First, They Came for the Climatologists….
November 7, 2011
Last week, Climate Scientist Mike Mann won a big one for the Planet. But the fight he’s in concerns anyone who believes in intellectual and academic freedom.
…Michael Mann — who is quickly becoming the Galileo of climate science — triumphed over the conservative American Tradition Institute, and ongoing attempts at scientist-harassment.
More specifically, Prince William County Circuit Court Judge Gaylord Finch both allowed Mann to join the case that ATI is pursuing against the University of Virginia to get Mann’s emails, and allowed UVA to back out of an agreement with ATI to let it review some of Mann’s emails that the university is nevertheless claiming are exempt from disclosure
It’s part of a lawsuit brought by the American Tradition Institute, a free-market think tank that wants the public to believe human-caused global warming is a scientific fraud. Filed against the University of Virginia, the suit seeks emails and other documents related to former professor Michael Mann, an award-winning climate scientist who has become a focus of the climate-denial movement because of his research documenting the recent spike in earth’s temperature.
By suing the university, the American Tradition Institute wants to make public Mann’s correspondence in an effort to find out whether he manipulated data to receive government grants, a violation of the state’s Fraud Against Taxpayers Act.
The way to find out if scientists manipulated data, is to examine the data. The fact that Mann’s data has been available online from the publication of the very first “Hockey Stick” graph demonstrates that this fishing expedition is not about data – it’s about power, intimidation, and a national strategy by the Koch financed right wing “think tanks” to turn the Freedom of Information act, meant to be a means to shed sunlight on the dark corners of government and bureaucracy, into a new tool of surveillance and oppression, to silence free speech, and curtail thought at academic institutions across the country.
As the screen shot from my recent video on the climate-gate emails shows, Mike Mann’s data has always been freely available to whoever wanted it.
After a day-long court hearing on Tuesday, a judge in Manassas, Virginia, granted Mann’s petition to join a lawsuit against the American Tradition Institute, an industry-funded thinktank that promotes scepticism about man-made climate change.
In an email, Mann called the decision a “good day” for academic freedom: “I don’t think there is any way to view this as anything other than a win for us, and for science more generally.”
Judge Gaylord Finch also granted a petition from the University of Virginia, Mann’s former employer, to revisit its earlier decision to let lawyers for the ATI have access to the emails before they were made public.
Scientists had seen the demands for documents and private correspondence as an attempt to intimidate Mann and other climate scientists. Virginia’s attorney general, Ken Cuccinelli, has also pursued the emails.
ATI is pursuing similar legal action against the Nasa scientist James Hansen, according to an investigation of the industry group.
But if you thought this was just about climate science, you are mistaken. This is the template for a new strategy of McCarthy-ist, authoritarian oppression and witch hunting.
The latest technique used by conservatives to silence liberal academics is to demand copies of e-mails and other documents. Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli of Virginia tried it last year with a climate-change scientist, and now the Wisconsin Republican Party is doing it to a distinguished historian who dared to criticize the state’s new union-busting law. These demands not only abuse academic freedom, but make the instigators look like petty and medieval inquisitors.
The historian, William Cronon, is the Frederick Jackson Turner and Vilas research professor of history, geography and environmental studies at the University of Wisconsin, and was recently elected president of the American Historical Association. Earlier this month, he was asked to write an Op-Ed article for The Times on the historical context of Gov. Scott Walker’s effort to strip public-employee unions of bargaining rights. While researching the subject, he posted on his blog several critical observations about the powerful network of conservatives working to undermine union rights and disenfranchise Democratic voters in many states.
In particular, he pointed to the American Legislative Exchange Council, a conservative group backed by business interests that circulates draft legislation in every state capital, much of it similar to the Wisconsin law, and all of it unmatched by the left. Two days later, the state Republican Party filed a freedom-of-information request with the university, demanding all of his e-mails containing the words “Republican,” “Scott Walker,” “union,” “rally,” and other such incendiary terms.
Controversy continues to swirl around collective bargaining rights–and the protests that recent legislation has sparked–in Michigan and Wisconsin.
At issue now is a number of Freedom of Information Act requests done by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy.
The requests have been made for information on faculty at Wayne State, Michigan State, and the University of Michigan.
Some critics are claiming that the FOIA requests are being used to intimidate college professors from participating in pro-labor protests.
A conservative research group in Michigan has issued a far-reaching public records request to the labor studies departments at three public universities in the state, seeking any e-mails involving the Wisconsin labor turmoil.
The group, the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, declined to explain why it was making the Freedom of Information Act request for material from professors at the University of Michigan, Michigan State and Wayne State University. But several professors who received the records request, which was first reported by Talking Points Memo on Tuesday, said it appeared to be an attempt to intimidate or embarrass professors who are sympathetic to organized labor.
This records request, which was filed Friday, comes several days after the Republican Party of Wisconsin made a records request to a prominent University of Wisconsin history professor, William Cronon, who had severely criticized the state’s Republican governor, Scott Walker, over his push for legislation to weaken public-sector unions.
The Mackinac Center, which describes itself as a nonpartisan research and educational institution and receives money from numerous conservative foundations, asked the three universities’ labor studies faculty members for any e-mails mentioning “Scott Walker,” “Madison,” “Wisconsin” or “Rachel Maddow,” the liberal talk show host on MSNBC.
Greg Scholtz, the director of academic freedom for the American Association of University Professors, said: “We think all this will have a chilling effect on academic freedom. We’ve never seen FOIA requests used like this before.”
“Rachel Maddow”? Now, the right wing wants to view your emails based on what kind of TV shows you’ve been watching.
Talking Points Memo, March 29, 2011:
A free enterprise think tank in Michigan — backed by some of the biggest names in national conservative donor circles — has made a broad public records request to at least three in-state universities with departments that specialize in the study of labor relations, seeking all their emails regarding the union battle in Wisconsin, Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI) and MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, TPM has learned.
According to professors subject to the request, filed under Michigan’s version of the Freedom Of Information Act, the request is extremely rare in academic circles. An employee at the think tank requesting the emails tells TPM they’re part of an investigation into what labor studies professors at state schools in Michigan are saying about the situation in Madison, Wisc., the epicenter of the clashes between unions and Republican-run state governments across the Midwest.
One professor subject to the FOIA described it as anti-union advocates “going after folks they don’t agree with.”
The Mackinac Center For Public Policy, based in Midland, Mich., submitted the FOIA requests last Friday and Monday to the Labor Studies Center at the University of Michigan and theDouglas A. Fraser Center for Workplace Issues at Wayne State University. A third FOIA was directed to Michigan State University, which has a School of Human Resources & Labor Relations.
The requests specifically seek emails from all labor studies faculty at each school.
The Mackinac Center For Public Policy describes itself as a “nonpartisan research and educational institute” focused on providing free market “solutions to state and local policy questions” in Michigan. The center does not disclose its donors but
according to recent reporting by Mother Jones, Mackinac “is part of a network of state-based groups associated with the Heritage Foundation.”
Talking Points Memo, March 30, 2011:
….the Mackinac Center, a Michigan think tank funded by big names in the conservative movement ranging from the Kochs to the Wal-Mart Waltons to the family that founded Blackwater, used the Freedom Of Information Act to request copies of every email sent or received by labor studies professors at state universities that mentioned Wisconsin, Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI), the city of Madison and Maddow. The universities have not decided how to respond, but the professors say the FOIAs suggest Mackinac is trying to catch them in illegal political advocacy. Mackinac has declined to speak on the record about the requests.
Under a withering barrage of outrage and ridicule, the Mackinac Center opened up –
We asked for these emails first because Ms. Maddow had recently criticized at length Michigan’s governor and his labor-related legislation in a TV segment virally circulated on the Web, and second because FOIA requests are an inexact art, much like a Google search. You can ask for everything, and get everything, but not only is it costly to do so (public bodies can charge the fair costs of retrieving public records), it is both time-consuming and needlessly intrusive on the activities of public employees.
Hence, by including emails referring to Ms. Maddow, we were aiming to generate a more narrowly targeted set of emails that nevertheless didn’t depend closely on exact phrases that she or the letter writers might have used and that would have excluded emails relevant to our request.
Freedom, liberty, constitution, rights – are buzzwords these “think tanks” use in their PR – but the truth is that this closely coordinated network of true believing ideologues is dedicated to monitoring, survelling, and closing off, any intellectual activity that threatens the absolute economic power and political influence of the fossil fuel industry that funds them.
November 9, 2011 at 2:27 pm
Who’d jail whom here? It’s pretty clear whom Mr. Cuccinelli wants to jail– even though he has no evidence that bears examination.
Omnologos declares this thread is all about partisan politics and objecting to FOI when it suits us. But the problem being raised here isn’t about FOI– it’s about the abuse of FOI by partisans with resources to burn and no interest in the truth. The East Anglia email hack and how those emails were used by denialist hacks and the credulously ‘balanced’ mainstream media tells you exactly how Dr. Mann’s emails would be used– not to investigate anything, but to cherry-pick quotes out of context and distort the truth.
The question of what is liable for FOI is still before the courts in the Mann case, and resisting illegitimate requests is a legitimate part of the process. Privacy is also a right! When who comes up for investigation is a matter of partisan politics, when fishing expeditions and harrassment by prosecutors and outside agencies who have axes to grind are the rule of the day, the individual rights and freedoms omnologos claims to care about are threatened, and the valuable work they enable academics to do is endangered.
When will ATI and similar groups open their records to outside examination? When will omnologos (what a self-regarding handle) recognize the difference between PR-motivated witch hunts and honest FOI requests? I think we know the answer.
November 9, 2011 at 3:21 pm
g2-something
you’re repeating points already made by others. Says a lot about your willingness to discuss. I know for a fact my work emails can be used in a court of law without me being asked. Mann knew just the same, yet for some reason he thinks he should have privileges like if he were in some secret governmental programme. Why? Why not Wegman? Why not all other government employees? Where will it stop, apart from with the emasculation of FOI to the detriment of all?
Intent cannot enter the FOI equation. I already said, exemption due to intent would kill off a great deal of investigative journalism. Nobody’s answered that point either.
November 9, 2011 at 3:47 pm
Indeed they can be used– but it’s not automatic. Why shouldn’t Mann fight to protect his privacy? Wegman’s plagiarism and misleading testimony were fully public. How do you think that compares with Mann’s emails?
Further, intent can enter it if the courts find it can, on whatever grounds they find in the relevant law. FOI doesn’t create an absolute right for anyone to see individual emails–our faculty association and university would resist such a blanket request, and the law (here at least) does provide grounds for that resistance. Further, my University wouldn’t tolerate me doing anything like what Wegman did– but somehow Wegman’s seems unable to respond to an open and shut case. So, to be blunt, your comparison is silly and so is your position on FOI legislation.
November 9, 2011 at 11:01 pm
You still don’t get it do you? Once again, you’re taking the side of the crooks and the fascists (no, I am not referring to Mann).
FOI is a right that is independent from established wrongdoing as it is from intent. FOI is in fact a valuable tool in uncovering wrongdoing (no, I don’t think Mann did anything wrong).
And you’re studiously avoiding the trouble of investigative journalism. Just search “freedom of information” on Google News to see how much stuff is surfacing every single day BECAUSE of FOI. Are you ready to lose it all because a guy called Michael Mann feels his publicly-funded emails should not be delivered to the public that paid for them??
November 11, 2011 at 12:54 am
Did I say I thought there should be no FOI legislation? Talk about interpretive bias.
November 11, 2011 at 1:19 am
You’re not considering the consequences. The fact that you don’t advocate something doesn’t mean it won’t happen exactly because of what you’re advocating.
If academics are protected from FOI, every Government employee will see fit to reclassify themselves as “academics”. Who’s going to prevent them? If a University scientist can keep his work emails private, why not an IRS “researcher”? Or a DoE “scientist”? Or a State Dept “fact finder”? Etc etc.
So FOI requests will only apply to janitors. Until some Cleaning Union will pop up and reclassify them as “sanitation analyzers”…
November 11, 2011 at 7:38 am
Very silly. FOI is not a blanket ‘anything you want to see’ process, and I never said academics should be immune. Let the courts decide which emails should be released- and stop complaining about Mann’s decision to contest their release: he knows how they’ll be used (and so do you), and what they really say has nothing to do with it.
December 15, 2011 at 9:02 pm
[…] because Horner is point man on the well-funded, politically motivated fishing expedition – not only to spy on climate scientist’s personal emails at the University of Virginia […]
January 4, 2012 at 10:35 pm
[…] right wing campaign of fear, surveillance and intimidation against scientists and […]
January 25, 2012 at 2:47 pm
[…] Bullying, intimidation, and threats are the currency of the climate denial movement . […]
March 2, 2012 at 7:00 pm
[…] Background, start here. Rate this: Share this:FacebookTwitterPrintLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. Posted […]
June 5, 2012 at 3:18 am
[…] See my previous post on this technique. […]