Since the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) was signed into law in July of 1966, our collective spheres have changed. Today’s America bears little resemblance to the America of fifty years ago. Most significantly, the technological revolution has completely transformed the world we live in. What was once the product of a science fiction writer’s imagination is now reality. As a result, although our population continues to grow in number, we are becoming increasingly closer by virtue of the global digital network. Events around the world become immediate news fodder, only to be forgotten upon receipt of a more salacious news item. This ‘new age’ feeds our voracity for information while having no significant impact on our lives. Or so it seems.

This unprecedented access to information, arguably pivotal to life under democratic tenets is, in reality, injurious to our society. This proliferation of knowledge only serves to minimize our attention spans, overwhelming us with largely superfluous information. This allows those who would do us harm to lurk mostly undetected on the information superhighway, capitalizing on our carelessness. These reprobates exploit our vulnerabilities, our vigilance dulled by viral videos and frivolous gossip.

There are those who believe we should have access to anything; that the machinations of our government should be absolutely transparent, and any piece of information, no matter how trivial, should be available upon request. Some have dedicated their lives (and jeopardized their own personal freedoms) to try and ensure that our government operates completely conspicuously. Julian Assange, the editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks, has become somewhat of a cult hero, a runner-up for Time Magazine’s Person of the Year award. Chelsea Manning, the Army soldier who is now serving up to 35 years in Fort Leavenworth for releasing the largest set of classified documents in history, believed she was “a whistleblower acting with the noblest of motives” (Greenwald, 2010). A former systems administrator assigned to work with the NSA, Edward Snowden disclosed information confirming the existence of numerous global surveillance programs. Some consider him an advocate for freedom; ironically this ‘freedom crusader’ is likely destined to live out his years pursuing an independence he will never again enjoy.

On the surface, the Freedom of Information Act bolsters the dogma of the United States Constitution. Supporters of the FOIA believe in a citizen’s right to information, no matter its relevancy. However, the US Supreme Court holds that “there is no constitutional right to obtain all the information provided by FOIA laws” (McBurney v. Young, 2013). Although the act has in place several exclusions to keep potentially harmful material from dissemination, the possibility exists that an ostensibly innocuous piece of information could be the very item that leads to a catastrophic loss of life.

As a librarian, and an advocate of intellectual freedom, I believe in the inherent freedom of speech rights we all share. Free thought and expression is essential to a free society. Speech and ideas, no matter how unpopular, must be voiced; the convictions of a few cannot be discounted or suppressed by the many. However, this freedom should not extend to those governmental records which may, upon release, be detrimental to the well-being of our populace. I contend that there are things the citizenry should not be privy to. Those who abhor the freedoms we enjoy will stop at nothing to try and suppress said freedoms, striking against them with zealous fervor. These extremists will exploit every weakness, look for any chink in the armor.

Are you willing to imperil the citizens of our country to satiate some presumed ‘right’? Will this withheld information, if disclosed to you, make any real difference in your daily life? Maybe-but probably not.

I am not alone in my opinion. Critics of the FOIA have expressed valid concerns. As with any legislative proceeding, it is an expensive process, one that the already overburdened taxpayers should not assume. Secondly, corporations, and the lawyers who work for them, account for 60% of FOIA requests. The information they receive may quite possibly be used for industrial espionage, to obtain trade secrets from their competition. Lastly, informants and whistle-blowers in both private industry and the juridical sector may not enjoy the anonymity they seek, and, as a result, may not be comfortable providing information (Drexel University, 1997).

Perhaps in response to citizen concern, but more likely as a precautionary measure, the United States government has recognized the need for additional legislation. The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, a measure that facilitates and the sharing of information between the U.S. government and private industry (McClatchy-Tribune Business News, 2012) is one example of a proposed measure aimed at keeping potentially damaging information out of the hands of those who may misuse it. Ultimately, this proposal did not pass both sides of Congress, but similar motions are sure to follow as we become infinitely more vulnerable to attack.

Here’s a thought: perhaps those bureaucratic bodies responsible for the distribution of governmental information do, in fact, know better than the general populace. These parties, often maligned and derided for their seemingly lethargic and unnecessarily labyrinthine administration, just may know what they are doing. By “employing a delaying strategy” (Gordon-Murnane, 2006, para. 6), maybe these agencies are, deliberately or not, saving us from a cataclysmic event. Is it possible that they do indeed have our country’s best interests at heart?

Maybe it is time for us to restore the trust we once had in our government. After all, those with influence are, at the end of the day, still people-people with homes and families. Notwithstanding the inevitable hubristic few, I believe that we share a collective vision and are all working toward the same objective: a safe and peaceful society.

References

Drexel University. (1997, December). Freedom of information act: FOIA vs CIA. (Issue Brief). Philadelphia, PA. Retrieved from http://www.cis.drexel.edu/faculty/shelfer/public_html/busrefpapers/foiafvc.htm

Editorial: Better solution needed. [Editorial]. (2012). McClatchy-Tribune Business News. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1010325887?accountid=4840

Gordon-Murnane, L. (2006). Shhh!!: keeping current on government secrecy. Infotoday.com, 14(1). Retrieved from http://www.infotoday.com/searcher/Jan06/Gordon-Murnane.shtml

Greenwald, G. (2010, June 18). The strange and consequential case of Bradley Manning, Adrian Lamo, and WikiLeaks. Salon. Retrieved from http://www.Salon.com/2010/06/18/wikileaks_3/

McBurney v. Young, 569 U.S. 10 (2013).