOIC members said enforcement measures were somewhat effective, while 42.6 percent of media attorneys reported the same thing.
* The number of media attorney and NFOIC respondents who said enforcement measures were somewhat ineffective was very close with 21.3 percent of media attorneys reporting that and 22.0 percent of NFOIC correspondents reporting that.
The majority of media attorneys and NFOIC respondents said that "disingenuous rationalization" was the most common reason why government officials deny access to information. Interpretations of statutory language and "inappropriate game-playing" were the next most common reasons for governmental officials to deny access to information, those surveyed reported.
Lawyer and Legal Journalist
