On Monday, several media outlets, including The Dispatch, were denied the chance to attend a review of the ballots cast in the Ward 5 city council runoff. Marthalie Porter, who narrowly lost the March 1 runoff to Stephen Jones, requested the chance to inspect the ballots. Both Jones and Porter were present during the examination.
Taken alone, the refusal to permit access to that review may seem of little importance, especially since no serious irregularities were found. Yet when viewed in the broader context of what is happening now on the local, state and national level, Monday’s decision supports a troubling narrative: More and more, it seems, the “people’s right to know” is compromised by other, less-compelling interests.
This week, as part of “Sunshine Week,” an initiative led by The American Society of Newspaper Editors to educate the public about the importance of open government and the dangers of excessive, unnecessary secrecy, the Associated Press asked legislators throughout the country to provide emails from their official email accounts for a one-week period. In Mississippi, which has some of the weakest Open Meetings laws in the nation, the leadership of both the House and Senate refused to release those documents, citing privacy. To his credit, Gov. Phil Bryant did release information requested.
We find the argument against releasing that information – that citizens who correspond with their legislators have an expectation of privacy – to be a flimsy excuse. That kind of information is routinely released with names of private citizens redacted. This protects the private citizen while holding the public official accountable. When public officials, using official email accounts, respond to questions or offer their views, these should be considered official comments and the public has every right to know what that public officials say.
Is it any wonder that citizens do not trust their government?
In Columbus, the decision to deny media access to the ballot review is not so troubling.
In the election law city officials cited Monday in denying the press the chance to watch the process, “media” is not mentioned as a participant. It is on that basis that the city denied the media’s requests.
But there is, or at least should be, a difference between participating (looking at the ballots) and observing how that review takes place.
That is a big part of the media’s job, after all – to bear witness. In the absence of a compelling reason to keep the media out, reporters should have been allowed to observe this process and report on it for the benefit of the citizens.
When government denies access to the media, it denies information that people have every right and expectation to know.
The Dispatch Editorial Board is made up of publisher Peter Imes, columnist Slim Smith, managing editor Zack Plair and senior newsroom staff.
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 41 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.