Public lectures not “off-the-record”

The Student Alliance for National Security invited former Deputy National Security Advisor Meghan O’Sullivan to speak Tuesday night at the Indiana Memorial Union. The event was advertised as free and open to the public, with one stipulation. Toward the middle of the press release, and at the end of the description on the associated Facebook event, the group stated that the speech would be “off-the-record for the press.”\nThe IDS notified the event’s organizers that we did not accept the “off-the-record” terms Tuesday night shortly before the event. The Student Alliance for National Security and the speaker offered to allow the reporters “five to 10 minutes” with O’Sullivan at the event’s conclusion, when O’Sullivan would have the discretion to determine what was and was not fit for print. We found this unacceptable.\nIt would have been one thing if O’Sullivan had agreed to come speak privately to group members. They could have rented a room and had a meeting closed to the press, and anyone else they wished to not be present. However, this event was advertised as open to anyone and was paid for with $3,000 in student funds. It would have been irresponsible, negligent and professionally unethical not to report just because we were asked not to.\nIn news reporting, if a source requests that information be off-the-record, the reporter can accept or deny the request. If he accepts it, he has an ethical obligation to keep his promise. In this case, no such acceptance was made. Remarks that are open to the public cannot be expected to be kept private. Why was the speech “off-the-record” to the press only? Were they going to enforce that no one in the audience was taking notes?\nWhat’s more, anyone in the world could have walked into that room with a recording device, posted the speech on the Internet, and sat back as it travelled around the world at lightning speed. The IDS could have sent reporters to the event to take notes or record the event discreetly. But in a desire to maintain high ethical standards we notified the organizers that we did not accept their request, and the speaker chose not to give her lecture. It was her choice to make.\nNot that the IDS handled everything perfectly. The press release for the event was sent out a week beforehand. Ideally, we would have noticed the stipulation earlier and notified the group of our intentions sooner, so that all sides could come to an acceptable solution.\nThis is a complicated issue, and it’s easy to rush to assumptions and knee-jerk reactions. A balanced assessment of the situation avoids sweeping generalizations and accusations. The IDS was not looking to make a political point or pull a stunt, and the speaker was not trying to engage in censorship. Come on, how many earth-shattering secrets is a former administration official going to reveal in a public lecture to students? In short, the IDS should have prepared better for the situation by communicating with the group earlier, but we had every right to be there, on the record. \nIn the future, speakers and the groups hosting them need to understand that the IDS intends to exercise our Constitutional right and our duty to our readers to report meetings and lectures that are open to the public.